CD player replaced by DVD player ? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : CD player replaced by DVD player ?



Jeremy
04-21-2005, 08:45 PM
Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?

shokhead
04-22-2005, 05:57 AM
A nice DVD player will play CD's just fine. Something like the Yamaha C750 for 300 bucks will play just about every disc there is and its a 5 disc changer. This is just an example as there are others for less.

46minaudio
04-22-2005, 06:00 AM
Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?
Yes,Some can even play SACD,DVDa,CD,MP3,DVDv and others for less than $200.

LEAFS264
04-22-2005, 07:43 AM
Pioneer Elite DV-59AI.

Jeremy
04-22-2005, 09:17 AM
I was wondering if DVD player can replaced CD player. Then why do we still need CD player around ?

By the way is there any difference between the sound quality of a CD audio playing on a
DVD & CD player ?

Maybe I should rephase my question "Can I achieve a high-end audio quality by using a DVD player due to budget constrain ?".

shokhead
04-22-2005, 09:58 AM
You wont hear any difference in a $200 DVD player and a $200 CD player,both playing CD's. I havent had a CD player in years.

paul_pci
04-22-2005, 10:52 AM
I have a CD player, but that's just a matter of convenience. I have the Sony 300 disc player because I'm too lazy to change discs. Now, I don't really want repave trampled ground, but most people use the digital connection for these lower priced players so that the receiver or preamp is doing the processing of transported digital information and not the player; therefore, it becomes arbitrary whether one gets a DVD player or a CD player when using the digital connection.

46minaudio
04-23-2005, 04:53 AM
Maybe I should rephase my question "Can I achieve a high-end audio quality by using a DVD player due to budget constrain ?".
Yes, again look at some of the players that will play all formats..Toshiba and Yamaha make a 5 disc PS player that does this all formats for around $300 .They also include proper bass management and distance settings for DVDa/SACD..

shokhead
04-23-2005, 07:46 AM
I have a CD player, but that's just a matter of convenience. I have the Sony 300 disc player because I'm too lazy to change discs. Now, I don't really want repave trampled ground, but most people use the digital connection for these lower priced players so that the receiver or preamp is doing the processing of transported digital information and not the player; therefore, it becomes arbitrary whether one gets a DVD player or a CD player when using the digital connection.

Is your Sony full?

paul_pci
04-23-2005, 09:41 AM
Is your Sony full?

Not in the least. I have about 110 discs in there.

Mr Peabody
04-23-2005, 12:29 PM
DVD players have not replaced CD players because DVD players do not give the same care to the analog signal as a true CD player. I am not talking about your entry level players. Through the analog outputs you will hear significantly better sound from a good CD player over a DVD player. It is too expensive to put high quality analog output stage for format in a multi format machine. Even brands like Arcam and Krell cannot do it. There high end DVD players have very good CD playback but not comparable to their CD players costing the same. I can't tell you why this is from a technical stand point but it is. To not recognize this you'd have to be in the camp that thinks all CD players sound the same. You simply cannot make one machine do the job of 3 or 4 at the same cost and performance of the one machine.

If you use the digital output of the machine there will be no difference in what kind of player you use. Although this is also debated as well.

My advice would be if you are planning on using the digital output of your machine or going to spend less than maybe $300.00 go ahead and get a DVD or multi format player. If you are looking for good CD playback use the analog outputs and buy a good CD player. By good I mean one that offers better performance than your mass market brands.

Jeremy
04-28-2005, 09:44 AM
DVD players have not replaced CD players because DVD players do not give the same care to the analog signal as a true CD player. I am not talking about your entry level players. Through the analog outputs you will hear significantly better sound from a good CD player over a DVD player. It is too expensive to put high quality analog output stage for format in a multi format machine. Even brands like Arcam and Krell cannot do it. There high end DVD players have very good CD playback but not comparable to their CD players costing the same. I can't tell you why this is from a technical stand point but it is. To not recognize this you'd have to be in the camp that thinks all CD players sound the same. You simply cannot make one machine do the job of 3 or 4 at the same cost and performance of the one machine.

If you use the digital output of the machine there will be no difference in what kind of player you use. Although this is also debated as well.

My advice would be if you are planning on using the digital output of your machine or going to spend less than maybe $300.00 go ahead and get a DVD or multi format player. If you are looking for good CD playback use the analog outputs and buy a good CD player. By good I mean one that offers better performance than your mass market brands.

How about using a DAC for my DVD player ? Do u think the sound quantity will be better
than a CD player ?

Another thing is "Is it worthwhile to buy a DAC 4 my DVD player or buy a good CD player ?".

N. Abstentia
04-28-2005, 10:41 AM
I doubt you'll hear a difference no matter what you do.

Put it this way..what does the rest of your system look like? If you've got $4000 in a preamp and $10,000 in speakers then by all means you can worry about DAC's and getting a .000001% sound quality improvement, but if you've got a $400 receiver and $500 speakers then just get whatever player fits your budget and needs.

Jeremy
04-28-2005, 11:42 AM
I doubt you'll hear a difference no matter what you do.

Put it this way..what does the rest of your system look like? If you've got $4000 in a preamp and $10,000 in speakers then by all means you can worry about DAC's and getting a .000001% sound quality improvement, but if you've got a $400 receiver and $500 speakers then just get whatever player fits your budget and needs.

Infact, I am very new to hifi. I had given up this hobby since 10 over years ago. I actually just brought the sf concerto home speaker. I would like to use back my accuphase
integrated amp E206 to drive the speaker & my philip DVD hard disk recorder to play CD audio. I am yet to get some speaker & interconnect cable. I heard from my friend that
RS cable is good. I had intended to get it this week.

Due to budget contrain, I tried to buy item 1 at a time. I hope my amp is still working.
Any suggestion ?

N. Abstentia
04-28-2005, 12:20 PM
You'll be more than pleased with the CD performance of a good DVD player, you might even want to get a 5 disc so you can load it up with whatever you want.

matt39
04-28-2005, 02:21 PM
...can do a pretty good job on cd's. As an experiment I recently purchased a Toshiba 3980 for use as a cdp. It does a very good job indeed. I am not saying that it is better or worse than a stand alone cd player, simply that it does a very good job in it's own right. It sounds much better than I expected and out of all proportion to it's price. Whether one prefers it over a cdp is, IMO, a matter of personal preference and the features you are looking for in your digital source. The cheaper players lack the build quality and features of more expensive players but still sound pretty good, even very good. Just my two cents.

shokhead
04-28-2005, 03:46 PM
They all sound the same hooked up with the dig out. :D

Mr Peabody
04-28-2005, 06:12 PM
If you already have a DVD player a DAC would be a good way to go for 2 channel listening. I'd think you could get more performance for your money by just buying the DAC. That way your cost don't include the transport, remote and whatever else would go into a full cd player. You might take a look at www.amusicdirect.com they carry several DAC's and have a 30 day return policy if you aren't happy.

On the home theater side I use a Denon DVD player and in 2 channel the DAC in my Primare processor sounds much better. I admit that is somewhat of a big step up in DAC capability but I definitely think it's worth buying a DAC for 2 channel. On another system I have been using a higher end Denon cd player which is a few generations back on DAC technology, I recently stuck a used Conrad Johnson DAC, which is a few generations back itself, on the digital output and it has made a dramatic improvement. I only paid about $400.00 for the CJ DAC. These guys don't listen, their loss, but you can make a large improvement in sound quality, no matter your electronics, if you upgrade your front end. This CJ DAC I'm talking about would still sound better than the Denon's DAC even through a Pioneer receiver. Go and listen to some gear for yourself, I could hear a difference in entry level cd players from Denon, Onkyo and Yamaha in a recent comparison. All things digital DO NOT sound the same.

