|
|
Post by spnolan14 on Nov 2, 2010 19:04:45 GMT -5
I am curious to see what others have to say about the potential sound quality of an XDA-1 vs. ERC-1. I know the XDA isn't out yet so no one has really had much time to evaluate it apart from at Emofest and RMAF. However, it seems like I remember Lonnie saying several times throughout various webcast that the XDA sounded "better" than the ERC-1 in his opinion. So, here is my hypothetical situation. Say you are playing lossless music (apple lossless) ripped on an iMac routed to the XDA via optical then straight to the amp vs. the quality of the same CD being played on an ERC-1 going straight to the amps.
If it sounded better through the XDA why would you buy a ERC-1? This would save from having to worry about having to change CD's all the time and spend time trying to organize your library when you could let iTunes do it all for you?
|
|
|
|
Post by ronjr on Nov 3, 2010 12:52:26 GMT -5
I am curious as well. Does the XDA-1 reduce the ERC-1's CD playing capabilities to the same as my panasonic bd-35 blu ray player? In other words is it now just "any old transport source" if plugged into the XDA-1 which I am anxiously awaiting?
|
|
spork
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 152
|
Post by spork on Nov 3, 2010 13:23:27 GMT -5
Many of these questions have been answered several times before, so there should already be a good deal of information on this subject on these forums.
The XDA-1 has a better DAC and output stage than the ERC-1.
Therefore if you have both the XDA-1 and the ERC-1, the ERC-1 would be used as "nothing more" than a transport (with the ERC-1's internal DAC and output stage sitting idle). That said, the ERC-1 is still an excellent transport which will, in all probability, introduce less jitter than most Blu-ray players.
The ERC-1 is also, reportedly, able to read many slightly damaged (scratched, etc.) CDs that other players can not.
As far as comparing the ERC-1 to audio streamed from a computer, the ERC-1 should still introduce less jitter into its digital output signal than a computer would. Simply put, a computer, as a digital audio source, has many, many more variables involved that could influence the signal it sends off to the DAC.
Now, whether or not you will be able to hear the difference between the two, that I can not answer.
|
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Nov 3, 2010 14:27:57 GMT -5
Say you are playing lossless music (apple lossless) ripped on an iMac routed to the XDA via optical then straight to the amp vs. the quality of the same CD being played on an ERC-1 going straight to the amps. If it sounded better through the XDA why would you buy a ERC-1? This would save from having to worry about having to change CD's all the time and spend time trying to organize your library when you could let iTunes do it all for you? #1 You'd need volume control of some sort between the ERC-1 and the amps, hence a pre-amp. Many pre-amps mess up the delicat low level analogue signal. #2 Habit. Some people like CD, others like computers. I am greedy, I use CD, Mac mini and - from time to time - LP! If you route the ERC-1 to the XDA-1 vs the ALAC formatted track also to the XDA-1 and in both cases straight to the amp, you'd be hard pressed to discover any difference in SQ. I don't hear any through my Weiss DAC2. My ERC-1 is connected via coaxial to it and my Mac mini via FireWire. |
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Nov 3, 2010 14:38:20 GMT -5
The XDA-1 has a better DAC and output stage than the ERC-1. Therefore if you have both the XDA-1 and the ERC-1, the ERC-1 would be used as "nothing more" than a transport (with the ERC-1's internal DAC and output stage sitting idle). That said, the ERC-1 is still an excellent transport which will, in all probability, introduce less jitter than most Blu-ray players. As far as comparing the ERC-1 to audio streamed from a computer, the ERC-1 should still introduce less jitter into its digital output signal than a computer would. Simply put, a computer, as a digital audio source, has many, many more variables involved that could influence the signal it sends off to the DAC. The XDA-1 and the ERC-1 use the same DAC. The XDA-1 uses superior discrete output stages. I read a review about the Oppo BDP83/SE/NE and it was measured that the optical output produced ten times more Jitter than the other output... I did not yet read any info what so ever about the Jitter of the ERC-1 or XDA-1. However, CD-players in general don't suffer from Jitter. Separate DAC's are more prone to it, especially USB and Optical with long cables. Firewire devices such as the Weiss slave the Mac to their internal masterclock to deal with Jitter. And some USB devices use asinchroneous USB to filter it out. We will have to wait and see (not to long I hope) about the XDA-1... |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Nov 3, 2010 15:15:21 GMT -5
On sort of a related track, I have transferred my CD collection to a hard drive in .flac format. The music is broadcast wirelessly via a Sonos system to my main audio setup.
