Best CD player for around 1K HELP

[vansonrider]

Hello,

Hello fellow Audio buffs. I’m looking to upgrade my CD player in my system. It’s a Sony CDP-C745 5 disk changer with optical out. I upgraded once to a HK fl8450 but the stupid thing died on me. The Sony is about 7 years old and has been faithful. I think it’s one of the weakest links in my system but I do love the changer feature. I know some audiophiles may scoff at the thought of a changer but I love the convenience. I’m willing to go single if I have to but would prefer a changer. My system is a follows.

Anthem AVM 20 1.12
Citation 7.1 x 2 amps
Revel M20 mains
Atlantic technologies center (I looking for a Revel C30)
Dynaudio audience 40 rears
Audioquest Mammoth speaker cables
Cardas interconnect to all sources
Sony DVP-NS700P DVD
JVC direct view TV
No sub I live in an apartment

I think my system is fairly good. Hey I'm trying...... I am willing to spend $700 to 1K on a player. Any suggestions and how should I hook it up?

Thanks
Vansonrider

[mtrycraft]

Hello,

Hello fellow Audio buffs. I’m looking to upgrade my CD player in my system. It’s a Sony CDP-C745 5 disk changer with optical out. I upgraded once to a HK fl8450 but the stupid thing died on me. The Sony is about 7 years old and has been faithful. I think it’s one of the weakest links in my system but I do love the changer feature. I know some audiophiles may scoff at the thought of a changer but I love the convenience. I’m willing to go single if I have to but would prefer a changer. My system is a follows.
I think my system is fairly good. Hey I'm trying...... I am willing to spend $700 to 1K on a player. Any suggestions and how should I hook it up?

Thanks
Vansonrider

Why do you think your Sony is the weak link? If anything, your speakers, your room and the recoded music are your weak links. Keep the Sony untill it dies. Then get a universal player for around $200.

[musicman1999]

i am also looking for a new cd player in this range as well.i have been looking at the new cambridge audio 640c($699 cdn),arcam cd73($999 cdn) also the latest rotel offering,dont remember the model number,but it was also about $1000 cdn.after careful listening the arcam was the clear winner,but the cambridge was close and $300 chaeper.you have good quality gear,and plugging either of these players into you rig,will make you think you upgraded your whole system.find a dealer that will let you bring one home if you can,that is the only way to really judge.good luck

[Arch]

I just went through the same selection process for a new CD player. Rotel RCD-1072 vs Arcam CD73t vs Cambridge Audio Azur 640c. I made the same conclusion as musicman1999. In the end I picked the Cambridge for its performance / price, and taking into consideration that the rest of my setup are now outmatched by the Cambridge. If you do have a system that can take advantage of the improved quality of the source, then Arcam it is.

[bturk667]

I like the Rega Research Planet 2000, it is @ $900.

[hertz]

Why do you think your Sony is the weak link? If anything, your speakers, your room and the recoded music are your weak links. Keep the Sony untill it dies. Then get a universal player for around $200.

Hi Mtrycraft,
What if somebody has good speakers, rooms and good recordings? Then, do you think a good cd player will make a difference ?
I have an audiophile friend who has an almost perfect room, musical fidility power and pre amps and dynaudio contour floor standing speakers.He has further tweaked his room with bass traps.Once you turn the music on, I almost get an errie feeling because of the realism in the reproduced sound. He has roksan and marantz cd players and a harman kardon dvd player.We have tried out all these in his music system.In fact I have checked out my nad cd player in his system.It is as clear as night and day that all of them sound different.Some of them differ slightly but some others are quite different.In fact I can clearly make out differences in his system if I change cables also.
But these things are not so apparant with my system which is not so high end and the room is less that perfect.I guess the bottom line is that, if you have a transparent system and a good room, all these differences suddenly becomes clear to you.

[dennis]

I like the Rega Research Planet 2000, it is @ $900.
The best cd player under $1000 is a "used" REGA PLANET .You can pick one up for around $400-$500....It's the sweetest sounding cd player this side of $1500!!!! READ THE REVIEWS

[mtrycraft]

Hi Mtrycraft,
What if somebody has good speakers, rooms and good recordings? Then, do you think a good cd player will make a difference ?
I have an audiophile friend who has an almost perfect room, musical fidility power and pre amps and dynaudio contour floor standing speakers.He has further tweaked his room with bass traps.Once you turn the music on, I almost get an errie feeling because of the realism in the reproduced sound. He has roksan and marantz cd players and a harman kardon dvd player.We have tried out all these in his music system.In fact I have checked out my nad cd player in his system.It is as clear as night and day that all of them sound different.Some of them differ slightly but some others are quite different.In fact I can clearly make out differences in his system if I change cables also.
But these things are not so apparant with my system which is not so high end and the room is less that perfect.I guess the bottom line is that, if you have a transparent system and a good room, all these differences suddenly becomes clear to you.


