|
|
Post by cyyyr05 on Jul 11, 2019 8:56:28 GMT -5
Ok Just had to chime in on this thread...
To state the obvious. Nearly all the comments in this thread about The ERC4 are regarding looks and basically whether or not it works as it's designed and how fast it works and if you can dim a light! I agree ergonomics and appearance are considerable factors, believe me I know. I have one of the UGLIEST pieces of gear ever designed in the Manley Steelhead it looks like it was a prop on "Young Frankenstein" But Oh the music reproduction is ever so sweet! So as a previous owner of the ERC1,2 and 3 I do have an obvious question. How does it sound compared to it's previous iterations and to decks in it's price range? Can we just assume that it works? Although I did have a "failure" with every one that I had they on the whole were very serviceable and really performed better than their cost. As always Emo's build quality and rear panel options as well as the internal layout looks great but how does all that mesh with the boards, Dac(s), Power Supply, cap's and everything else to create a "live" performance in your space? It shouldn’t sound much different than ERC-3. Other than different disc mechanism, digital inputs and cosmetics not much seem to have changed. However, ERC-3 was a really good CD player, much better than its price. Almost the only thing people complained about was the sounds from the disc mechanism, which is now fixed in ERC-4. One thing I didn’t like with ERC-3 was the fact that it always auto started all discs inserted, no way to configure this. If this has been fixed, other than not playing native SACD, it should be the best CD player in its price class. The erc4 always automatically reads a disc as soon as it's in the player. He also resumes reading at the place where he was stopped |
|
|
|
Post by seraphic on Jul 14, 2019 8:09:38 GMT -5
If your audio processor does not support XLR inputs and you are unable to use the XLR outputs of the ERC-4, what are the pros/cons of using the Optical Toslink output of the ERC-4 to your audio processor instead?
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,847
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jul 14, 2019 9:49:11 GMT -5
If your audio processor does not support XLR inputs and you are unable to use the XLR outputs of the ERC-4, what are the pros/cons of using the Optical Toslink output of the ERC-4 to your audio processor instead? Use of the XLR/RCA outputs of the ERC-4(or any CD player) takes advantage of the on-board DAC's of said player. Using the digital outputs(coax, toslink, aes-ebu) of the CD player is sending the information to the processor, thus using the processors DAC's. |
|
|
|
Post by seraphic on Jul 14, 2019 10:02:01 GMT -5
If your audio processor does not support XLR inputs and you are unable to use the XLR outputs of the ERC-4, what are the pros/cons of using the Optical Toslink output of the ERC-4 to your audio processor instead? Use of the XLR/RCA outputs of the ERC-4(or any CD player) takes advantage of the on-board DAC's of said player. Using the digital outputs(coax, toslink, aes-ebu) of the CD player is sending the information to the processor, thus using the processors DAC's. I see. So in the case of the ERC-4 vs RMC-1, would it be ideal to let the Player or Processor DACs do the work? |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,847
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jul 14, 2019 10:19:46 GMT -5
Use of the XLR/RCA outputs of the ERC-4(or any CD player) takes advantage of the on-board DAC's of said player. Using the digital outputs(coax, toslink, aes-ebu) of the CD player is sending the information to the processor, thus using the processors DAC's. I see. So in the case of the ERC-4 vs RMC-1, would it be ideal to let the Player or Processor DACs do the work? It just depends on your listening experience of which one you prefer. If I'm remembering correctly, the RMC-1 DAC's are AKM AK4490, and the ERC-4 DAC's are Analog Devices AD1955, so AKM v/s Analog Devices. If you are only using digital outputs from your CD player(in others words only using it as a transport), then a CD player with lesser DAC's that's less expensive is a great way to save yourself money. I've not extensively heard the AKM DAC's in RMC-1 for music listening so I'm couldn't say one way or the other, but they are at the top or the top of line from AKM so take from that what you will. I've grown to really enjoy the AD 1955 DAC's in my DC-1 DAC, so when I do end up with an RMC-1 or RMC-1L, that will be something I'll be paying close attention to. |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Jul 14, 2019 13:58:03 GMT -5
