Need a good cd player

[systemerror909]

Looking for a near audiophile quality cd player on ebay, but not sure whats good. I've been heavily researching Sony, and their "es" line of players, because all of them seem to pretty much be of good quality. I'm hoping to find something nice in the sub $100 range, but might be compelled to spend up to $200 if absolutely necessary. I've got a good amp already (pioneer) and Some wharfedale diamond 8.2 speakers. Any suggestions? I'm considering brands other than sony too, I just don't know whats good.

btw, i'm planning on buying used, but is it better to get a better older model (like early 90's) or a cheaper newer model (late 90's)? I know technology has progressed, but some early 90's equiptment that was real expensive sells for real cheap

[N. Abstentia]

If you're limited to only $200, just get a new universal player. How will you be connecting the player to your system? Do you also need a DVD player?

[systemerror909]

If you're limited to only $200, just get a new universal player. How will you be connecting the player to your system? Do you also need a DVD player?


No, I only need a really good cd player, not dvd, hdcd, or sacd, and I'd prefer to buy a slightly used high end model with a heavy build to it rather than a cheap consumer "does it all" lightweight player that will break in a year or two and provides mediocre sound at that.

[markw]

You might want to think bout that for a while. FWIW, some of the "low end" Toshiba DVD players have been known to produce some quite satisfying sound, and this comes from the audiophile community.

[anamorphic96]

Why dont you try and save up 300 then you have some real options. Such as a NAD 521BEE which is considered by many to be the best budget player out there. Plus you get it new with a 2 year warranty. You could also look at the Marantz CD 5400 or the Integra carousel changer for 300. ( I know its a carousel, but its a damn good one with a 3 year warranty).

Makes no sense to me to be willing to spend 200 on a used player which could crap out in a month. Your so close at 200. You should wait and save. You could also probably get those players with a 10% discount if the dealer is nice enough.

Cheers

[Les Adams]

Hi there. I have an Arcam Delta 70.3 for sale on Ebay. It is in very good condition. Rather old now, but very well built, much better in fact than their current machines. It is very solid with a metal case as opposed to plastic!

The transport is also one of the best Arcam ever made and as it has an SPDIF coaxial output, you could add an external DAC later and that would give you a superb machine.

I am selling it because I just bought an Arcam Alpha 8SE HDCD machine on Ebay! The starting bid is 140 pounds. An identical machine went recently for 170, but who knows where the bidding will go on mine. It could go for 140.

If you want to see it, search for item no: 5801274760 on Ebay.

Best wishes. Les.

[StanleyMuso]

to buy any laser equiped product second hand? All problems that developed in my players, both CD and DVD, were with the lasers. Once out of warranty, they can be expensive to repair.

[JohnMichael]

I have a 9 year old Sony CDP XA1ES that has been an excellent cd player. I bought it as a store demo from a local audio shop. Never had any trouble with it except for a channel would cut out and that was fixed with tightening a screw. One of the rca's was losing ground. I will use this one until it dies and I do not know of another player that will give such good service for such a long time.

[topspeed]

You want an "audiophile" cdp for less than $100? Define "audiophile." Does this mean it has to be manufactured by some boutique brand no one has heard of? I'm confused as you seem to want to avoid "consumer" brands, yet are looking into Sonys (not that there's anything wrong with that as their SACD players are among the very best).

I'm in the same camp as Stan and anamorphic in that I wouldn't even consider a used cd player. For one, there are just too many moving parts to break. For all you know, the previous owner's 3 yr old may have taken great delight in jamming his Power Ranger into the transport. In addition, technology moves so rapidly that yesterdays reference player is killed by today's "mass market" brands. DAC's improve, error correction is tighter, clocks are more accurate, sampling rates increase, etc. While some of the improvements made to cdp's over the years amount to little more than marketing hype, make no mistake that real advancements have been made.

If you can find the patience to save another C note, you can pick-up a new cdp from NAD, Cambridge Audio or Denon that has a full warranty. Personally, I'd sleep better knowing what has or hasn't been done to my main source or musical enjoyment. YMMV.

Hope this helps.

[RGA]

Topspeed
"DAC's improve, error correction is tighter, sampling rates increase, etc."

One day you should try a DAC that needs none of these things to sound like real music. As biased as I may come across.

To the originhal poster. Don;t bother buying any used cd player. Not because new ones are better -- they might be but not necessarily -- the reason is simply to to faiure of digital products. You have to consider that much of the new audio componants are cheap and are not the least bit ruggedly built or durable. Spending $400.00 on a Single Disc NAD may last longer than say my 300 Disc Sony Mega Changer but then again maybe not.

I had a Pioneer 100 disc player (the first such player that ever came out) and it lasted for several years until I traded it in. The Nad or any other $300.00is player isn;t going to be a world beater - and if it's better than the CDP 355 Mega changer it's going to be small differecnes and likely not detectable by most if not all budget systems and not on most non acoustic music genres.

There are some expensive DAC's that make a significant improvement and I intend to buy it but what I've heard from many others Arcam Audio refinment YBA, Mark levinson, Linn, Sony SACD players, Rega and on and on...I'd buy a FUN feature loaded Sony Mega Changer (with digital out to add an external DAC) save a couple hundred to be used on cds to fill the machine. If ti craps out in 4 years buy another one. Even after two of them it's still probably cheaper than the NAD -- and judging by Nad's quality control history 8 years is unlikely.