Your hearing is still the limiting factor. It has limits. Psychoacoustic reasearch over the past number of deacdes has shown that you will hear small volume differences as better sound. And, volume differences you need to differentiate varies with overall volume.
With louder sound you need smaller differences to detect but there is a limit what you can detect. Low levels may need as much as 3dB change to detect. Frequency response of the ear is also limited and need higher levels and higher differences at either end of the spectrum.

I seriously doubt that a well designed CD/DVD player is audibly different. One only needs to check the frequency response specs for that.

What will affect your perception is the good old bias issues in a sighted comparison :)

In a DBt you also need to set it up technically so the levels in each player is the exact same, to a very close tolerance for which you need instruments, not by ear.

Cables, unless they are not even closely comparable is a no brainer. Nothing there, especially if the receiver is doing the digital processing for all the players.

So, in the end, you need to do a DBT to be sure :)

[skeptic]

I seriously doubt that a well designed CD/DVD player is audibly different. One only needs to check the frequency response specs for that.


Cables, unless they are not even closely comparable is a no brainer. Nothing there, especially if the receiver is doing the digital processing for all the players.


IMO, from recent experience, minor differences in frequency response between one cd player and another make them audibly slightly different. The illusion is that one is actually better than the other. Pure nonsense. By compensating for this difference with slight tweaking of equalization, the differences can be completely cancelled out.

My main gripe about cd and dvd players is that they should have a variable output that they can be controlled with the same remote control that operated the rest of the player. Since my preamps and amplifiers mostly have manual only volume controls, I find it very inconvenient getting up every time I want to change it. I also need 4 way repeat for the musician in my household who uses it as a practicing aid. This was common on $200 players 15 years ago. Why isn't it parctically universal today.

As for interconnect cables, I have given a very easy test for determining whether or not they do their job perfectly. The $1 RS cables do. So do the cables that come with most equipment. Can companies which want to manufacture a cable that sounds different come up with something that does succeed? I have every confidence that the infinitely inventive human mind can find a way to wreck even the simplest device. If those audiophile cables attenuate the high end of your sound system because of their enormous shunt capacitance thereby reducing the shrill high frequency peak in a pair of audiophile loudspeakers that makes high mass mc cartridges sound listenable but cd players sound unbearable, maybe in this case, two wrongs do cancel out a right, but the way I see it, the current approach to buying audiophile equipment is completely off the wall. That's what keeps these people in business.

[musicman1999]

Your hearing is still the limiting factor. It has limits. Psychoacoustic reasearch over the past number of deacdes has shown that you will hear small volume differences as better sound. And, volume differences you need to differentiate varies with overall volume.
With louder sound you need smaller differences to detect but there is a limit what you can detect. Low levels may need as much as 3dB change to detect. Frequency response of the ear is also limited and need higher levels and higher differences at either end of the spectrum.

I seriously doubt that a well designed CD/DVD player is audibly different. One only needs to check the frequency response specs for that.

What will affect your perception is the good old bias issues in a sighted comparison :)

In a DBt you also need to set it up technically so the levels in each player is the exact same, to a very close tolerance for which you need instruments, not by ear.

Cables, unless they are not even closely comparable is a no brainer. Nothing there, especially if the receiver is doing the digital processing for all the players.

So, in the end, you need to do a DBT to be sure :)
while i do agree with you thatb many people will hear louder as better,these are casual listeners only.any serious listener should be capable of picking up differences in cd players as well as any type of component.any test of quality players,played through the same system,with the same music,at the same volumn level will reveal differences and no two players are the same.i have recently been through this myself in a search for a new player(cambridge audio,arcam,sim audio with a denon dvd-2200 thown in for comparison)
and while the results of a dbt would have been interesting,i doubt they would have been different.

[skeptic]

While there are minor differences in some players compared to others, because these are attributable to slight differences in frequency response, it is impossible to say that one player is better than another. It is also ludicrous to justify the huge disparity in cost when this type of difference is not only barely audible but easily and cheaply compensated for. Any real differences in performance would show up as differences in dynamic linearity and non linear distortion. But virtually every player far exceeds the ability of human beings to detect whatever minor differences in these regards exist. To those who think that equalization is process that should never be allowed in high quality audio systems, you not only are not knowledgeable about the way analog tapes, phonograph records, and FM broadcasts work, you don't understand what a loudspeaker crossover network is either. Therefore, you will be forever condemned to pay exhorbitantly high prices for equipment that performs no better than much less expensive equipment in an effort to achieve audibly flat frequency response without the use of inexpensive active equalization.

