It's a comparative thing. The DAC on my DAB tuner (Sony STD777es)
sounds
inferior then when compared with the sound whilst connected through the
DAC
of the Arcam Black Box 500. I would assume that lesser DAB tuners would
also
benefit in this manner. Yes the bitrate of the transmission has a large
bearing on the sound, but then so does the DAC. When I buy a new
Freeview
box with digital output next month I should benefit from the superior
bitrates seemingly available via this platform with some broadcasts.

Yes better, but NICAM and FM still sound better.....

Not really relevant though. No UK radio transmissions employ NICAM (do they
elsewhere?) whilst the radio services offered via Freeview aren't available
on FM.

Now say 100 times:
"My dapper Dad's damn DAB DAC doesn't do DAT justice."

Didn't hear you saying it )

I would agree, although I'm not sure how that would be done - isn't that
just a natural result of better fidelity?

I have two freeview boxes, A Pioneer and a Sony. They work equally well in
most the time but the Sony cuts in and out during heavy rain and when I
turn the lights on.

My point is, with digital better fidelity means better at recovering data.
If high-end dacs were good at this they would find it harder to justify
ridiculous CD transport prices.

--
Jim H jh
@333
.org

I would agree, although I'm not sure how that would be done - isn't that
just a natural result of better fidelity?

I have two freeview boxes, A Pioneer and a Sony. They work equally well in
most the time but the Sony cuts in and out during heavy rain and when I
turn the lights on.

My point is, with digital better fidelity means better at recovering data.
If high-end dacs were good at this they would find it harder to justify
ridiculous CD transport prices.

--
Jim H jh
@333
.org

"Wally" wrote in message
...
A mate brought his Arcam CD player (8 or 9, I think) round for a listen
last
night, and (as expected) it showed up my cheapie Schneider DVD/CD
wossname.
Much better clarity and definition, I thought. The bass especially was a
huge improvement.

Then I realised that the Schneider has digital outputs - coax and
optical -
and wondered if it's feasible to connect a DAC to these and maybe approach
the sort of sound produced by the Arcam. A quick look in eBay indicates
that
there's a fair selection up to about £200.

Is this worth considering, or will the transport in the Schneider have a
deletrious effect in spite of whatever improvements a DAC wold bring? It
strikes me that the cheapest DVD/CD drive can deliver error-free digital
data to a computer, so one would think that a cheap transport in a CD
player
is capable of similar. If it is worth considering, what makes/models of
DAC
should I look at that would match the Arcam's level of fidelity?

Hi Wally,
Ok this is with my setup and my ears at the time and as with everything
YMMV.
I thought I'd try the same thing a while back with a DVD player as
RicherSounds were selling the Cambridge Audio Isomagic DAC for £70 (it
doubles up as an isolation platform). I didn't have the space for separate
CD and DVD players so the DAC route looked ideal.
When I hooked it up to the DVD player the difference was like night and day.
When I first bought the DVD player I thought the sound was ok it just lacked
a bit of weight and power, I messed around with bigger speakers and amps but
the it still sounded a bit weak and distant. As soon as I adding the DAC it
sounded like the speakers were being driven by a larger amp, the sound had
much more weight and I could actually hear the bassline.
I've since got a dedicated HiFi cd/amp but I've still got the DAC to hook up
to my second system.
As you can probably tell I was pretty chuffed with the change it made to my
system and I don't think that it was a top of the line product.
Ideally you should always audition before you buy and just because I had a
good experience with an offboard DAC it might not be the same with your
combination of equipment.
BTW my DVD player was/is a Sony 725.

HTH

Dave


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 18/11/2003

"Wally" wrote in message
...
A mate brought his Arcam CD player (8 or 9, I think) round for a listen
last
night, and (as expected) it showed up my cheapie Schneider DVD/CD
wossname.
Much better clarity and definition, I thought. The bass especially was a
huge improvement.

Then I realised that the Schneider has digital outputs - coax and
optical -
and wondered if it's feasible to connect a DAC to these and maybe approach
the sort of sound produced by the Arcam. A quick look in eBay indicates
that
there's a fair selection up to about £200.

Is this worth considering, or will the transport in the Schneider have a
deletrious effect in spite of whatever improvements a DAC wold bring? It
strikes me that the cheapest DVD/CD drive can deliver error-free digital
data to a computer, so one would think that a cheap transport in a CD
player
is capable of similar. If it is worth considering, what makes/models of
DAC
should I look at that would match the Arcam's level of fidelity?

Hi Wally,
Ok this is with my setup and my ears at the time and as with everything
YMMV.
I thought I'd try the same thing a while back with a DVD player as
RicherSounds were selling the Cambridge Audio Isomagic DAC for £70 (it
doubles up as an isolation platform). I didn't have the space for separate
CD and DVD players so the DAC route looked ideal.
When I hooked it up to the DVD player the difference was like night and day.
When I first bought the DVD player I thought the sound was ok it just lacked
a bit of weight and power, I messed around with bigger speakers and amps but
the it still sounded a bit weak and distant. As soon as I adding the DAC it
sounded like the speakers were being driven by a larger amp, the sound had
much more weight and I could actually hear the bassline.
I've since got a dedicated HiFi cd/amp but I've still got the DAC to hook up
to my second system.
As you can probably tell I was pretty chuffed with the change it made to my
system and I don't think that it was a top of the line product.
Ideally you should always audition before you buy and just because I had a
good experience with an offboard DAC it might not be the same with your
combination of equipment.
BTW my DVD player was/is a Sony 725.

