Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Cornell! I haven't incorporated my computer with my home theater system either, but I also hope to do so. I checked the B and K website, but didn't find it very accessible. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 9:21 AM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Gary, Do you have your computer incorporated into your Home Theater system? That's what I ultimately want to do, but when I did so a few months ago, my computer screen didn't read well on a HD TV. The wife said all characters looked weird, but I only have composite and S video out on my video card and no adaptor to accommodate the 16:9 TV screen. Don't quote me on this, but I heard the BK Audio Components AVR 507receiver will allow software programs, such as JAWS to be loaded onto it's system allowing blind folk to use it more easily. I'm currently running an Onkyo 989 version 2 THX Ultra 2 receiver and considering a few other options now as I'm trying to sell the Onkyo. JVC has wireless PC hook up capability as well as Sirius satellite radio built right into the 702B model. So, I'm considering the BK as mentioned above or the JVC once I sell my Onkyo, or I might just wait to see if Onkyo has an upgrade soon with newer HD features. I also like to use a few surround features when playing music. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 00:49:33 -0500 Well I like my home theater system. I play my music in surround sound, as well as watching movies with it, and I think it sounds pretty good. I have a Pioneer system not, but am not sure what I'm going to get next time. I plan to get a new system though. I'm not sure about on screen programming since I can't read the screen. This may have strayed off topic, but people were comparing audio files with home theater. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but I'm such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and I'm familiar with Nad's reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. I'm also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note - I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years. Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Gary, I had the same experience on the BK audio site as well. Ill hold on to this email through the weekend and will forward privately so I dont clog things up on the list. IOW: I will get info for you and send it along. I had my eye on a unit via EBay had I sold my system. I kind of glad I didnt though, unless I could get into the BK unit. I have an older BK 4090 preamp, but the remote went bad, so I sold my power amp about two years ago and jumped into the Flagship Onkyo receiver. After further research, I realized how much of a step down the JVC wouldve been, so I moved on from it. Although it has some nice features, its not TXH Ultra II certified. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 00:57:51 -0500 Hi Cornell! I haven't incorporated my computer with my home theater system either, but I also hope to do so. I checked the B and K website, but didn't find it very accessible. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 9:21 AM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Gary, Do you have your computer incorporated into your Home Theater system? That's what I ultimately want to do, but when I did so a few months ago, my computer screen didn't read well on a HD TV. The wife said all characters looked weird, but I only have composite and S video out on my video card and no adaptor to accommodate the 16:9 TV screen. Don't quote me on this, but I heard the BK Audio Components AVR 507receiver will allow software programs, such as JAWS to be loaded onto it's system allowing blind folk to use it more easily. I'm currently running an Onkyo 989 version 2 THX Ultra 2 receiver and considering a few other options now as I'm trying to sell the Onkyo. JVC has wireless PC hook up capability as well as Sirius satellite radio built right into the 702B model. So, I'm considering the BK as mentioned above or the JVC once I sell my Onkyo, or I might just wait to see if Onkyo has an upgrade soon with newer HD features. I also like to use a few surround features when playing music. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 00:49:33 -0500 Well I like my home theater system. I play my music in surround sound, as well as watching movies with it, and I think it sounds pretty good. I have a Pioneer system not, but am not sure what I'm going to get next time. I plan to get a new system though. I'm not sure about on screen programming since I can't read the screen. This may have strayed off topic, but people were comparing audio files with home theater. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but I'm such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and I'm familiar with Nad's reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. I'm also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note - I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years. Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Thanks, Cornell! - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 8:50 AM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Gary, I had the same experience on the BK audio site as well. I'll hold on to this email through the weekend and will forward privately so I don't clog things up on the list. IOW: I will get info for you and send it along. I had my eye on a unit via EBay had I sold my system. I kind of glad I didn't though, unless I could get into the BK unit. I have an older BK 4090 preamp, but the remote went bad, so I sold my power amp about two years ago and jumped into the Flagship Onkyo receiver. After further research, I realized how much of a step down the JVC would've been, so I moved on from it. Although it has some nice features, it's not TXH Ultra II certified. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 00:57:51 -0500 Hi Cornell! I haven't incorporated my computer with my home theater system either, but I also hope to do so. I checked the B and K website, but didn't find it very accessible. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 9:21 AM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Gary, Do you have your computer incorporated into your Home Theater system? That's what I ultimately want to do, but when I did so a few months ago, my computer screen didn't read well on a HD TV. The wife said all characters looked weird, but I only have composite and S video out on my video card and no adaptor to accommodate the 16:9 TV screen. Don't quote me on this, but I heard the BK Audio Components AVR 507receiver will allow software programs, such as JAWS to be loaded onto it's system allowing blind folk to use it more easily. I'm currently running an Onkyo 989 version 2 THX Ultra 2 receiver and considering a few other options now as I'm trying to sell the Onkyo. JVC has wireless PC hook up capability as well as Sirius satellite radio built right into the 702B model. So, I'm considering the BK as mentioned above or the JVC once I sell my Onkyo, or I might just wait to see if Onkyo has an upgrade soon with newer HD features. I also like to use a few surround features when playing music. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 00:49:33 -0500 Well I like my home theater system. I play my music in surround sound, as well as watching movies with it, and I think it sounds pretty good. I have a Pioneer system not, but am not sure what I'm going to get next time. I plan to get a new system though. I'm not sure about on screen programming since I can't read the screen. This may have strayed off topic, but people were comparing audio files with home theater. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but I'm such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and I'm familiar with Nad's reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. I'm also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note - I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years. Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Gary, Do you have your computer incorporated into your Home Theater system? Thats what I ultimately want to do, but when I did so a few months ago, my computer screen didnt read well on a HD TV. The wife said all characters looked weird, but I only have composite and S video out on my video card and no adaptor to accommodate the 16:9 TV screen. Dont quote me on this, but I heard the BK Audio Components AVR 507receiver will allow software programs, such as JAWS to be loaded onto its system allowing blind folk to use it more easily. Im currently running an Onkyo 989 version 2 THX Ultra 2 receiver and considering a few other options now as Im trying to sell the Onkyo. JVC has wireless PC hook up capability as well as Sirius satellite radio built right into the 702B model. So, Im considering the BK as mentioned above or the JVC once I sell my Onkyo, or I might just wait to see if Onkyo has an upgrade soon with newer HD features. I also like to use a few surround features when playing music. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Gary Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 00:49:33 -0500 Well I like my home theater system. I play my music in surround sound, as well as watching movies with it, and I think it sounds pretty good. I have a Pioneer system not, but am not sure what I'm going to get next time. I plan to get a new system though. I'm not sure about on screen programming since I can't read the screen. This may have strayed off topic, but people were comparing audio files with home theater. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but I'm such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and I'm familiar with Nad's reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. I'm also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note - I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years. Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Well I like my home theater system. I play my music in surround sound, as well as watching movies with it, and I think it sounds pretty good. I have a Pioneer system not, but am not sure what I'm going to get next time. I plan to get a new system though. I'm not sure about on screen programming since I can't read the screen. This may have strayed off topic, but people were comparing audio files with home theater. - Original Message - From: Cornell Ligon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but I'm such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and I'm familiar with Nad's reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. I'm also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note - I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years. Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but Im such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and Im familiar with Nads reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. Im also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Cornell System is strange here. I had a home theater amp which I used with a set of no man brand speakers which cost me about les than 200 dollars [that is the speakers]. They are floor standing speakers. It sounded OK with the home theater amp which is also no man brand but not that hot. Then I hooked up the pair of speakers to the NAD c320 and both my friend and I were astounded at the results! And this from chinese speakers which are not made by any recognised brand! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 30 March 2007 04:48 PM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Andre, No, I understood what you were stating, but Im such a junky for audio equipment in any capacity and Im familiar with Nads reputation for keeping things simple without too many bells and whistles. Im also an audio file, but I began to incorporate home theater A/V into my system back in 91 with an Onkyo 70 Pro integra receiver with discreet amplification. For the most part, I fully agree with you about home theater systems not that great for audio files. However, when you get into higher end systems, at least with a few out there, they tend to accommodate audio listening quite well along with the home theater features. But, that typically means spending $1800 to almost $4000 for a good system. Quick note I had a great 6 channel 170 watts per channel rms THX Parasound power amp that I sold two years ago and kind of regret now, but tend to like to change up audio equipment every few years Sorry to get so far off topic. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:59:52 +0200 Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