[bturk667]

I own the original Planet.

[Geoffcin]

While there are minor differences in some players compared to others, because these are attributable to slight differences in frequency response, it is impossible to say that one player is better than another. It is also ludicrous to justify the huge disparity in cost when this type of difference is not only barely audible but easily and cheaply compensated for. Any real differences in performance would show up as differences in dynamic linearity and non linear distortion. But virtually every player far exceeds the ability of human beings to detect whatever minor differences in these regards exist. To those who think that equalization is process that should never be allowed in high quality audio systems, you not only are not knowledgeable about the way analog tapes, phonograph records, and FM broadcasts work, you don't understand what a loudspeaker crossover network is either. Therefore, you will be forever condemned to pay exhorbitantly high prices for equipment that performs no better than much less expensive equipment in an effort to achieve audibly flat frequency response without the use of inexpensive active equalization.

The fact of the matter is that you not only can hear a difference between CD players, in some cases it's glaringly obvious. Test measurements of simple sinewave performance, and gross distortion measurements are no adequate in the least to determine the performance of these components. There is no test equipment made that can duplicate the ear-brain ability to detect subtle difference in complex waveforms. And, even if there was sophisticated equipment that could do it, there would be no way to quantify it. You absolutely need to compare the components against each other to come to a conclusion. I found it quite easy to pick out the best CD player for me, as that is what it all comes down to in the end isn't it?

[mtrycraft]

while i do agree with you thatb many people will hear louder as better,these are casual listeners only.any serious listener should be capable of picking up differences in cd players as well as any type of component.any test of quality players,played through the same system,with the same music,at the same volumn level will reveal differences and no two players are the same.i have recently been through this myself in a search for a new player(cambridge audio,arcam,sim audio with a denon dvd-2200 thown in for comparison)
and while the results of a dbt would have been interesting,i doubt they would have been different.


Well, there are a great deal of DBT data that is contrary to your belief on audible differences.
Yes, it would have been very interesting to put your perception to the real lie detector. You didn't and now you don't know if there are audible differences, only think there is and is unreliable.

[mtrycraft]

The fact of the matter is that you not only can hear a difference between CD players, in some cases it's glaringly obvious. Test measurements of simple sinewave performance, and gross distortion measurements are no adequate in the least to determine the performance of these components. There is no test equipment made that can duplicate the ear-brain ability to detect subtle difference in complex waveforms. And, even if there was sophisticated equipment that could do it, there would be no way to quantify it. You absolutely need to compare the components against each other to come to a conclusion. I found it quite easy to pick out the best CD player for me, as that is what it all comes down to in the end isn't it?

where did you get all this nonsense? How do you think the limits of hearing is mapped if not with instruments? Best if you think before you make profound announcements in science. Or, you have citations for your pronaouncements.

And, you should read and talk with real audio gurus in the industry about measurements and what it can do, not rely on audio mythology.

I am sure you have confirmed your findings of differences with DBT listening? No? Then you have nothing to hang your hat on but a straw hanger.

[musicman1999]

Well, there are a great deal of DBT data that is contrary to your belief on audible differences.
Yes, it would have been very interesting to put your perception to the real lie detector. You didn't and now you don't know if there are audible differences, only think there is and is unreliable.
wrong,i do know that there were audible differences,i heard them,they were clear and distinct.they were not based on preconcieved ideas and were played through the same speakers i have at home although with a different amp.put aside all thoughts of how tests are done and how a players spec sheet reads and listen to the music,it will tell no lies.the music is what its about not the spec sheet.

[skeptic]

"Test measurements of simple sinewave performance, and gross distortion measurements are no adequate in the least to determine the performance of these components. There is no test equipment made that can duplicate the ear-brain ability to detect subtle difference in complex waveforms. And, even if there was sophisticated equipment that could do it, there would be no way to quantify it."

This is an absurd statement based on absolutely nothing but someone's preconceived foolish notion of something he doesn't understand.

[robin_v]

I just went through the same selection process for a new CD player. Rotel RCD-1072 vs Arcam CD73t vs Cambridge Audio Azur 640c. I made the same conclusion as musicman1999. In the end I picked the Cambridge for its performance / price, and taking into consideration that the rest of my setup are now outmatched by the Cambridge. If you do have a system that can take advantage of the improved quality of the source, then Arcam it is.
Somebody asked me to have a look at the Cambridge D500SE CD player for them. This I agreed to do. The more I examined this unpretentious little player, the more I liked what I saw, A major plus is the upgrade capability of the player. Current sampling rates are about 24 bits at the moment. This is included in the CD player BUT, should even higher sampling rates become available in the future, Cambridge have built this little beauty with a view to being upgraded, as technology developes. This is a nice feature.

