Hi Phil and welcome to C/A. Boy, now that's a question that could go on and on! I'll share a few of my observations -

Regarding the CD player - one should reasonable expect to get whatever is on a CD processed and sent to the amplifier(s) correctly, i.e., as intended. On a single CD basis, if a CD player is doing that, then what more could you want? Ditto for a computer solution. If it's correct then they would seem equal. I'm ignoring all the stuff that actually happens and taking a rather simplistic view. Hypothetically, either one can deliver the goods, so to speak.

Now, one advantage to the computer, I think, in actually delivering said goods, is altering the probability of consistently performing the above task, because it doesn't have to deal with as many error issues on the fly (during playback). You did that when you ripped the CD.

That being said, the player you use may interject a bit of confusion at times because ripped songs tend to store as individual islands (songs) in a chain (the album). One can compensate and correct for the poor geography that ripping periodically imparts. But, it does take time/attention. So, the computer gives you song titles, band names, access to your entire collection at the push of a button, redundancy, streaming a signal all over the place via wire or wireless. It just totally smokes having to hunt for a CD to play. Playlists are a snap and you can load your iPod with ease. You can do things like listen to iTunes radio stations if you want to. One playlist for cocktails, one list for soft music, one for shagging, and on and on. Try that with any CD player. Even a 200 disk Sony can't easily do much of a playlist. Try downloading a hi resolution album on ye ole CD player! Isn’t going to happen.

Now, the computer can give you minor fits when it doesn't get the titles right, or it thinks 10 songs on a CD are 10 cds, things like that. For me, I don't mind taking the time to sort those issues out, but they do periodically occur.

Most folks don't need convincing as to why a computer offers a lot more in terms of features or flexibility, but they wonder how for about 1-3 thousand dollars you can get comparable sound and more utility versus their beloved CDP. Well, if both the CD player and computer are doing their job playing back what the CD offers, you get what the original CD brought to the party so to speak. Then it's the DAC. Can a standard CD player have a better DAC than a computer? Yup. Can a computer have a better internal DAC than another CD player? Yup. Can a computer have a better external DAC than a players internal DAC. There's the most common solution. Point being, it's about the choices you make in moving the data and converting the digital to analog. I'd bet a new low-end DAC is probably as good as a high end DAC of year's long gone. That's just a general statement about chips and there's probably some exception out there.

So, I don't think I'd say a computer by definition totally outclasses a conventional player at playing a given song. In fact, if it equals it isn't that pretty cool? But, it offers one zillion times the flexibility in playback, and when done correctly rivals the "old conventional CD player which cost x times more". And if the old CD player was marginal in any respects the computer based system with a good DAC would probably be superior.

I think everyone would agree you can do it with Mac or PC, it's just that the Mac/iTunes/iPod work together well with little fiddling as a good basic package. Same for the Airport Extreme Base station. Having your entire CD collection at fingertip control using a remote is pretty ... nifty. Now there's a technical audiophile term - nifty. I’d suggest you start with whatever you have and develop your opinions, needs and wants. I use both Mac (iTunes) and PC (iTunes and WinAmp). The Mac hands down is easier, of course not everyone will agree.

When I bought new for storing music, I went with Mac. I do tend to prefer Windows for business applications, maybe just because I’m comfortable there historically. Point is, I have no axe to grind, I just like Mac better for music, having and still using both. Our marketing folks use Macs for printed artwork rather than PCs. They use PCs for business apps and mail. They like the Mac better is all, at least for Artwork stuff.

Windows music systems from my perspective take more fiddling/potential hardware changes to reach that same state of niftiness. Lord help you when the folder art gets screwed up, that can be a pain to fix. I say that to remind you that for all the cool stuff a computer can do, they all hickup on organization at times. Moreso with obscure CDs.

Don't forget you can also rip your vinyl and store it with your CD collection! A bonus.

Take the plunge - everyone here helps. I’m a terrible salesman, thank God my customers need me.

Regards

Hah, I had a moment of inspiration there ... probably the drugs ... j/k

Hi Phil - Computers are certainly better at reading/ripping CDs than anything else I've seen. error correction and multi-pass really beat the realtime disc reading of a standard transport. Sure some newer players are "memory" players that rip the CD to memory first, but these are just intermediate products that will move people all the way to music servers.

With the external DAC your computer does just the transport work as you suggested above. You may be able to use your conventional CDP as a transport as well if you want to compare them. Most people I talk to agree that coax sounds much better than optical, but it is not the case in 100% of circumstances. You'll need to try it for yourself. I think USB has the potential of beating both of them when it is well implemented.

Macs are pretty quiet in my opinion. I have a MacBook Pro that barely breathes heavy when I am listening to music through it. I haven't experienced or even heard of anyone with trouble because of electronic noise. The topic has come up before and I know of one manufacturer who is developing products to fight this "issue."

Each Mac has pros and cons for use as a music server. You could use a Mini as a headless system or you can of course use a MacBook is you want the convenience of a monitor whenever you need it. In my opinion all of them have the horsepower to serve up any music you throw at them. With one exception, the MacBook Air will not make a good music server for several reasons that I won't go into. The MacBook Air makes a fabulous remote control however :-)

Phil - did you poke thru this thread? http://www.computeraudiophile.com/node/538

It talks about some pertinant issues, then fire away with questions

Hey Chris, Thanks. What exactly is a solid state drive? I assume a flash drive, not Hard Disk. How much do they cost?

I can see you love your MacBook and they sound neat to me.

Regards

Phil