I agree with you, Bruce. Winamp sounds much better to me (with or without equalizer) than either Windows Media Player or Realplayer. But, as far as CDs, I'm not sure I understand what either you or Andre is complaining about. Of course, I rip all my CDs to my hard drive, and play them with Winamp, from there. I don't play the physical CD with any player. But, when I play an album in the way I've describe, I can't hear any loss in sound quality or listenability. And, when I play Days of Future Past (the *original* concept album), it sounds just as good through Winamp, from my hard drive, as it does on my Cd deck. Blessed Be, Dana that's Dayna, D A N A, NOT Donna, D O N N A D. S. Leslie, née C. R. Guttman Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: dsleslie Web: ÞE OL' PHILOSOPHIE SHOPPE Your Source for Discounted Ideas http://members.cox.net/dsleslie2/ - Original Message - From: Bruce Toews [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:59 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 2150 (20070328) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
I'm not a fan of windows media either. Allison - Original Message - From: Bruce Toews [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:59 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
If only winamp didn't take up almost 50 megs of ram. Besides that, and a few other things, it's my fav player. I only use wmp when I must. I will say however that it is anoying to hear a slight gap when a track moves forward when it should be seemless. There's crossfading, but that doesn't give what I want exactly either. If they could fix that, then I'd truly be a happy camper. Rick contact info msn [EMAIL PROTECTED] skype lord_of_beer aim r_claypo - Original Message - From: Allison Mervis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 04:10 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I'm not a fan of windows media either. Allison - Original Message - From: Bruce Toews [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:59 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hello the list! Has anyone seen a true comparative analysis of the two players? What is the process? You have to read the file (on the CD or on your hard drive and feed it to a digital to analog converter which produces the analog sound which is fed into an amplifier of some kind. That digital to analog converter can be in your sound card on your pc or in your stereo's cd player. The amplifier can be in your sound card or as part of your stereo system. When you are comparing sound systems, you have to make sure that the music is being played flat; no adjustments to the bass, treble or high end. You have to make sure that your settings in Win Amp and WmP are not tweaking the sound. So, when you are asking about sound quality with these guys, you first have to ask what part dose Win Amp or Windows Media Player or the program reading your files on your stereo cd player perform in the process and what influence will it have on the actual sound?. I presume it is in the reading of the cd (or file) and the ability of the software to read exactly what is on the file. So, if you have a perfect cd, will they perform the same? One can prefer the usability, friendliness, functionality and so on, one over the other. But, how easy is it to say that one has a better sound quality output than the other? Hey guy, this is getting kind of long. Time to stick your finger in your eye, start rocking and go back into dream mode. Reed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dana S. Leslie Sent: 2007/03/28 12:32 To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I agree with you, Bruce. Winamp sounds much better to me (with or without equalizer) than either Windows Media Player or Realplayer. But, as far as CDs, I'm not sure I understand what either you or Andre is complaining about. Of course, I rip all my CDs to my hard drive, and play them with Winamp, from there. I don't play the physical CD with any player. But, when I play an album in the way I've describe, I can't hear any loss in sound quality or listenability. And, when I play Days of Future Past (the *original* concept album), it sounds just as good through Winamp, from my hard drive, as it does on my Cd deck. Blessed Be, Dana that's Dayna, D A N A, NOT Donna, D O N N A D. S. Leslie, née C. R. Guttman Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: dsleslie Web: ÞE OL' PHILOSOPHIE SHOPPE Your Source for Discounted Ideas http://members.cox.net/dsleslie2/ - Original Message - From: Bruce Toews [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:59 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
I think it all depends on your system. I remember on my last system before this one, when I would listen tto a live album, or any other album where there was no gap between tracks on a cd, Winamp would stop for aquick second, switch tracks and continue. It was really annoying. On my current system and in later versions of Winamp this seems to have been fixed and it's acting much better than it was. so it may be worth upgrading to the latest version of Winamp to see how it goes for you. At 01:59 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 2150 (20070328) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