You don't want to get into the audiophile trappings where NAME of the brand reigns supreme over what you're actually hearing. Nad is perceived to be above the Japanese brands that A&B Sound carried and at that time it was probably true -- is it still true. Just because in 1998 it was so doesn't mean it still is...Maybe Pioneer got better or maybe NAD got worse or maybe both happened at the same time. mainstream run of the mill Sony for example was perceived by many as better than msot other stuff. I remember at one time people would spend $350.00 on a Siny VCR and poo-poo Htachi VCRs that were $160.00. The funny thing was that they were identicla VCRs both in fact made and designed by Hitachi and were the exact same unit with a different cover and layout. Pioneer was rated king of the laserdisc market yet many of ther laserdisc players they built for other brands like hitachi -- The Hitachi unit was silver not black and said Hitachi and went for $100.00 less - but it was IDENTICAL t the Pioneer unit. Yet the store sold 5 times more Pioneers because Pioneer was "known for" laser disc players.

Most of the mass market stuff is using the chame chipsets of other brands -- even higher up Arcam players use Sony Transports. Sony makes good transports - but interestingly many of Sony's own players don't use Sony transports but cheaper ones sourced someplace else.

And if you are going to be playing any of this stuff through a Receiver as your amplifier -- then you may as well buy the cheapest cd player that meets your feature requirement as is possible -- any gain in the cd player will more than likely be offset by the receivers on the market anyway.

[RGA]

Topspeed
"DAC's improve, error correction is tighter, sampling rates increase, etc."

One day you should try a DAC that needs none of these things to sound like real music. As biased as I may come across.

To the originhal poster. Don;t bother buying any used cd player. Not because new ones are better -- they might be but not necessarily -- the reason is simply to to faiure of digital products. You have to consider that much of the new audio componants are cheap and are not the least bit ruggedly built or durable. Spending $400.00 on a Single Disc NAD may last longer than say my 300 Disc Sony Mega Changer but then again maybe not.

I had a Pioneer 100 disc player (the first such player that ever came out) and it lasted for several years until I traded it in. The Nad or any other $300.00is player isn;t going to be a world beater - and if it's better than the CDP 355 Mega changer it's going to be small differecnes and likely not detectable by most if not all budget systems and not on most non acoustic music genres.

There are some expensive DAC's that make a significant improvement and I intend to buy it but what I've heard from many others Arcam Audio refinment YBA, Mark levinson, Linn, Sony SACD players, Rega and on and on...I'd buy a FUN feature loaded Sony Mega Changer (with digital out to add an external DAC) save a couple hundred to be used on cds to fill the machine. If ti craps out in 4 years buy another one. Even after two of them it's still probably cheaper than the NAD -- and judging by Nad's quality control history 8 years is unlikely.

You don't want to get into the audiophile trappings where NAME of the brand reigns supreme over what you're actually hearing. Nad is perceived to be above the Japanese brands that A&B Sound carried and at that time it was probably true -- is it still true. Just because in 1998 it was so doesn't mean it still is...Maybe Pioneer got better or maybe NAD got worse or maybe both happened at the same time. mainstream run of the mill Sony for example was perceived by many as better than msot other stuff. I remember at one time people would spend $350.00 on a Siny VCR and poo-poo Htachi VCRs that were $160.00. The funny thing was that they were identicla VCRs both in fact made and designed by Hitachi and were the exact same unit with a different cover and layout. Pioneer was rated king of the laserdisc market yet many of ther laserdisc players they built for other brands like hitachi -- The Hitachi unit was silver not black and said Hitachi and went for $100.00 less - but it was IDENTICAL t the Pioneer unit. Yet the store sold 5 times more Pioneers because Pioneer was "known for" laser disc players.

Most of the mass market stuff is using the chame chipsets of other brands -- even higher up Arcam players use Sony Transports. Sony makes good transports - but interestingly many of Sony's own players don't use Sony transports but cheaper ones sourced someplace else.

And if you are going to be playing any of this stuff through a Receiver as your amplifier -- then you may as well buy the cheapest cd player that meets your feature requirement as is possible -- any gain in the cd player will more than likely be offset by the receivers on the market anyway.

[GMichael]

What do you think of some of the CD recorders with built in hard drives? I bought the Yamaha a couple of weeks ago. It works great so far. How long will it last? Beats me.

[topspeed]

One day you should try a DAC that needs none of these things to sound like real music. As biased as I may come across. I've heard three outboard DAC's off the top of my head. The first was my friends Bel Canto which was only slightly better than his stock Yammie. The other two I can't really say because I haven't had enough appreciable time with the corresponding rigs to determine how much impact the DAC's are making compared to everything else. One was a Wadia dac and the other an Electrocompaniet. Personally, I think DAC's can make a difference, it just becomes harder and harder to justify their price considering the performance gains over a decent cdp.

[RGA]

The main problemis many of the DACs are built on the same kind of designs of many one box players -- IE using Burr-Brown, using filters, nosie shaping, and oversampling or upsampling etc.

I have heard a couple of two box players sound worse than one box units too so I always avoided it because I felt it was too much of a crapshoot for marginal improvements (and sometimes making things worse). I recently changed my mind given one companies cd playback in direct a/b comparaisons. Enough of a difference that the cd player costs more than my speakers and yet I could actually say it was worth the money -- and i never thought I'd say that.