HTH

Dave


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 18/11/2003

In article , Wally
writes
Jim H wrote:

How good, or not, is DAB through the external DAC?

The limiting factor is usually bitrate, not the DAC, so still worse
than FM.

Audibly, what differences are there between DAB and FM? I'm not a critical
FM listener (mainly because my tuner isn't exciting), so I'm wondering how
DAB would fare for background stuff.



Well on DAB the broadcasters have the opportunity to alter the
transmitted bit rates. "Quality" supposedly indistinguishable from CD
was reckoned to come in at 256 kilobits, but for most stations they have
now settled on 128 K/Bits (sometimes less and mono!) in order to pack
more channels in. Radio 3 is an exception at 192 K/bits. Most of the
128 K stations sound quite dire especially when "audio processing" is
applied in order to make them sound louder.

FM whilst not perfect uses a higher bit rate feed, NICAM 728 or a
version of it to feed the FM modulator which gives a higher quality of
audio assuming a good tuner and FM signal.


www.digitalradiotech.co.uk

has a lot of info of what's wrong with DAB in the UK:-((
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Wally
writes
Jim H wrote:

How good, or not, is DAB through the external DAC?

The limiting factor is usually bitrate, not the DAC, so still worse
than FM.

Audibly, what differences are there between DAB and FM? I'm not a critical
FM listener (mainly because my tuner isn't exciting), so I'm wondering how
DAB would fare for background stuff.



Well on DAB the broadcasters have the opportunity to alter the
transmitted bit rates. "Quality" supposedly indistinguishable from CD
was reckoned to come in at 256 kilobits, but for most stations they have
now settled on 128 K/Bits (sometimes less and mono!) in order to pack
more channels in. Radio 3 is an exception at 192 K/bits. Most of the
128 K stations sound quite dire especially when "audio processing" is
applied in order to make them sound louder.

FM whilst not perfect uses a higher bit rate feed, NICAM 728 or a
version of it to feed the FM modulator which gives a higher quality of
audio assuming a good tuner and FM signal.


www.digitalradiotech.co.uk

has a lot of info of what's wrong with DAB in the UK:-((
--
Tony Sayer

In article , just me
writes
It's a comparative thing. The DAC on my DAB tuner (Sony STD777es)
sounds
inferior then when compared with the sound whilst connected through the
DAC
of the Arcam Black Box 500. I would assume that lesser DAB tuners would
also
benefit in this manner. Yes the bitrate of the transmission has a large
bearing on the sound, but then so does the DAC. When I buy a new
Freeview
box with digital output next month I should benefit from the superior
bitrates seemingly available via this platform with some broadcasts.

Yes better, but NICAM and FM still sound better.....

Not really relevant though. No UK radio transmissions employ NICAM (do they
elsewhere?) whilst the radio services offered via Freeview aren't available
on FM.

NICAM is used to feed the main FM transmitters in the UK well BBC ones.

The extra radio channels on freeview are not available on FM as you
rightly point out. However freeview does use higher transmission rates
then T-DAB..

--
Tony Sayer

In article , just me
writes
It's a comparative thing. The DAC on my DAB tuner (Sony STD777es)
sounds
inferior then when compared with the sound whilst connected through the
DAC
of the Arcam Black Box 500. I would assume that lesser DAB tuners would
also
benefit in this manner. Yes the bitrate of the transmission has a large
bearing on the sound, but then so does the DAC. When I buy a new
Freeview
box with digital output next month I should benefit from the superior
bitrates seemingly available via this platform with some broadcasts.

Yes better, but NICAM and FM still sound better.....

Not really relevant though. No UK radio transmissions employ NICAM (do they
elsewhere?) whilst the radio services offered via Freeview aren't available
on FM.

NICAM is used to feed the main FM transmitters in the UK well BBC ones.

The extra radio channels on freeview are not available on FM as you
rightly point out. However freeview does use higher transmission rates
then T-DAB..

--
Tony Sayer

In article , Jim H
writes

I would agree, although I'm not sure how that would be done - isn't that
just a natural result of better fidelity?

I have two freeview boxes, A Pioneer and a Sony. They work equally well in
most the time but the Sony cuts in and out during heavy rain and when I
turn the lights on.

That's almost certainly due to a marginal aerial signal. Almost without
exception the DTV signals are transmitted over a much wider channel
range that the original TV channel plan.

Also the cable that you use as a down lead is likely to be the older
low-loss type more modern ones such as CT100 are far better...

My point is, with digital better fidelity means better at recovering data.
If high-end dacs were good at this they would find it harder to justify
ridiculous CD transport prices.


--
Tony Sayer