This CJ DAC is the first outboard DAC I've used so I really don't have a good suggestion as to what brand to look at. If you are serious about looking let me know and I have a friend that could give us a pointer and also check out reviews of some DAC's. Then buying from a place that will let you return it is a must, then you have nothing to loose and everything to gain. If it's not up to your expectations, send it back, or if you are amazed, then you have many hours of enjoyable listening ahead as you re-explore your music collection.

N. Abstentia
04-29-2005, 08:32 AM
I think you have to consider the guy's budget here...I don't think he's ready to go spending $1000 for a standalone CD player for $500 just for a DAC.

Bascially, he'd be better off with a good quality $300 DVD player that does everything, rather than getting a $150 DVD player and a $69 CD player. There's no way he'd gain ANYTHING by getting a cheapo CD player. Just because it's a 'standalone' CD player does not mean it will sound better than a DVD player.

A $1000 CD player? Yes.
$69 CD player? No.

shokhead
04-29-2005, 08:38 AM
$1000 cd player-Yes
$69 cd player-No
Why? As long as your using the Dig out,they will sound the same and thats the way most hook up. I wouldnt buy a $1000 cd player so i could not use the dig. :confused:
Maybe i'm wrong{again} but dont most of use use the dig connection?

Jeremy
04-29-2005, 01:15 PM
You'll be more than pleased with the CD performance of a good DVD player, you might even want to get a 5 disc so you can load it up with whatever you want.

Let me hook up my system & see how does it sound......B4 that, I need to get some cables.....

Jeremy
04-29-2005, 01:19 PM
Hey, but I don't think you will not get a good quality sound by buying a cheap cd player & use the digital output.

Is it true that a transport & DAC combine always work better than a cd player ?

N. Abstentia
04-29-2005, 05:01 PM
$1000 cd player-Yes
$69 cd player-No
Why? As long as your using the Dig out,they will sound the same and thats the way most hook up. I wouldnt buy a $1000 cd player so i could not use the dig. :confused:
Maybe i'm wrong{again} but dont most of use use the dig connection?

Umm..digital is NOT the way most of us hook them up. I'm talking high quality players here..not the $99 Walmart specials. If it's got a high quality DAC, USE IT!

Besides, it's impossible to play SACD through digital, and you can't get the high res DVD-A tracks with digital.

shokhead
04-29-2005, 05:52 PM
Didnt see that we were talking about DVD-A and SACD. Wow,so most do not use the digital connection,well i guess i learned something today. Interesting. If i had a player that costs more then my reciever, i suppose i wouldnt use the dig but i'd rather not spend 1K on a player. I'm kinda a beliver that most dont hear the differences they claim only a dog could here.

noddin0ff
04-29-2005, 06:35 PM
Shokhead-I consider my system mid-fi. Denon DCM-370 CD player and Yamaha RX-V800 receiver. I bought the Denon because at the time it had the best DAC's for my budget. I connect the Denon analog outs to the receiver because it sounds better than the digital connection. The Denon has better DAC's to my ears (and I suppose on paper too but I don't know). I'm nowhere near the $1K range.

My DVD player is connected digitally for 5.1 DD/DTS (but analog for SACD, of course) I've also tried analog outs for 5.1 but I don't really notice a difference but I haven't really cared to listen for one.

My point being that you don't have to climb the equipment ladder very far to find CD players DAC's that outdo the receiver DAC's. I tend to believe that DAC's get cheaper and better every year so it won't be too long until it really doesn't matter because they'll all be good. I expect that any midrange DVD/CD/SACD/DVD-A player from a good company these days will sound quite good.

shokhead
04-30-2005, 05:05 AM
Well i'm always going the better reciever then the rest of my stuff guy. I'm pretty sure that my 2805 has better DAC'c then my Sony player. I think i'm alot less picky then most. Maybe someone could list say,5 common Dac's used in recievers and players that are best to look for. That might be interesting or list common equipment and what they use like Yamaha,Denon,Onkyo and so on,say all mid-priced stuff. I bet N Abstentia has that info all in his head to share with us,i hope. :D

Mr Peabody
04-30-2005, 06:12 AM
It not always in the actual conversion of digital to analog, but sometimes it is, but the quality has more to do with what happens to the analog signal after it's converted.

I missed where the original posted gave his exact budget. I believe in one of my posts I agreed that if the budget was $300.00, give or take, he could be as well off getting a universal machine. Marantz is putting out some nice stuff in that range. But for not much more you can find a outboard DAC that will give far superior channel sound than a $300.00 universal machine.

As far as which is better internal receiver DAC vs DVD or CD player, that's only something that can really be decided by listening and comparing.

N. Abstentia
04-30-2005, 06:57 AM
Maybe someone could list say,5 common Dac's used in recievers and players that are best to look for. That might be interesting or list common equipment and what they use like Yamaha,Denon,Onkyo and so on,say all mid-priced stuff. I bet N Abstentia has that info all in his head to share with us,i hope. :D

Actually I have no freaking idea! I have no idea who makes DAC's, I can name Burr/Brown mainly just from reading various player literature.

Other than that, I just trust my ears. I've learned to never get caught up in a name as you can get burned. "OH, this player has ABC DAC, it must sound better than anything else. I'll take it." Not for me. It could have a Wile E. Coyote ACME DAC for all I care..as long as the total package delivers the sound I want is the main thing.

Plus the DAC is just one piece of the puzzle. It's all got to work together in perfect harmony to sound good.

shokhead
04-30-2005, 08:13 AM
I'm starting my search for an ACME DAC,i know they are out there somewhere. :D
:D

bikeman
04-30-2005, 04:11 PM
"I can't tell you why this is from a technical stand point but it is. To not recognize this you'd have to be in the camp that thinks all CD players sound the same. You simply cannot make one machine do the job of 3 or 4 at the same cost and performance of the one machine."

If you can't tell someone "why from a tecnical standpoint" then you can't tell him why. All you can tell them is you preceive a difference. From a technical standpoint there are no differences that a consumer would be able to benefit from.
Buy a DVD player, almost any DVD player (most have a pretty finite life span to beging with). Most are made in the same Far East factories so it's pretty much it's just the marketing depts that are different. There are exceptions in build quality but there is not one ioda of evidence (perception does not qualify as evidence unless it can be scientifically validated) that build quality translates into "improved" sound.
Make sure the DVD player you choose has all the features that you might require. At a minimum, it should have analog outputs, at least one (but two is better) digital outputs. It should also be able to play CD's and DVD's in the formats that you are likely to use.
Also keep in mind the the DVD itself is on it's way out. Blu-Ray and HDCD are coming very soon and will quickly dominate the market. Current players will not play these formats so don't spend alot on a current generation DVD Player.
Spend all the money you save on music. Software beats hardware anyday.

David

shokhead
04-30-2005, 04:59 PM
"I can't tell you why this is from a technical stand point but it is. To not recognize this you'd have to be in the camp that thinks all CD players sound the same. You simply cannot make one machine do the job of 3 or 4 at the same cost and performance of the one machine."