The AKM4490 and the AD1955 is a hard tell apart. I have had both. They both do the job well. How the Analog stage does its thing after to me is more important. That AD1955 has been around a long time though where the AKM4490 is much newer if that matters to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by clivep on Jul 19, 2019 16:57:38 GMT -5
Forgot one, how about dimming the lights? How many settings are there? I have a couple of similar questions, based on a long term annoyance with my ERC-3 (which I still love). When you put a disc in, does it play automatically, or do you have to hit play? (I often like to play a specific track, and the ERC-3's habit of playing automatically, but not responding to track selection until after it's begun playing is really annoying). Is optical / coax digital in a separate mode? Is there a switch for CD / digital in? |
|
|
|
Post by clivep on Jul 19, 2019 17:02:18 GMT -5
I guess I'm wrong. Those players were before my time here on the forum so I was just going from memory. I do know the ERC-3 did not, it only played them. ERC-3 decodes HDCD, or at least, it identifies it where present... HD shows up in the display if you put in a HDCD encoded disc.  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 24, 2019 6:45:58 GMT -5
I guess I'm wrong. Those players were before my time here on the forum so I was just going from memory. I do know the ERC-3 did not, it only played them. ERC-3 decodes HDCD, or at least, it identifies it where present... HD shows up in the display if you put in a HDCD encoded disc. View AttachmentIt does decode HDCD |
|
|
|
Post by conmoto on Jul 30, 2019 20:50:45 GMT -5
Hello. I don't know enough about audio tech to figure this out myself, so I'll ask you all:
I'm using an old functional cheap-ass Sony CD player with optical out and running it through my DC-1 into Stealth 8 via XLR. I don't care about aesthetics or ergonomics too much, which is why I have a simple CD player that spits out ones & zeros into a DAC that organizes them into glorious music. So...will an ERC-4 send better ones & zeros than my old dusty laser? I'm not trying to be funny. I truly don't know the answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jul 30, 2019 23:27:57 GMT -5
Hello. I don't know enough about audio tech to figure this out myself, so I'll ask you all: I'm using an old functional cheap-ass Sony CD player with optical out and running it through my DC-1 into Stealth 8 via XLR. I don't care about aesthetics or ergonomics too much, which is why I have a simple CD player that spits out ones & zeros into a DAC that organizes them into glorious music. So...will an ERC-4 send better ones & zeros than my old dusty laser? I'm not trying to be funny. I truly don't know the answer. Running any CD player through the DC-1 will use the DAC of the DC-1, so there would be no difference in sound. You’d still be using the DC-1 DAC out to your amp/amps |
|
|
|
Post by routlaw on Jul 31, 2019 10:16:22 GMT -5
@novisnich: this would assume that a transport makes absolutely no difference what so ever to the overall performance. There are many audio engineers, but probably not all, that would adamantly disagree with this suggestion. There are many audio companies that make transports as well as DACs and they do so in most cases to theoretically improve the overall audio performance.
However that is not to say using the ERC-4 would augment an improvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jul 31, 2019 13:03:59 GMT -5
@novisnich: this would assume that a transport makes absolutely no difference what so ever to the overall performance. There are many audio engineers, but probably not all, that would adamantly disagree with this suggestion. There are many audio companies that make transports as well as DACs and they do so in most cases to theoretically improve the overall audio performance. However that is not to say using the ERC-4 would augment an improvement. There may be some merit to what you say! But @novisnich may not agree! 😏 |
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Aug 13, 2019 7:47:59 GMT -5
There’s definitely difference between transport and transport.
How well it reads the disc, how it handles the data before it sends it out digitally. Preferably doing nothing with it
and not adding to it, distorsion or any conversions.
I always used to believe zeros and ones are the same from any player... It’s less difference than analog out
for sure. But there are differences for sure.
Try borrow a really expensive true transport CD player and compare with your current player.