Instead of wondering whether one needs to upgrade to a whole new 48 bit sampling CD player, for instance, one simply needs to upgrade a PCB inside the player.

The long and the short of it is that I ended up buying one for myself. I'm still burning it in but it is opening like a tender rosebud. Every session has it sounding sweeter and sweeter.This is after about 50 hours of playing time. They recommend 200 hours for it to reach it's best. I'll keep you posted.

I paid about 2500 SEK for this CD player (about $350) from the Swedish HiFi Club and it's at a price where one can afford to take a chance to have something to compare with.

What I didn't like about it was the fact that the text over the control buttons are extremely difficult to read. One needs 20-20 vision to see what each button is. However, after just a little practice, one gets to know which button does what.

With the introduction of the Azur series, shops are dumping the prices on the Classic series and this is an added bonus for the end buyer.

[Geoffcin]

"Test measurements of simple sinewave performance, and gross distortion measurements are no adequate in the least to determine the performance of these components. There is no test equipment made that can duplicate the ear-brain ability to detect subtle difference in complex waveforms. And, even if there was sophisticated equipment that could do it, there would be no way to quantify it."

This is an absurd statement based on absolutely nothing but someone's preconceived foolish notion of something he doesn't understand.

You obviously cannot take anyone who disagrees with you, so you resort to childish character bashing. I used to have respect for you, but after this absurd post by you I have reconsidered my opinion of you.

[Robert Seletsky]

i am also looking for a new cd player in this range as well.i have been looking at the new cambridge audio 640c($699 cdn),arcam cd73($999 cdn) also the latest rotel offering,dont remember the model number,but it was also about $1000 cdn.after careful listening the arcam was the clear winner,but the cambridge was close and $300 chaeper.you have good quality gear,and plugging either of these players into you rig,will make you think you upgraded your whole system.find a dealer that will let you bring one home if you can,that is the only way to really judge.good luck
---------
Hi,
I have used an HK HD-710 for years: very sweet, open, transparent sound. I just got--new--an HK HD-720 as a second deck, thinking myself lucky. It looks identical, except for a flimsy CD drawer, but sounds very different--really aggressive and bright. I wondered if anyone knows this unit and whether or not playing it in--and for how many hours--will make it less harsh. Thanks.

Robert Seletsky <memres@sprintmail.com>

[hertz]

Hi Mtry, skeptic,
I am very well aware of this loudness factor in cd players and I am very carefull when I do comparisons.
What I observe are as follows:
1.soundstage
2.depth
3.tonal accuracy (digital glare vs natural)
4.tonal balance
5.sheer musicality

I use the "burmester test cd" for most of my evaluations.
The tracks:
1.Melissa Walker: A time for Love
2.Gil Shaham and Göran Söllscher: Sonata Concertata
3.John Lee Hooker: Early one morning
4. Bennie Wallace: It's The Talk of the Town
5.Gioacchino Rossini: Sonata I G-Dur
6.Hans Theessink: The Planet
7.Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov: Allegro Molto
8.Bach Orgelwerke 1: von Hans-Jürgen Schnoor
9.Hugh Masekela: Stimela
10.Yim Hok-Man: Poem of Chinese Drums

I noticed that each of the cd players cast their own signature on all these factors.This friend of mine actually spend 3 months trying out different cd players at his home before he settled on the roksan cd player.The fact is that none of the cd players were perfect.He just picked up the one which had flaws he can live with.I liked the marantz better.

[skeptic]

Again, it is important to understand what the differences are, not merely that they exist. The car I now drive has an electronic throttle and a 290 HP engine. When it was first designed the action of the throttle made the car feel very sluggish because it didn't deliver the gobs of reserve power it had until the gas pedal was almost completely depressed. At that point as one mechanic explained it, it took off like a bat out of hell. The throttle was redesigned so that it "felt" more powerful. The same thing happens with a lot of products. An amplifier or reciever which gives you most of its gain in the first quarter turn of the volume control knob seems very powerful but it isn't necessarily any more powerful than the one sitting next to it which needs the knob turned to 1 or 2 o'clock for the same amount of gain. Two cd players may be virtually identical in every other respect but one sounds slightly diffferent because of minor frequency response shaping that the manufacturer knows will make it sound preferable to many users compared to other units sitting next to it on a shelf. This is pure illusion. And it can easily be duplicated or compensated for at low cost. Unless someone can demonstrate why the performance of one is superior to another by showing inherently better electrical characteristics that are of real value, I'm not buying it. And they can't because this is a product that has reached full maturity. It's one of those things where it's performance is so close to its theoretical limit within its paradyme that one unit is pretty much like another except for its features. And for me, that means 4 way repeat, a remote controllable volume control with variable output, and hopefully a 5 disc carousel with ply one while change at least 2. And please keep it well under $200. That's what is meant when we say a product is comoditized.