If you can't tell someone "why from a tecnical standpoint" then you can't tell him why. All you can tell them is you preceive a difference. From a technical standpoint there are no differences that a consumer would be able to benefit from.
Buy a DVD player, almost any DVD player (most have a pretty finite life span to beging with). Most are made in the same Far East factories so it's pretty much it's just the marketing depts that are different. There are exceptions in build quality but there is not one ioda of evidence (perception does not qualify as evidence unless it can be scientifically validated) that build quality translates into "improved" sound.
Make sure the DVD player you choose has all the features that you might require. At a minimum, it should have analog outputs, at least one (but two is better) digital outputs. It should also be able to play CD's and DVD's in the formats that you are likely to use.
Also keep in mind the the DVD itself is on it's way out. Blu-Ray and HDCD are coming very soon and will quickly dominate the market. Current players will not play these formats so don't spend alot on a current generation DVD Player.
Spend all the money you save on music. Software beats hardware anyday.

David


How do you know they will quickly dominate the market?

bikeman
04-30-2005, 05:42 PM
I don't know in the literal sense but in the economic sense, I consider it a slam dunk. The last three introductions of significance A/V technology all were rapidly assimilated. VHS/Beta, CD's and DVD's. It is in the the major player's best interest to re-coup the huge investment that they have in these technologies. Most consumers are sheep and can be led by multi-million dollar marketing campaigns. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

David

Mr Peabody
05-01-2005, 04:34 PM
Well Bikerman I can't technically tell you how an airplane flies either but I'm pretty damn sure it does. I can't understand why with your level of misunderstanding and ignorance of this hobby would bother participating on this forum.

A $30.00 DVD player does the same job as a $3,000.00 DVD player but there is quite a difference in their ability to carry out the job. Some people appreciate the difference and some don't but to deny the difference is foolishness. A Cavalier will get you to work the same as a Cadillac but it would be foolish to say the ride or driving ability is the same. Same thing with electronics, in most instance you get what you pay for.

bikeman
05-01-2005, 06:26 PM
"Well Bikerman I can't technically tell you how an airplane flies either but I'm pretty damn sure it does."

You know it flies and that's all you know. You know the DVD player makes sound and that's all you know. How it does it, by your own admission is beyond your level of expertise.

I can't understand why with your level of misunderstanding and ignorance of this hobby would bother participating on this forum.

You admit you don't understand the technical aspects but I'm the one with the "misunderstanding and ignorance?" Go figure.

A $30.00 DVD player does the same job as a $3,000.00 DVD player but there is quite a difference in their ability to carry out the job.

Then discuss those differences. I'm always interested in learning new things.

Some people appreciate the difference and some don't but to deny the difference is foolishness.

I've never denied there are differences. I'm asking for an explantion of how those differences relate to sound. Again, that involves a technical explanation which you admit you are unable to provide.

A Cavalier will get you to work the same as a Cadillac but it would be foolish to say the ride or driving ability is the same. Same thing with electronics, in most instance you get what you pay for.

Pure BS. What you pay and what you get are not directly related. You are talking about your perceptions and equating them with fact. That's why science became a discipline. So we as a species could learn to differenciate fact from perception.
Your car analogy is not comparable. The difference in the handling of an automobile or the sound of the vehicle for that matter can be explained mathmatically.

David

grigore
05-01-2005, 11:26 PM
Hi! The sound of the new models of DVD-players can be prety close to an entry level or even mid-level CD-player. For the moment only very expensive DVD-player can deliver a very good sound wich is compared with the sound of a very good CD-player. Personal I own a Panasonic DVD S-47 and it's sounds better then an entry lever player from Sony and Denon and I can tell this becouse I'v made many sound's test. But if you want to achiev a very high quality of sound I recomend to you to buy a good CD-player.

bikeman
05-02-2005, 04:54 AM
Hi! The sound of the new models of DVD-players can be prety close to an entry level or even mid-level CD-player. For the moment only very expensive DVD-player can deliver a very good sound wich is compared with the sound of a very good CD-player. Personal I own a Panasonic DVD S-47 and it's sounds better then an entry lever player from Sony and Denon and I can tell this becouse I'v made many sound's test. But if you want to achiev a very high quality of sound I recomend to you to buy a good CD-player.

To you, one sounds better than the other. And that's valid. You hear a difference. But if there is a noticeable difference, it can be measured.
Not everyone hears a difference. ABX testing has humbled many an audiophile. The field of perceptual psychology is coming up with quite a bit right now. A trip to the local college library can do more for someone's understanding that a trip to the local Hi-Fi salon.

David

noddin0ff
05-02-2005, 05:55 AM
Also keep in mind the the DVD itself is on it's way out. Blu-Ray and HDCD are coming very soon and will quickly dominate the market. Current players will not play these formats so don't spend alot on a current generation DVD Player.
Spend all the money you save on music. Software beats hardware anyday.

I agree that new formats are on the way but 'quickly dominate'? I don't think so. HDTV is still a long way from domination and it has a government mandate behind it. HDCD is a 2-channel audio format and there are already superior formats available, so it's not likely that that it will ever dominate and its been available for years. To me it seems the main thing stalling the roll out of new video formats is the copy protection concerns of the movie industries versus every one else. I don't see that being resolved anytime soon. DVD may be on the way out but it will be here until every one owns HDTV's.

bikeman
05-02-2005, 07:41 AM
I don't DVD may be on the way out but it will be here until every one owns HDTV's.


I'm not basing my thoughts on rational behavior as you are. I'm basing it on the effectiveness of marketing. I think I'm right. I hope you're right.
On a related note, it appears that many folks are buying HDTV's and not receiving an HD signal either through ignorance or cost considerations.

David

noddin0ff
05-02-2005, 07:50 AM
I'm not basing my thoughts on rational behavior as you are. I'm basing it on the effectiveness of marketing. I think I'm right. I hope you're right.
On a related note, it appears that many folks are buying HDTV's and not receiving an HD signal either through ignorance or cost considerations.

I'm sure once the future video format is settled, marketing will be aggressive and we will all be assimilated, but it is the settling that seems to be the issue...Content providers see things differently than hardware providers.

Dave Lindhorst
05-05-2005, 12:52 PM
Hey guys. At someplace in your system the equipment must do analog. No 2 ways about it. Now think about what is the most important part of any system. The source. So get a good CD player and use the DACs in it to do what they do, right at the source. The DACs in cheap CD/DVD players are not very good and are really designed to convert the poorer quality DVD audio tracks to analog.

Overlooking the source machine and material is a common mistake for people buying audio equipment. The most common mistake being the upgrade of speakers with a 100.00 CD/DVD player as a source. Wrong move.

The most important 3 rules in audio. 1. SOURCE 2. SOURCE 3. SOURCE

musicoverall
05-05-2005, 01:48 PM
Overlooking the source machine and material is a common mistake for people buying audio equipment. The most common mistake being the upgrade of speakers with a 100.00 CD/DVD player as a source. Wrong move.