When listening with headphones, during the silent periods of a track (such as the very beginning), I can hear a very faint ticking. It is faint enough that any sort of sound covers it up. This sound is not present when no tracks are playing - in other words it does not seem to be the residual noise of any equipment in the chain.
Does anyone know if this ticking is caused by the CD burner in my computer when converting the files to .flac (I am using a regular NEC burner and Exact Audio Copy), or is it being generated from the Sonos gear? Or could it be the DAC? I am using the optical out from the Sonos box to a separate DAC to the USP-1. The headphone amp is connected to the tape monitor jacks of the USP-1. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Nov 3, 2010 15:56:27 GMT -5
You would need a oscilloscope and signal generator to track down the source of that tick... too many possible cause to venture a guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by oscartheclimber on Nov 3, 2010 16:26:13 GMT -5
On sort of a related track, I have transferred my CD collection to a hard drive in .flac format. The music is broadcast wirelessly via a Sonos system to my main audio setup. When listening with headphones, during the silent periods of a track (such as the very beginning), I can hear a very faint ticking. It is faint enough that any sort of sound covers it up. This sound is not present when no tracks are playing - in other words it does not seem to be the residual noise of any equipment in the chain. Does anyone know if this ticking is caused by the CD burner in my computer when converting the files to .flac (I am using a regular NEC burner and Exact Audio Copy), or is it being generated from the Sonos gear? Or could it be the DAC? I am using the optical out from the Sonos box to a separate DAC to the USP-1. The headphone amp is connected to the tape monitor jacks of the USP-1. Any ideas? How old is the hard drive? Clicking from the hard drive could indicate that it is on its way out. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Nov 3, 2010 16:57:57 GMT -5
On sort of a related track, I have transferred my CD collection to a hard drive in .flac format. The music is broadcast wirelessly via a Sonos system to my main audio setup. When listening with headphones, during the silent periods of a track (such as the very beginning), I can hear a very faint ticking. It is faint enough that any sort of sound covers it up. This sound is not present when no tracks are playing - in other words it does not seem to be the residual noise of any equipment in the chain. Does anyone know if this ticking is caused by the CD burner in my computer when converting the files to .flac (I am using a regular NEC burner and Exact Audio Copy), or is it being generated from the Sonos gear? Or could it be the DAC? I am using the optical out from the Sonos box to a separate DAC to the USP-1. The headphone amp is connected to the tape monitor jacks of the USP-1. Any ideas? How old is the hard drive? Clicking from the hard drive could indicate that it is on its way out. This is a new hard drive (a couple of months old). I was wondering if that clicking came when I used a CD burner to make the flac file? That drive is a few years old. It's just a very faint click sound. If a hard drive was physically clicking, would that translate to that sound being transmitted over a wireless connection? |
|
|
|
Post by rclark on Nov 4, 2010 0:52:06 GMT -5
Some of us prefer buying cd's still because you can rip them and have a permanent backup, and also because downloaded music still has not replaced buying albums for getting all the material you get in the album such as photos, notes, extras, etc.
It is still far cooler to pull an album down off the rack than it is to fire up a PC. Open it up, look at the artwork, pull out the folder, often the discs are stylized, take in the band's entire intended statement, lay it out open while you listen, pass it around to friends. A lot of cd's come with quirky cool stuff you downloaders are totally missing out on.
I don't regret purchasing my ERC-1 in the slightest, and still order cd's weekly off Amazon.
When I get my XDA-1 (I am preordered) I will probably begin experimenting with hi-rez music but will only go in full force when they finally give us an ALBUM experience with our download, I don't just want a file on a computer, I want all the other stuff too.
My ERC-1 will be run as a transport to the XDA-1. However, the ERC-1 (which I'm listening to right now), sounds BEAUTIFUL all on its own.
|
|
spork
Emo VIPs
Posts: 152
|
Post by spork on Nov 4, 2010 9:16:00 GMT -5
Keep in mind that the background noise you are hearing over headphones may be a result of music being streamed wirelessly if there is any interference from other wireless sources in the nearby area. If this is the case, you could try moving around any wireless receivers and transmitters and changing the frequency bands of nearby wireless phones, etc.. Though I would not pull your hair out over slight background noise at the start of tracks, especially if only audible with headphones.