It's gotten a lot betterr, but on some albums I can hear a glitch, and if I'm lost in a 20 minute guitar keyboard organ thngy, and then hear a blip, it takes me out of my little world. contact info msn [EMAIL PROTECTED] skype lord_of_beer aim r_claypo - Original Message - From: Chris Skarstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 05:40 PM Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS I think it all depends on your system. I remember on my last system before this one, when I would listen tto a live album, or any other album where there was no gap between tracks on a cd, Winamp would stop for aquick second, switch tracks and continue. It was really annoying. On my current system and in later versions of Winamp this seems to have been fixed and it's acting much better than it was. so it may be worth upgrading to the latest version of Winamp to see how it goes for you. At 01:59 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: I disagree with you about Windows Media. I feel it is the least palatable of all the player options out there. As for CD's, you are quite correct and there's no disputing you there. Bruce On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:55:02 +0100, Kevin Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ogts.net Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 2150 (20070328) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
I'm not sure if there's short cut keys to do this, but if the EQ is on or off, tab down to that field and hit the button to turn it off or on. once it's turned off, it's off. You can set it how you like, but turn it off when not using it. HTH Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: André van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same sound quality out of playing audio cds on a computer than you would get playing them on a good quality cd player? I am not really interested in saving my music in wav format as you cannot seem to get media info on a wav file. Andre Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS
Hi Cornell The Nad c320b is an integrated amplifier. I do not need a home theter system so I went for a simple amplifier to listen to music. This is a very simple integrated amp with no bells or whistles, like we have ben expecting from NAD over the years. I don't know what their home theater systems are at all. Perhaps I should have stated this in my original message. The reason I asked these questions is that I wanted to listen to high quality music and not home theater. And I must say that the few times I listened to music on home theater systems the sound quality was horrible to put it mildly!! Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornell Ligon Sent: 29 March 2007 03:51 AM To: pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi, is the Nad a power amp or a receiver? In other words, do you have your computer system and stereo or home theater integrated? I did this awhile ago until I realized my phone jack in family room wasn't powerful enough to handle DSL for the nt, so I temporarily move my computer system back into my office. I am however considering a 'Home Thater ' computer to integrate into my Onkyo 989 V2, and also considering upgrading it to a newer BK audio system that handles HD TV, HD audio files and wireless communication with the PC. being an audio file with 'home audio', I must say I don't quite have the same ear for audio on my computer, because I can't tell much difference in sound quality from using WMP, REal Player or ITunes other than ease of use. Best Regards, Cornell Original Message Follows From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: PC audio discussion list. pc-audio@pc-audio.org To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Subject: RE: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:19:37 +0200 Hi Kevin The setup I use here is of course my PC with win xp and windows media player 11. I have a emagic emi 2/6 usb professional soundcard running into a newly-purchased NAD c320b. So I am not using computer speakers but a proper hifi system. So the soundcard in this stage is completely isolated from the computer. Oh yes - on windows media player 11 is there a way to completel y turn off the equalizer? I know there is a certain menu item to not make the equalizer show but is it then turned off completely? Andre -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Lloyd Sent: 28 March 2007 08:55 PM To: PC audio discussion list. Subject: Re: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi Andre. In my opinion windows media player provides a better listen than winamp. There's really very little difference but specifically if you listen to live albums or concept albums, windows media player is far superior to winamp in playing the tracks seemlessly. I prefer windows media player personally and I believe you won't get a third party product to play a proprietary format like WMA better than a player produced by the company that produced the WMA format itself. With regards to your other question, no, a computer won't play a CD as well as a good CD player. I've had a number of machines over the years and find the transports are more flimsy than a good quality CD player and don't hold the CD as well. This can lead to jitter and distortion. A computer's CD-ROM is primarily designed to play data CD's and so there was never a need originally to worry about this aspect. Incidentally, I've found laptops to have the better transports which surprised me but they do tend to have a raised centre onto which you can firmly place the disc and so eliminate jitter. After the transport you've got the processing of the signal which is going through a dirty box of electrics in close proximity and generally feeding finally into a not too wonderful soundcard. A good quality CD player will have more separation between the digital processing and power supply to remove RF generated by all that hot electrics. Best way to listen to a collection of music on a computer in my opinion is to get a decent USB soundcard and connect to a quality amplifier, preferably using a digital connection. Regards. Kevin E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Andri van Deventer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'PC audio discussion list. ' pc-audio@pc-audio.org Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:40 AM Subject: SOUND QUALITY OF DIFFERENT AUDIO PLAYERS Hi all I know that I am now probably starting a rather difficult and perhaps controversial thread, but I really want to get an answer to my questions. 1. Is there a difference in the audio quality between winamp and windows media player? I like using windows media player but I do want the best audio quality. I put all my cds in windows media lossless format so I want lossless sound out of the audio player also. 2. Would you get the same