The most important 3 rules in audio. 1. SOURCE 2. SOURCE 3. SOURCE

Unless you're talking about the source material. The source component would fall behind the speakers in importance, IMHO. My 3 important rules in audio would be 1) source material, 2) room acoustics and 3) speakers. CD players sound more alike than different even though most of them are considered "transparent". Speaker sound varies widely, with dynamic driver enthusiasts duking it out with planar lovers and horn lovers, all of whom proclaim their way is the right way. CD players can sound diffferent but not to the same degree as speakers. I'll take a $3000 pair of speakers with a $500 CDP any day over a $500 pair of speakers and a $3000 CDP. Once you've got the speakers you want, then it's time to look at the amplification chain and then the source component. I've heard (and owned!) many systems that sounded pretty decent using a very cheap CD player and good speakers but never the other way around.

With vinyl, my rules change, most likely because a phono cartridge is a transducer as is a speaker and is therefore subject to wide sonic differences from another cartridge. The cartridge/arm matching is critical and the table itself needs to have the proper suspension and isolation.

musicoverall
05-05-2005, 01:53 PM
To you, one sounds better than the other. And that's valid. You hear a difference. But if there is a noticeable difference, it can be measured.

David

Jitter is indeed measured. There are probably other areas that are not yet measured, most likely because the people that are servants of measurements are already convinced those measurements don't exist. Those that are servants of better sound don't feel the need to measure. The CDP designers that I've spoken with have said that they listen to their product prior to putting it on the market so that they don't mistakenly become enamored of a poor sounding player that measures well.

shokhead
05-05-2005, 02:16 PM
Unless you're talking about the source material. The source component would fall behind the speakers in importance, IMHO. My 3 important rules in audio would be 1) source material, 2) room acoustics and 3) speakers. CD players sound more alike than different even though most of them are considered "transparent". Speaker sound varies widely, with dynamic driver enthusiasts duking it out with planar lovers and horn lovers, all of whom proclaim their way is the right way. CD players can sound diffferent but not to the same degree as speakers. I'll take a $3000 pair of speakers with a $500 CDP any day over a $500 pair of speakers and a $3000 CDP. Once you've got the speakers you want, then it's time to look at the amplification chain and then the source component. I've heard (and owned!) many systems that sounded pretty decent using a very cheap CD player and good speakers but never the other way around.

With vinyl, my rules change, most likely because a phono cartridge is a transducer as is a speaker and is therefore subject to wide sonic differences from another cartridge. The cartridge/arm matching is critical and the table itself needs to have the proper suspension and isolation.

But WAF can wipeout #2

bikeman
05-05-2005, 04:07 PM
Jitter is indeed measured. There are probably other areas that are not yet measured, most likely because the people that are servants of measurements are already convinced those measurements don't exist. Those that are servants of better sound don't feel the need to measure. The CDP designers that I've spoken with have said that they listen to their product prior to putting it on the market so that they don't mistakenly become enamored of a poor sounding player that measures well.

The problem with your position is you are presenting an either/or argument. It is not. If someone can't tell a difference, then, for them there is no difference. I'm one of those people and there's a lot more like me. There are a relatively few audiophiles who can hear grass grow and/or hear Mars obiting overhead.
The only evidence presented so far is perceptual. If there's more to it than your perception, then document it. How easy can this get?

David

musicoverall
05-05-2005, 06:31 PM
The problem with your position is you are presenting an either/or argument. It is not. If someone can't tell a difference, then, for them there is no difference. I'm one of those people and there's a lot more like me. There are a relatively few audiophiles who can hear grass grow and/or hear Mars obiting overhead.
The only evidence presented so far is perceptual. If there's more to it than your perception, then document it. How easy can this get?

David

It IS an either/or argument, if I understand what you're saying. There's either a difference or there isn't. If even one person out of a thousand can hear a difference in a particular component, there is evidence that one exists. My perception and those of other audiophiles is all that matters. I'm certainly not responsible for those that don't hear differences! And I have documented it on cables if you care to check out the Audio Lab forum.

The problem I have with blind testing is simple. If the participant chooses the correct component with statistical significance, DBT proponents blame the test. If the null is the result, the participants blame the test. That shows me that neither side is willing to bend on its beliefs, so what's the point except to prove to oneself? The differences I hear in CDP's or cables isn't huge by any means, but subtle. Then it becomes a matter if I am willing to pay a disproportionate amount of money for a subtle difference. That doesn't mean the differences aren't there. They are and I find them musically significant. Your mileage may vary.

musicoverall
05-05-2005, 06:37 PM
But WAF can wipeout #2

I recall someone once telling me when I had a similar issue. He said "If you can't put what you want in your house, is it really your house"? :)

Mr Peabody
05-05-2005, 06:43 PM
Thank you Mr. Lindhorst!! At least one other person besides myself has a grasp on the principles of sound quality.

Bikeman, measurements don't mean jack! There are receivers with better spec sheets than my Krell amplifier. I guess you are going to tell me there's no difference between my amp and a receiver, I just think it sounds better because the amp cost 10 times as much as the receiver. OK, you stay in la la land. One thing that most audiophiles can agree on is that NO ONE pays attention to spec sheets. I believe that many sonic characteristics that distinguish one piece of equipment from another cannot be measured.
You wouldn't happen to be Skeptic back under another name would you?

Musicoverall, it looks like you have the right idea as well.

bikeman
05-06-2005, 04:40 AM
Thank you Mr. Lindhorst!! At least one other person besides myself has a grasp on the principles of sound quality.


Those aren't principles, those are perceptions. If you have principles, please list them.

Thanks,
David

bikeman
05-06-2005, 04:46 AM
Bikeman, measurements don't mean jack!


You for forgot to add, "to me" to the end of your statement. Measurements, if done properly, are a foundation of science. The spec sheets that come with audio components are not measurements in the scientific sense. They're much more often from the marketing dept than the engineers.

David

bikeman
05-06-2005, 04:56 AM
It IS an either/or argument, if I understand what you're saying. There's either a difference or there isn't. If even one person out of a thousand can hear a difference in a particular component, there is evidence that one exists. My perception and those of other audiophiles is all that matters. I'm certainly not responsible for those that don't hear

You don't understand what I'm saying. If you hear a difference, then there IS a difference to you. There may or may not be an actual difference.
Most everyone hears and no one has asked you to be responsible for that. We don't hear the same. The field of Psychology is having a wonderful time with how we preceive our senses right now. Hop over to you local college library and have a read. Facinating stuff.

David

shokhead
05-06-2005, 05:26 AM
You don't understand what I'm saying. If you hear a difference, then there IS a difference to you. There may or may not be an actual difference.
Most everyone hears and no one has asked you to be responsible for that. We don't hear the same. The field of Psychology is having a wonderful time with how we preceive our senses right now. Hop over to you local college library and have a read. Facinating stuff.

David

Some people buy just from trhe spec's and some buy just from listening and some use both. I think both is the best way for me. In the cycling forums,many will not sit on or test ride a bike before they spend 5K. I think thats nuts but they go only on the measurements of the bike. They say it works out fine.

musicoverall
05-06-2005, 07:56 AM
You don't understand what I'm saying. If you hear a difference, then there IS a difference to you. There may or may not be an actual difference.
Most everyone hears and no one has asked you to be responsible for that. We don't hear the same. The field of Psychology is having a wonderful time with how we preceive our senses right now. Hop over to you local college library and have a read. Facinating stuff.

