CD transport importance.
#1 CD transport importance.
Hello all,
What does anyone think about this?
Obviously (I assume) a better transport will sound better, but how much. All the attention seems to be on DACs but there rarely seems to be any discussion about how much difference a transport can make. Is this because the answer is "not very much"?
Does anyone have some experience to share?
Regards, Phil.
What does anyone think about this?
Obviously (I assume) a better transport will sound better, but how much. All the attention seems to be on DACs but there rarely seems to be any discussion about how much difference a transport can make. Is this because the answer is "not very much"?
Does anyone have some experience to share?
Regards, Phil.
#2 Re: CD transport importance.
Can you define a 'better' transport? More expensive, lower jitter (achieved I believe in very cheap stuff nowadays) or what?
I know those of us around at the time have a huge fondness for the battleship machines and transports of the late 80's, when CD finally started to show what it could really do imo, but I wonder how much different a basic £150 Denon machine would cope as a transport these days - I have a DCD1520 from yesteryear and also a newer (but now elderly) DCD 1015 and as transports, they 'sound' identical' to me.
I know those of us around at the time have a huge fondness for the battleship machines and transports of the late 80's, when CD finally started to show what it could really do imo, but I wonder how much different a basic £150 Denon machine would cope as a transport these days - I have a DCD1520 from yesteryear and also a newer (but now elderly) DCD 1015 and as transports, they 'sound' identical' to me.
#3 Re: CD transport importance.
Thanks for the Reply,
Well, as ever, by better I suppose I mean newer and/or more expensive.
Like many people I expect, I have a modern DAC with a fairly old, budget(low mileage) CD player being used as a transport.
Would a new budget CDP or even one of the cheaper dedicated transports available, be likely to deliver better sound. My assumption is that there would not be much difference but I was hoping that someone might have first hand experience.
My interest is because I have a small "office" system that is currently tuner only and I would like to add CD. My first thought was to buy a cheap S/H CDP for that system but then I thought of the option of moving my current CDP to the office and getting a better transport for my main system.
Phil.
Well, as ever, by better I suppose I mean newer and/or more expensive.
Like many people I expect, I have a modern DAC with a fairly old, budget(low mileage) CD player being used as a transport.
Would a new budget CDP or even one of the cheaper dedicated transports available, be likely to deliver better sound. My assumption is that there would not be much difference but I was hoping that someone might have first hand experience.
My interest is because I have a small "office" system that is currently tuner only and I would like to add CD. My first thought was to buy a cheap S/H CDP for that system but then I thought of the option of moving my current CDP to the office and getting a better transport for my main system.
Phil.
#4 Re: CD transport importance.
I've recently purchased a Cambridge CXC transport. The price varies between £250 - £300 at Richer sounds and mine was at the lower price.
It's not run in yet but I feel it is a little bit better than the DVD-3910 I was using before.
Perhaps I should go back to the DVD-3910 and see if I can tell the difference.
It's not run in yet but I feel it is a little bit better than the DVD-3910 I was using before.
Perhaps I should go back to the DVD-3910 and see if I can tell the difference.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Edmund Burke
G-Popz THE easy listening connoisseur. (Philip)
Edmund Burke
G-Popz THE easy listening connoisseur. (Philip)
- The Stratmangler
- Shed dweller
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:50 pm
- Location: Rossendale, Lancashire
#5 Re: CD transport importance.
You have to use it to run it in.pre65 wrote:I've recently purchased a Cambridge CXC transport. The price varies between £250 - £300 at Richer sounds and mine was at the lower price.
It's not run in yet but I feel it is a little bit better than the DVD-3910 I was using before.
Perhaps I should go back to the DVD-3910 and see if I can tell the difference.
Most folks just stick a disc in and leave it running for a couple of days.
I think you should go back and try the Denon.
Chris 

