hjdca
Member
Hello Audiophiles, I ripped all my SACDs to a 1 TB USB stick and a media server. They are DSD .dsf files now. I have an MCT500 that feeds into a D150 that feeds into a C2300 that feeds into two monoblock MC275 that control a pair of Wilson W/P 8. The DSD data is going to the D150 directly from the MCT500 DIN cable, and from what I can tell, the D150 does not know the difference from a DSD (.dsf) file coming from the MCT500 transport or the MCT500 USB Stick interface. The convenience of popping in a USB stick into the MCT500 and quickly playing any SACD song in my is rather easy. I actually have no problem with the MCT500 user interface, and it is very fast. I find, I prefer it, to loading an SACD into the transport or messing with my IPAD - which connnects to 14 year old cheap music server. My question is - Is the USB stick electronics of the MCT500 as good as the SACD laser transport in the MCT500 ? I did some A/B testing, and I am not sure I can tell the difference, but, my ears have been through a lot of concerts and shooting adventures. I cannot hear anything below 25 hz or above 16 or 17 khz. A friend of mine told me that he can hear the difference, and the Laser transport sounds better than the USB stick. I think the laser transport may sound "tighter" or "more clean". I noticed that the new high end, state of the art MCD12000 SACD player does not even have a USB stick interface. Why is that ? Personally, I consider that a negative.... I guess McIntosh figures that anybody spending all that coin on a SACD player will only want to use the transport? ...., so, the USB stick interface must be considered very inferior ?? What is the prevailing view of these two McIntosh Technologies ie. Laser Transport vs USB Stick interface ? Thanks in advance for any info.