David

How would you determine an "actual" difference? By measurements? Which ones? Is 0.0005 THD an actual difference that is audible from 0.00001 THD? I don't see how there would be a set of measurements currently in use that would show "actual" differences that would be audible. I think the ability to hear these differences can be developed by anyone with normal healthy hearing and the proper ancillary components so I'd have to call them "actual" differences.

Psychoacoustics is indeed an interesting field. I do need to look more into that.

hermanv
05-06-2005, 09:19 AM
This thread now seems to need two seperate postings, one directed at Jeremy since his question has gotten lost. The second at the old yes it is no it isn't question of sound quality and perception.

Jeremy;

As I read these postings I see a wide range of possible responses to your original question. All the respondents have good intentions but disagree on the correct answer.

It seems that we could start by asking you an important question.

What kind of listening do you do? That is to say is this mostly background music with an occasional party or do you participate in what my neighbor calls "active listening"? Active listening is where you turn the lights down low perhaps with some wine and listen attentively to a set of musicians performing their art.

It is this second form of listening that drives much of the audiophile community and causes at least some of us to invest significant amounts of money in our systems.

If you listen in this way there is some advice about the upgrade merry-go-round. Many of us have bought not inexpensive electronic devices only to discover that as our passion matured newer better and more expensive gadgets were called for.

I for one upgraded several pieces more than once and my advice is to buy each item of equipment so that it stretches your finances. This saves money over your lifetime because you will replace individual pieces less often. Most of this stuff will last 20 years and commands a good price on the used market if it is name brand quality equipment. The previous statement is rarely true for Pioneer, Yamaha, Technics and other mass market brands. Not to disparage their value and the fact that they basically work fine but do not on the whole achieve a level of performance that encourages that active listening I am talking about.

If on the other hand this form of listening is not what you are after then by all means consolidate pieces and buy multi-function all in one devices. This saves fortunes on cabling and will greatly simplify the interconnections and reduce the space this stuff occupies.

Once we have a better idea of what you want then the forums can offer a more exacting response to what particular brands and system complexity should be considered.

shokhead
05-06-2005, 09:41 AM
Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?

Yes there is. A good DVD player will work just as well as a good CD player.

hermanv
05-06-2005, 10:29 AM
The debate about what is and is not important what can and can not be heard resounds throughout much of the forum and not just this one. People repeat statements made by someone with a fervor even though the original context or detail has long been lost, and in the process of repeating these things they take on an absolute quality of purest black or white when the whole discussion actually revolves around grey.

ABX testing;

If so much as one person exceeds statistical probability on a double blind test then they have proved conclusively that there is a difference and that they can hear it. This has been done (and much more than once)! So instead of repeating the often quoted "double blind testing proves there's no such thing", the opposite is true. This doesn't answer in any way whether you or your equipment meets this test but others have. There are differences and they can hear them reliably.

Expensive gear sounds no better.

A $79 boom box does not sound as good as a $50,000 system. Although we can agree that the differneces near the top of the price curve become small, it is not rational to draw a line and say beyond this number of dollars no further improvement is possible. So we can argue effectively about the value or quality of a given piece but the "it all sounds the same" crowd simply can not escape the boom box example.

If you can't measue it, it doesn't exist.

This might be true or not, the problem is that not every possible measurement is performed, in fact very few behaviors of an electronics device reproducing music are actually measured. Almost all testing is done steady state at a constant level and frequency quite the opposite of music. Musicians can easily tell you the frequency of a given note in a complex piece, test equipment is very poor at this if the note is short and mixed in with others


By me in another thread
An example: I know of no automatic testing device that will verify that low level signals are not being differentially attenuated in the pressence of varying high level signals - huh? What I mean is that one thing that expensive electronics seems to do better to my ears is that quality we audiophiles call harmonic sustain. The ability to hear a single note die off slowly even thought the rest of the musicians have moved on. This is quite difficult to measure and as far as I know it isn't done. I could think of other measurements that aren't performed but I admit that I have little idea how any of these measurements in particular relate to those sound qualities audiophiles value.


By me in another thread
Certainly much more complex measuring equipment could be invented. Although I do not work in an audio design capacity I do know that design shops in the end do listen to their product, some for extended periods . If measurement was the end all of sound quality they wouldn't bother

Much of the sound quality that audiophiles value and treasure can be described as small, incremental or even miniscule imrpovements. This does not make them less real or invalidate the positions on cables, bi-wiring and a host of other issues that impact the sound in small ways. It is up to an individual to decide if the improvement vs cost equation justifies a given purchase decision, probably few people would agree that the $30,000 amplifier is enough better than their $2,000 amplifier to justify the expense but some do and those systems I have heard with stratospheric pricing sounded pretty damn good to me.

bikeman
05-06-2005, 12:24 PM
[QUOTE=
Much of the sound quality that audiophiles value and treasure can be described as small, incremental or even miniscule imrpovements. This does not make them less real or invalidate the positions on cables, bi-wiring and a host of other issues that impact the sound in small ways. [/QUOTE]


You forgot to add "imperceptable to anyone but the audiophile" to your list of "small, incremental or even miniscule." If it's "small, incremental or even miniscule" to you, the chance that it even exists are large, big or even huge. These changes exist to the individual listener. If you preceive them and it makes you happy, go for it. If they were really there for everyone, we'd all hear it. No matter how much you rationalize, we don't.

David

N. Abstentia
05-06-2005, 04:04 PM
Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?

Cowinkidink?

hermanv
05-06-2005, 04:11 PM
This forum exists because most people in it hear these things if they didn't there be no reason for its existence. Nothing to talk about.

There is no chance that performance differences exist there is a proven fact that they exists; the only person between the two of us that used large, big and huge was you.

Do you really mean you hear no difference between a $79 boom box and a $50,000 system or only a miniscule one? That is hyperbole, let us discuss the performance or price point at which you no longer hear a difference, and then we can ask others where that point lies for them.

Trying to lump it all in the "it just doesn't exist box" is pure reactionary emotional escalation. Tiresome.

bikeman
05-06-2005, 06:18 PM
"This forum exists because most people in it hear these things if they didn't there be no reason for its existence."

What are you hearing?

" Nothing to talk about."

?


"There is no chance that performance differences exist there is a proven fact that they exists;"

We're not arguing that differences exist.

"the only person between the two of us that used large, big and huge was you."

You've failed to comprehend how I used those terms. I used them in regard to perception. What we preceive can be, and often is quite different from what is actually occuring. Again, perceptual psychology is turning out a great deal on this.

"Do you really mean you hear no difference between a $79 boom box and a $50,000 system or only a miniscule one?"

Where have I mentioned a $79 boombox? Please stick to my argument and not what you would like my argument to be.

" That is hyperbole, let us discuss the performance or price point at which you no longer hear a difference, and then we can ask others where that point lies for them."

What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.

"Trying to lump it all in the "it just doesn't exist box" is pure reactionary emotional escalation"

Not my point. And I believe this is why you are having difficulty with the discussion.

". Tiresome"

Spare me.

David

bikeman
05-06-2005, 06:21 PM
Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?
Cowinkidink?

You will find me in many forums under the same name. I like consistency.

David

shokhead
05-07-2005, 04:10 AM
Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?

Cowinkidink?

I hope your not saying if the spec's say X and i hear Y,i cant hear Y because the spec's say X?

Jeremy
05-07-2005, 10:14 AM
This thread now seems to need two seperate postings, one directed at Jeremy since his question has gotten lost. The second at the old yes it is no it isn't question of sound quality and perception.