#6 Re: CD transport importance.
Hello Philip,
Yes, I had seen the Cambridge CXC. Even bearing in mind that yours is not yet fully run in, it does sound like any differences are fairly small so I think I will be going for the cheap option.
Thanks all. Phil.
Yes, I had seen the Cambridge CXC. Even bearing in mind that yours is not yet fully run in, it does sound like any differences are fairly small so I think I will be going for the cheap option.
Thanks all. Phil.
- Irene Idler
- User
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:12 pm
- Location: Southsea
#7 Re: CD transport importance.
Ooooh, I know something! I actually know something! I'm so excited!
I have a couple of good friends who are hardcore digital audio geeks, and what they've told me (and my own experience confirms) is that for the most accurate tracking, the old-fashioned Philips single-beam tracking system is vastly superior. It's just plain simpler to keep a single beam in proper alignment. Three-beam systems are superior when high-speed tracking is required, as in a CD/R drive, but they can also result in an increased rate of read errors due to alignment issues. This is *especially* true when the CD isn't in good condition. You may have noticed that CDs that will play fine on your CD player won't play in your computer's CD/DVD drive -- this is why. There's a good article about it here if you're interested in the technical details.
I don't know anything at all about dedicated CD transport devices, so I have no idea whether anyone's making them with single-beam tracking systems, but I'd definitely look into it before buying.
I have a couple of good friends who are hardcore digital audio geeks, and what they've told me (and my own experience confirms) is that for the most accurate tracking, the old-fashioned Philips single-beam tracking system is vastly superior. It's just plain simpler to keep a single beam in proper alignment. Three-beam systems are superior when high-speed tracking is required, as in a CD/R drive, but they can also result in an increased rate of read errors due to alignment issues. This is *especially* true when the CD isn't in good condition. You may have noticed that CDs that will play fine on your CD player won't play in your computer's CD/DVD drive -- this is why. There's a good article about it here if you're interested in the technical details.
I don't know anything at all about dedicated CD transport devices, so I have no idea whether anyone's making them with single-beam tracking systems, but I'd definitely look into it before buying.
"Hey, you know the rules, baby. If you wanna PLAY funky, you gotta SMELL funky." -- Mike Troutman
#8 Re: CD transport importance.
I think that the most critical function is being able to read the disc in the first place. What good is a boutique transport when you can't listen to all of your discs.
Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
#9 Re: CD transport importance.
Quite........rowuk wrote:I think that the most critical function is being able to read the disc in the first place. What good is a boutique transport when you can't listen to all of your discs.

#10 Re: CD transport importance.
You're quite correct, BUT...... The Philips CD-M9 was the finest mech they made for tracking, and Arcam used it best with their Alpha 5 and 6 players, even over really nasty scratches and scuffs (we had a bad copy of Miles Davis 'Tutu' that defeated almost everything else) and better than Sony's finest heavy jobs, but what that meant was that the disc manufacturers started cutting corners. the triple beam machines would perfectly track proper in-spec discs, but discs over the tolerance were rejected or badly skipped over. So what do we do? Either we have a transport that'll plough it's way through regardless of disc specs being ignored, or a transport that's perfect on in-spec discs but doesn't like put of spec ones.Irene Idler wrote:Ooooh, I know something! I actually know something! I'm so excited!
Linn first brought this to our attention in the late 90's. their machines would play on-spec discs perfectly, but non red-book-standard discs weren't played well. They weren't alone here and once Philips went over to cheapo jap made triple-beam mechs, the discs began to improve again I remember...
I believe modern transports are basically DVD ones, as a dedicated CD drive is now too expensive in the small volumes they're made in - I could be wrong as this is second hand info - I'd recommend a player manufacturer with good after-care standards. Cambridge should be fine and Denon do some good looking machines that may make fine transports.
#11 Re: CD transport importance.
Get a cheap cdp (80s).........job done.
ebay is fullof em....£10- £100.
ebay is fullof em....£10- £100.

-
- Amstrad Tower of Power
- Posts: 10319
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
- Location: South Yorks.
#12 Re: CD transport importance.
My long gone Arcam Delta 170.3 transport was the bees knees.
Wish I still had it. I bet is would still cut it with a modern DAC rather than the Black Box 3 early bitstream DAC I used with it.
Wish I still had it. I bet is would still cut it with a modern DAC rather than the Black Box 3 early bitstream DAC I used with it.
If you always do what you always did, then you’ll always get what you always got. (John Crawford.)