Why not also buy an ERC-4, if it doesn’t make an improvement you could always send it back.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 13, 2019 13:27:45 GMT -5
Hello. I don't know enough about audio tech to figure this out myself, so I'll ask you all: I'm using an old functional cheap-ass Sony CD player with optical out and running it through my DC-1 into Stealth 8 via XLR. I don't care about aesthetics or ergonomics too much, which is why I have a simple CD player that spits out ones & zeros into a DAC that organizes them into glorious music. So...will an ERC-4 send better ones & zeros than my old dusty laser? I'm not trying to be funny. I truly don't know the answer. No it won’t sound better. There is no special addition in the transport as far as I know. It does the job it is intended to do. However the ERC has an aes output which is cool to me. You don’t find a whole lot of transports that provide that. I run An xlr balanced set up. So having an XL r cable from the digital transport just adds to the cool factor of it. But I highly doubt there is a sound difference Because of the transport in the ERC-4 |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Aug 13, 2019 13:44:26 GMT -5
Lets see. A transports sends out the stream to the DAC. Check. They all use the same error correction check. I have used cheapies too and nice players as transports too, and my ears such as they are, are hard pressed to tell the difference. I like the post that says if you wanted to try the ERC-4, why not? I would also run it by itself without an external DAC just for giggles. Then connect your DAC and you be the judge what is to your liking. Our hobby is about new cool things and the ERC-4 might be the one. Or you won't hear a difference. Even so, the controls, build will slay any cheapie out there. I had the ERC-1. My brother enjoys it to this day. Yes, it is a tough call. Will you hear the difference that matters to you. The very quandary that makes our hobby, our hobby.
|
|
|
|
Post by clivep on Aug 13, 2019 17:14:58 GMT -5
I’m an RF engineer and spend a lot of time with digital signal processing, albeit at much higher frequencies than audio.
Where a transport may make a difference is in clock accuracy. The S/PDIF standard doesn’t have separate clocking, but each bit changes state half way through to provide a clock to the receiver. Clock accuracy is critical in recovering analog from digital signals. Jitter yields distortion and inaccurate frequency components in the recovered analog signal. So no, it isn’t just ones and zeros; it’s ones and zeros at a given clock rate and with an amount of jitter. All transports are not equal.
That said, some DACs will buffer and reclock the signal internally, which would eliminate any poor transport clock accuracy. So it all depends.
|
|
|
|
Post by brutiarti on Aug 13, 2019 19:37:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by routlaw on Aug 14, 2019 15:26:17 GMT -5
While I'm sure this is a fine CD player/transport I think Emotiva might have missed a chance to take this up another notch or two without adding a lot of extra engineering. Given that the ERC-4 has two digital inputs that can take a 24 bit 192 KHZ signal why not have the capability for even higher resolution. The AD 1955 can decode SACD and I believe DSD as well. Its not clear to me why USB inputs were eliminated let alone a optical drive that deals with SACD. I owned the ERC-3 and loved it, and who knows I might even belly up to the bar and purchase the ERC-4 though at the moment I'm quite happy with my current DAC and computer based music server. Don't get me wrong not trying to be overly critical of Emotiva, but on this one its seems like they got really close to hitting one out of the ball park but just didn't quite nail it. brutiarti, the above article reflects what I've always heard about better transports, but I guess the proof is in the pudding. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 15, 2019 10:53:45 GMT -5
I'm inclined to agree that I would have included a USB input. However, there are many "little black boxes" available that accept USB input and output S/PDIF. (They're all over the map in terms of performance and compatibility with various source devices - but they don't cost much.)
As for SACD ... the short answer is that playing physical SACD discs requires special drive hardware in the transport itself. (That's the main reason why most players can't play them... and why there are no computer SACD drives.)
So drives that can play SACDs are a bit of a specialty item, and cost more, and there simply isn't that much demand...
(Even though there are several companies now selling DSD files.... you really don't see many SACD discs lately.... a few - but not many.)
DSD is a data format which was originally developed for use with the SACD disc format. However, you can have digital audio files in the DSD format (and several related formats) other than on SACD discs. Being able to play SACD discs has a few hardware requirements beyond the ability to play DSD files.
While I'm sure this is a fine CD player/transport I think Emotiva might have missed a chance to take this up another notch or two without adding a lot of extra engineering. Given that the ERC-4 has two digital inputs that can take a 24 bit 192 KHZ signal why not have the capability for even higher resolution. The AD 1955 can decode SACD and I believe DSD as well. Its not clear to me why USB inputs were eliminated let alone a optical drive that deals with SACD. I owned the ERC-3 and loved it, and who knows I might even belly up to the bar and purchase the ERC-4 though at the moment I'm quite happy with my current DAC and computer based music server. Don't get me wrong not trying to be overly critical of Emotiva, but on this one its seems like they got really close to hitting one out of the ball park but just didn't quite nail it. brutiarti , the above article reflects what I've always heard about better transports, but I guess the proof is in the pudding. |
|