Jeremy;

As I read these postings I see a wide range of possible responses to your original question. All the respondents have good intentions but disagree on the correct answer.

It seems that we could start by asking you an important question.

What kind of listening do you do? That is to say is this mostly background music with an occasional party or do you participate in what my neighbor calls "active listening"? Active listening is where you turn the lights down low perhaps with some wine and listen attentively to a set of musicians performing their art.

It is this second form of listening that drives much of the audiophile community and causes at least some of us to invest significant amounts of money in our systems.

If you listen in this way there is some advice about the upgrade merry-go-round. Many of us have bought not inexpensive electronic devices only to discover that as our passion matured newer better and more expensive gadgets were called for.

I for one upgraded several pieces more than once and my advice is to buy each item of equipment so that it stretches your finances. This saves money over your lifetime because you will replace individual pieces less often. Most of this stuff will last 20 years and commands a good price on the used market if it is name brand quality equipment. The previous statement is rarely true for Pioneer, Yamaha, Technics and other mass market brands. Not to disparage their value and the fact that they basically work fine but do not on the whole achieve a level of performance that encourages that active listening I am talking about.

If on the other hand this form of listening is not what you are after then by all means consolidate pieces and buy multi-function all in one devices. This saves fortunes on cabling and will greatly simplify the interconnections and reduce the space this stuff occupies.

Once we have a better idea of what you want then the forums can offer a more exacting response to what particular brands and system complexity should be considered.

I like all sort of nice music ( pop, jazz, classic & etc ) but not into heavy metal rock.
With light off & closing your eyes can really give you a very pleasing moment while listening to the type of music u like.

Yeah, I am intending to upgrade slowly at a time so as not to burnt my finance one shot.

True, I notice that the discussion here had somehow gone a bit too far that its too much for me. Anywhere, I really enjoy the discussion here.

I am yet to connect up my system & see how it sound. However, I am quite busy lately.

I think every brand had their own high end range. But the question is price verus sound quality. Does it mean that a very expensive player ( >$5K ) will always sound better than a conventional player (<$5K) ? Is it worth the price paying for ? Can the difference been heard ?

As u mentioned, mass production brand do not offer good sound quality. I do agreed. A piece of good equipment need extensive research & workmanship to build. That's why good stuff always come limited build.

hermanv
05-07-2005, 11:01 AM
bikeman;

There is a consistent thread in your discussions that you dont hear the subtle differences between various audiophile components that others prize and discuss at length. You then certainly appear to claim that since you can't hear them they couldn't exist and cite as proof the fact that most audiophile are not engineers so their opinions which are not backed up by learned discourse and scientific papers are therefore worthless



originally posted by bikeman
From a technical standpoint there are no differences that a consumer would be able to benefit from. .


originally posted by bikeman
but there is not one ioda(sic) of evidence .....that build quality translates into "improved" sound.


originally posted by bikeman
I'm asking for an explanation of how those differences relate to sound. Again, that involves a technical explanation which you admit you are unable to provide. .


originally posted by bikeman
we'd all hear it. No matter how much you rationalize, we don't..
I hear it, many others hear it. I don't use the word all but you do. It is the absolutism that is offensive, the idea that nothing outside your personal experience could possibly be valid.

These posts are but snippets by nature, many of your responses intentionally demand huge discourse and seem meant to obscure and diverge rather than illuminate and strive for any common ground. Example:


originally posted by bikeman
What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.
This requires no answer if you are older than 16 you already know what needs to be known here and so do the rest of us.

I am an engineer I can discourse at some length about theory and math. As an engineer I have performed the math that made me doubtful about these various claims especially regarding cables. But and this is the big issue here, I went and I listened. I let others demonstrate these performance differences and to my own surprise I could hear them, most were subtle but they in fact improved the quality of the music in increased detail and clarity. The cumulative result of a host of minor improvements was substantial, enough so that I spent a lot of money to duplicate these results in my home with considerable success. I have discussed these things at some length with other engineers and although there are some theories no one who truly understands these things seems to be talking.

There is evidence that at least some people do understand. Certain manufacturers are consistent in producing those qualities audiophiles value. For example Kimber cable products are highly regarded at every price point in their line. They seem to have found some fundamental reasons that they apply to all their products to achieve better than usual results.

So, many of us discuss our perceptions of sound quality and the possible cause in the hope of finding common ground and understanding. For me at least the result would be a better idea of what to buy and to decrease the financial risk while maximizing the financial benefit. The better stuff is by no means cheap.

On a fairly regular basis someone like yourself seems to spend a great deal of effort to derail the discussions, replacing maybe and might with absolutes and demands, questions with pronouncements, I with we, and some with all.

You are not the first and you won't be the last. It doesn't change what I hear and what I hear is largely confirmed by others when we listen in groups. My interest is in passing on things I have learned to perhaps to save someone else from a quite expensive learning curve. I have never claimed any exclusive knowledge or any direct path to the audio almighty.

To force every discussion to continuously reset to square one is what I mean by tiresome.

musicoverall
05-07-2005, 01:22 PM
[QUOTE=bikeman If they were really there for everyone, we'd all hear it.
David[/QUOTE]

Not true. Much the same as someone can't play basketball without practice and with a hoop that's too small, just because someone has two ears and a brain it doesn't mean they can hear with the same acuity and comprehension as others. Listening skills have to be learned. Further, I could swap any CD player into my basement system and not hear a difference at all. Swapping CDP's in my upstairs system would produce an obvious and noticeable difference. More revealing gear is just that... more revealing. Finally, a particular component may react differently to two different higher definition systems. I do not always hear a difference when I swap components in and out of my system. Other systems can react differently... and do. I auditioned two sets of highly regarded speaker wires recently that I could not discern from what I already had in place. Similar situations have exhibited themselves on preamps and other pieces of gear.

I'm not alone here in being a bit lost as to what your point is. Are you saying that there are no quantitative differences in audio gear and those of us who hear otherwise are simply creating a difference in our minds, creating a singular reality? If that's it, fine - we've heard that argument before, but I have no problem refuting it again. If that's not it, can you please clarify?

bikeman
05-07-2005, 01:59 PM
"I hear it, many others hear it. I don't use the word all but you do. It is the absolutism that is offensive, the idea that nothing outside your personal experience could possibly be valid."

I have never disputed that you hear "it." Where do you come up with this argument?
What's valid for you dosen't translate to someone else without reservation. You seem to have trouble with this concept. Pity.

"These posts are but snippets by nature, many of your responses intentionally demand huge discourse and seem meant to obscure and diverge rather than illuminate and strive for any common ground. "

All your examples are taken out of context. Post it all or don't bother.

Quote:
originally posted by bikeman
What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.

"This requires no answer if you are older than 16 you already know what needs to be known here and so do the rest of us."

What the heck does this mean? Is English not your native language or don't you believe in puntuation? I've been involved in this debate for almost four decades. My thoughts have changed dramatically over this time and so has the hardware. The only thing I haven't see change is the attitude that "you get what you pay for."

David

bikeman
05-07-2005, 02:53 PM
[QUOTE
I'm not alone here in being a bit lost as to what your point is. Are you saying that there are no quantitative differences in audio gear and those of us who hear otherwise are simply creating a difference in our minds, creating a singular reality? If that's it, fine - we've heard that argument before, but I have no problem refuting it again. If that's not it, can you please clarify?