If you are overly curious and want to rule wireless as the issue out entirely, try using a wired connection to your Sonos as a test.
I have posted a more (perhaps overly) in-depth description of what could be going on below (believe it or not, this stuff is fun to me, haha):
I prefer routing wires over using wireless for devices that tend to stay put, so I have never looked into setting up wireless sound systems myself, however I am always put off by their widespread use of "streaming" in their descriptions when referencing access to your locally stored (computer, NAS, etc.) media.
This is because, to me, wireless streaming implies that error-handling is unidirectional; some level of error detection and correction may be built into the stream (by sending redundant data via the channel encoding and/or parity, etc.), but in cases where the steam's built-in error detection/correction is insufficient to correct all errors, a bit-imperfect signal is used since no repeat requests are sent. (All digital TV is streamed; if you have ever seen artifacts appear on your screen during a storm, this is exactly what is happening.)
That said, their use of the word "streaming" may not be indicative of my above description. Wireless transmissions can be "lossless" as well (assuming perfect detection of errors so that repeat requests are made in all cases of error, an impossibility, but it can get really, really darn close). So for all I know, the Sonos does make use of repeat requests, in which case your chances for receiving bit-errors may be the same as if you were downloading a file over a wireless network.
(As an aside, if you ever wondered why the signal strength, aka speed, of your wireless connection degrades with distance and interference, this is in part due to increased error detection/correction overhead via repeat sends since the source signal becomes more difficult to remove from noise.)
Of course then the Sonos would likely need to buffer a few milliseconds of audio, at the very least, to avoid ever-so-slight delays in playback caused by the repeat requests. Also, do not get me wrong, wired network connections need error detection and correction as well, it is just that the chances for such bit-errors are exacerbated by sending the same signal wirelessly versus over a twisted pair cable.
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Nov 4, 2010 9:25:47 GMT -5
Keep in mind that the background noise you are hearing over headphones may be a result of music being streamed wirelessly if there is any interference from other wireless sources in the nearby area. If this is the case, you could try moving around any wireless receivers and transmitters and changing the frequency bands of nearby wireless phones, etc.. Though I would not pull your hair out over slight background noise at the start of tracks, especially if only audible with headphones. If you are overly curious and want to rule wireless as the issue out entirely, try using a wired connection to your Sonos as a test. I have posted a more (perhaps overly) in-depth description of what could be going on below (believe it or not, this stuff is fun to me, haha): I prefer routing wires over using wireless for devices that tend to stay put, so I have never looked into setting up wireless sound systems myself, however I am always put off by their widespread use of "streaming" in their descriptions when referencing access to your locally stored (computer, NAS, etc.) media. This is because, to me, wireless streaming implies that error-handling is unidirectional; some level of error detection and correction may be built into the stream (by sending redundant data via the channel encoding and/or parity, etc.), but in cases where the steam's built-in error detection/correction is insufficient to correct all errors, a bit-imperfect signal is used since no repeat requests are sent. (All digital TV is streamed; if you have ever seen artifacts appear on your screen during a storm, this is exactly what is happening.) That said, their use of the word "streaming" may not be indicative of my above description. Wireless transmissions can be "lossless" as well (assuming perfect detection of errors so that repeat requests are made in all cases of error, an impossibility, but it can get really, really darn close). So for all I know, the Sonos does make use of repeat requests, in which case your chances for receiving bit-errors may be the same as if you were downloading a file over a wireless network. (As an aside, if you ever wondered why the signal strength, aka speed, of your wireless connection degrades with distance and interference, this is in part due to increased error detection/correction overhead via repeat sends since the source signal becomes more difficult to remove from noise.) Of course then the Sonos would likely need to buffer a few milliseconds of audio, at the very least, to avoid ever-so-slight delays in playback caused by the repeat requests. Also, do not get me wrong, wired network connections need error detection and correction as well, it is just that the chances for such bit-errors are exacerbated by sending the same signal wirelessly versus over a twisted pair cable. Thank you for the detailed explanation - kind of complicated but I do understand what you are trying to say. I do have a long cable so I am going to try connecting the box with the cable and see if that makes a difference. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Nov 4, 2010 14:11:12 GMT -5
What we really need is an ERC-2, with all the goodness of the ERC-1 and XDA-1 combined. You could leave out the volume control in my opinion, as I would always still run this through a pre-pro (still need to deal with room acoustics, so EmoQ is a must).
|
|