I can see that my point has been lost. I will refer you back to the OP. This is it in it's entirety.

"Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?"

People were telling him all sorts of myth and lore. I think he should know that good sound comes at a very small price these days compared to the last 35 years that I've been around audio. You don't agree? Fine. Post your data and I'll retract my statement.
Persceptual psychology can teach a heck of a lot more about what and why we hear than any almost any audiophile. I say almost because there are designers/engineers who are learning fast. When we preceive a difference, that difference is valid for only one person. There may or may not be a difference and even when there is a difference, knowledgeable people don't always see that difference in the same light.
Along with all the lawyers and marketeers that he employs, I'm told that Amar Bose has psychologists on the payroll. It wouldn't surprise me if that's true. The novice usually finds the Bose "sound" very pleasing. He's learned what the unwashed masses will react to initially. And I don't mean just the sound. He prepares his victims with the slickest advertising this side of Procter and Gamble. And we all do that to ourselves. We're just not aware of it. Everything is seen and heard through the filters that we've created over our lifetime. Can't be helped.
In summary, very good sound is available at very low prices. No, not in boomboxes but in lots and lots of equipment. And it's only going to get better and cheaper.

David

shokhead
05-07-2005, 03:17 PM
Its been answered and its pretty easy. A dvd player will play cd's as well as a cd player. Thats it. And if you use the digital connection then it matters even less about the player. Its really a easy question and answer.

musicoverall
05-07-2005, 06:22 PM
I think he should know that good sound comes at a very small price these days compared to the last 35 years that I've been around audio.

David

I don't disagree with that. I'm pretty happy with the sound I get from a pair of small speakers, a fairly low powered and not expensive integrated amp and a relatively cheap CD player that I use in my basement system. I'd call it "good" sound. I could live with it as my main rig if it became necessary. Oh, and I have no idea if a DVD player plays CD's as well as a good CD player since I've never tried CD's in one. Based on my experience with audio gear, I would tend to doubt it but I don't know for sure.

Anyway, good sound is available for a pittance and that is something to rejoice about. However, GREAT sound... sound that transports you from your listening chair to the venue, sound that makes you forget you're listening to a reproduction... comes at a cost. Too high a cost? Probably. The additional retail cost of my Maggie 20.1's over my previous 3.6's was painfully broad. Thankfully, I bought them used! Additonally, I've listened to some very expensive equipment that I've enjoyed less than much cheaper gear.

With regards to psychology, I understand what you're saying but I also know of many, many audio components that have their own sound, one which is evident regardless of the system in which it's employed. Certain amps, cables, turntables, etc and other components that aren't supposed to have a sound of their own do indeed exhibit the same certain characteristics that they carry from system to system. It's not all psychology; sometimes it's simple engineering.

lomarica
05-07-2005, 08:03 PM
I recently simplified my system by getting rid of my seperate cd and dvd. I replaced my 1995 parasound cd player with a new denon 1910 dvd/cd. My wife and I did a sound comparison and after 3-4 times of playing the same song on the different players concluded there was no significant difference and they both sounded very good. we ended up just listening to the music not how it sounded.

so in my opinion for a mid high end system, parasound seperates and paradigm seakers just use one source component. it simplifies everything, one less remote one less input device to change, one less interconnect jungle, one less component on the rack and so on.

bikeman
05-07-2005, 08:29 PM
It's not all psychology; sometimes it's simple engineering.

And that's what the psychology will teach us. It's not all anything. There are lots of factors at play. Some we're consiciously aware of and some we're not. And many we haven't discovered yet.

David

46minaudio
05-08-2005, 06:38 AM
In summary, very good sound is available at very low prices. No, not in boomboxes but in lots and lots of equipment. And it's only going to get better and cheaper.

David
I agree.I posted some examples of these new players.To the OP,a stand alone cd player will not play multi ch music,.Rather than spend 1000s on a cd player(that canot decode multi ch music) look into room treatment,speaker placement,and ways to eq those nasty peaks your subwoofer will have.Cost on these real world improvments are small.

nightflier
05-09-2005, 09:55 AM
OK, I admit that buying used has its risks, especially when talking about a CD/DVD players because of all the moving parts. That said, there are some pretty good deals to be had on sites like Audiogon. I bought a pre-owned Cambridge Audio D500 CD player, that has a few things that impressed me over the rest (very good sound, solid construction, quiet operation, a bit more heft, and still a very good price). I've had it for a while so the price I'm sure has dropped now, but it sits right on top of my Onkyo DVD player. I don't use the digital outs, but it's on-board DAC is very good. And yes, it does sound better to play RBCD's on it than on the Onkyo DVD player.

But if you're talking about a universal DVD-everything player, there are some for $300 and even some as low as $180. But this won't be a solid player. A good quality universal player will still run +/- $400 if you include shipping/tax and you buy from a good dealer. At that price point, the decision to buy a universal player is no longer that simple. For about the same price, one could buy a good second-hand CD player (one that originally cost $600) and a very good new DVD player, or an even better second-hand DVD player.

The real question is whether a $300 universal player still a comparable value, especially if you'll need to add a DAC to it. Anyhow, N.Abst. is right, on a budget system, it really matters little to add a DAC. The DAC in the player should be just fine. However, if Jeremy wants to build-up to a more capable setup by buying good quality components from here on out, a good CD player will be a good first step. Of course, a good ($1000+) universal player would also be a good step.

P.S. As far as DAC's are concerned, a Musical Fidelity X10-D just sold on eBay for $137 (I realize this is not everybody's favorite design for a DAC, but it's still a bargain).

musicoverall
05-09-2005, 10:02 AM
P.S. As far as DAC's are concerned, a Musical Fidelity X10-D just sold on eBay for $137 (I realize this is not everybody's favorite design for a DAC, but it's still a bargain).

The X10-D isn't a DAC as it does no digital-to-analog conversion. It's to be inserted between a CD transport and a DAC and is used as a tube buffer, presumably to "smooth" out the sound. Never used one so I have no idea what it does or doesn't do. I've lost count but I already have 30-some tubes in my system and no need for another. :)

Mark of Cenla
05-09-2005, 10:05 AM
I recently simplified my system by getting rid of my seperate cd and dvd. I replaced my 1995 parasound cd player with a new denon 1910 dvd/cd. My wife and I did a sound comparison and after 3-4 times of playing the same song on the different players concluded there was no significant difference and they both sounded very good. we ended up just listening to the music not how it sounded.

so in my opinion for a mid high end system, parasound seperates and paradigm seakers just use one source component. it simplifies everything, one less remote one less input device to change, one less interconnect jungle, one less component on the rack and so on.

That is what I did in my living room, or as some would call it, the land of remote controls. In my bedroom, where I do most of my music listening, my JVC DVD player and my Sherwood CD player sound about the same. But the JVC does not have shuffle play and cannot program tracks, which are features I use fairly often. So I use the CD player there. IMHO sound is not the only consideration. Peace.

46minaudio
05-09-2005, 10:33 AM
But if you're talking about a universal DVD-everything player, there are some for $300 and even some as low as $180. But this won't be a solid player..
Is this a fact,or somthing you have been told and never bothered to check for yourself.Try playing these players side by side level matched to within .5 DBs.To the OP Please think long and hard about buying a used cd only player without warranty..

hermanv
05-09-2005, 10:35 AM
Clearly not everyone agrees but, I still believe that there is a continuum in performance from the lowest price to the top price. Yes I realize that it's not automatically guaranteed that a $600 piece will always sound better than a $500 piece, but in my experience the $1,000 piece can safely be expected to outperform the $500 item and so on.

So the question becomes where does the decreasing return on expensive equipment cross your person financial reality.

Although I have tried some better regarded lower cost brands (in my case Denon and NAD) I found that they didn't live up to my expectations. In short I haven't found equipment that meets the CD sound quality standard, I find to be my minimum, at prices that are less than around $1,000.

So if I were in your position the question would come down to; do I want an expensive CD only player (there are several at or near the $1,000 price point that get consistently good reviews, brands such as Rega or Arcam) or would it be better to buy an all around player? This player used as is for DVD and as a transport for CD. And then also purchase an external decoder. Since mechanical devices tend to wear out they seem less desirable used, but a used D to A converter can be expected to provide many years of service.

So my personal recommendation would be an inexpensive device jointly used for home theater and as a transport only for CD stereo music. This does beg the question of multi channel DVD-A (Sony has announced the end of SACD so I think it's out of the picture). There seem few DVD-A titles that really get the audiophile community excited and an audiophile quality external multi channel decoder is both expensive and un-likely to be found in the used market. This dilemma is made worse by now needing 5 channels of amplification and 5 good speakers.

In summary my choice would be to buy an inexpensive DVD and CD player a step or two up form the cheapest so you have a chance at the more reliable mechanisms. And then, buy a used D to A. Focus on a high class stereo system and allocate less money for the home theater part.

I did this, and I am happy with my choices and the end result.

Others clearly have a different view of how to arrange the priorities and at what price point further improvements become too small for the increased cost.

Herman.

nightflier
05-09-2005, 11:02 AM
The X10-D isn't a DAC as it does no digital-to-analog conversion. It's to be inserted between a CD transport and a DAC and is used as a tube buffer, presumably to "smooth" out the sound. Never used one so I have no idea what it does or doesn't do. I've lost count but I already have 30-some tubes in my system and no need for another. :)

Sorry about that. It isn't a DAC. I suppose I was more looking at the price point. If I remember right those sold for about $600 new.

hermanv
05-09-2005, 11:23 AM
Wasn't it called an X-DAC?

Talk about a strange success story. Market a tube buffer thing that has suspicious claims, and propel yourself in to a high end powerhouse (maybe a little strong) that makes a broad range of well reviewed equipment.

The suspicious X-10 claims comes from the fact that their advertising promoted coverting harsh transistor sound into smooth tube like sound without the use of any filtering. 'Course I never heard one so it's speculation on my part that they couldn't in all likelyhood do what was claimed. It also added one more cable pair to the mix.

Sold a zillion of them apparently.

nightflier
05-09-2005, 11:36 AM
Is this a fact,or somthing you have been told and never bothered to check for yourself.Try playing these players side by side level matched to within .5 DBs.To the OP Please think long and hard about buying a used cd only player without warranty..

I have listened to about 30+ DVD players and perhaps a couple dozen or so CD players in my home. I have a group of friends (some of them work in the industry) who regularly get together to try out equipment. Some of it we own, but most of it we are just auditioning. I should also say that what we looked at in these units was more than just the sound (which is always subjective). We also look at noise, ergonomics, construction, weight, size/type of the internal components (two of the guys are engineers), power supply, wiring, etc.

Now we're not an official group. We just have a hobby and get together to talk about it. We regularly try new products (and old ones, too), particularly when someone bought something new that they want everyone to check out. I'm not in the audio industry myself (I'm more of a computer guy), but I've been told I have a very good ear. We do blind tests using identical gear on both sides, as well as less scientific tests, especially when we really like a component. Sometimes we borrow each other's gear for a few weeks to "work it out," but it's still very un-scientific. While we usually disagree about what sounds ideal (especially with speakers), we do tend to agree on the more basic stuff like built quality, overall sound, and ergonomics. Some of us have tons of $ to spend on gear (that would definitely not be me) and others are always looking for the most bang-for-the-buck.

Some people get together to play golf, others to drive sports cars, and we, well, we get together to test audio gear. So the gist of it is that yes, I have tried some of these CD and DVD players in my home with my own equipment and my own speakers. Some where really expensive (at least for me), and others where your disposable K-mart variety.

Regarding used players, I do think long and hard about it (I think I learned that in college). That said, I also have several people I can depend on to repair the equipment, so I suppose, my position is a bit unique. While I agree there are risks, if you have a reliable repair shop nearby, you should give used equipment a try. Theoretically if you consider that just about everything I own has been passed around to friends' houses, some of it has been upgraded and a few items repaired, I don't really own anything new. But I can also tell you that there is a difference between a $300 universal player and a $1K player.

shokhead
05-09-2005, 12:10 PM
If your only hooking up the digital connection,there wont be any audio difference. If your running your analog on the player,then a 1K will probably sound better then a $300 player. 700 bucks worth? Thats what ya have to decide. You can get a nice,new universal player,Yamaha C750 that plays everthing for $300 bucks. I will do ewverything you need and do it very nicly.

musicoverall
05-09-2005, 12:58 PM
Wasn't it called an X-DAC?

Talk about a strange success story. Market a tube buffer thing that has suspicious claims, and propel yourself in to a high end powerhouse (maybe a little strong) that makes a broad range of well reviewed equipment.

The suspicious X-10 claims comes from the fact that their advertising promoted coverting harsh transistor sound into smooth tube like sound without the use of any filtering. 'Course I never heard one so it's speculation on my part that they couldn't in all likelyhood do what was claimed. It also added one more cable pair to the mix.

Sold a zillion of them apparently.

Yeah, the X-DAC sold for around $600 and I think the X-10D was less than half that. Seems to me I read a review in S'phile about the X-10D (one NOT written by Sam Tellig!) and the listener felt his system sounded better without the additional buffer, possibly because of the additional cables. The X-DAC got a glowing review from the same mag, as I recall. Was the X-10D MF's first piece, prior to their little preamp and so on that can housed in the same cannister? I don't remember. If so, yes... it's an odd success story.

hermanv
05-09-2005, 01:27 PM
Seems to me that in the X-10, X-DAC and X-CAN (headphone amp) days they were carried and strongly promoted by Audio Advisor, the HiFi by mail catalog people. Eventually they had all kinds of stuff in the stackable extruded round housings including an outboard power supply, power amps etc. all of them in that same package. I get the impression they wouldn't be caught dead producing those kinds of products today (ones that sell for a few hundred).

I have purchased from Audio Advisor and they always treated me right.

The relationship between Audio Advisor and Musical Fidelity floundered about the time Musical Fidelity hit the big time. I occasionally wonder who got the short end of that stick.

nightflier
05-09-2005, 01:39 PM
Ditto on Audio Advisor. Good, knowledgeable folks. And always with a 30-day return policy and clearance prices that are competitive. If you're gona buy used, that is one "safer" way to start. They have a CA Azur 640C for $400 and a Marantz DV4500 for $237.

Speaking of their clearance & the discussion about DAC's, they are selling a Whest DAP.10R Active Analog Processor. I wonder what that will do for the sound? But it's also selling for $1300 on clearance so that's a hefty chunk of change.