[mtrycraft]

Hi Mtry, skeptic,
I am very well aware of this loudness factor in cd players and I am very carefull when I do comparisons.
What I observe are as follows:
1.soundstage
2.depth
3.tonal accuracy (digital glare vs natural)
4.tonal balance
5.sheer musicality

I use the "burmester test cd" for most of my evaluations.
The tracks:
1.Melissa Walker: A time for Love
2.Gil Shaham and Göran Söllscher: Sonata Concertata
3.John Lee Hooker: Early one morning
4. Bennie Wallace: It's The Talk of the Town
5.Gioacchino Rossini: Sonata I G-Dur
6.Hans Theessink: The Planet
7.Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov: Allegro Molto
8.Bach Orgelwerke 1: von Hans-Jürgen Schnoor
9.Hugh Masekela: Stimela
10.Yim Hok-Man: Poem of Chinese Drums

I noticed that each of the cd players cast their own signature on all these factors.This friend of mine actually spend 3 months trying out different cd players at his home before he settled on the roksan cd player.The fact is that none of the cd players were perfect.He just picked up the one which had flaws he can live with.I liked the marantz better.

Yes, you may be very careful. Did you check the level differences, to .1dB? At 1kHz? 10kHz?
If not, how do you know one wasn't louder?

It seems you are using only one CD and swap. Even more reason for a DBT listening as your memory wonders. Sighted comparisons for what you are after, audible differences, is just unreliable.

[mtrycraft]

wrong,i do know that there were audible differences,i heard them,they were clear and distinct.they were not based on preconcieved ideas and were played through the same speakers i have at home although with a different amp.put aside all thoughts of how tests are done and how a players spec sheet reads and listen to the music,it will tell no lies.the music is what its about not the spec sheet.


Wrong? I only have a claim from you, not evidence. People make all sorts of claims in life and are unable to deliver when put to the task.
You'd be much better off knowing human psychology, bias, expectations, gullibility, etc.

[skeptic]

clear and distinct

Audible, yes, clear and distinct? Definitely not. How do I know? I had to swap cd players and this time, it won't take 2 years to re-equalize the system again. Maybe 2 weeks. Maybe at worst 2 months. If I wasn't so familiar with the recordings and the rest of the system, I never would have known. The differences are so subtle that to someone who wasn't as familiar with it as I am, they never would have guessed. It's like two color television sets. One has the flesh tones dead on and slightly more contrast, the other is slightly redder or greener and has less contrast. A slight twist of the right knob or two and you couldn't tell them apart for your life. Every time someone tells me "this unit blew all the others away" I have to laugh. The infintisimal differences mean nothing. In essence, they are all the same. All that is except the price.

[trauski]

to the origional post. i would go with a used nad 515 . it is a 5 cd changer and a nice little unit. it retailed for 500. i got mine for 350. you might get a used one under a 100. it won some great awards in its day. very comparale to much more expensice single disc units. very warm sounding. i bought it to replace an onkyo integra series cd player that was the brightest, foreign made, tinsel sounding cd player i ever owned for a short period. the 515 is a better unit than unit nad replaced it with according to a lot of reviewer. it has a digital coax out but you will want to use the da converter in the nad for the best sound.i use monster reference interconnect on it only cause i got free from dealer for a big purchase. i sure i paid for it somewhere else.

[Sealed]

I am not sure what could be classified as "best." Some cd players do things other cannot, so you get a mixture of voicings.

I can tell you themodels I like, and they are all European or American.

NAD C541
Arcam Cd-73
Rotel cd-955
Adcom GCD-750*
Ah Noe Tjoeb 4000**
Jolida cd-1000**
Musical Fidelity A3.2 cd *
Rega Planet 2000
AMC cd-6as**

* these cdp's are just over $1000, but worth it.

** these cd's use a tube buffer stage for output.

[hertz]

Yes, you may be very careful. Did you check the level differences, to .1dB? At 1kHz? 10kHz?
If not, how do you know one wasn't louder?

It seems you are using only one CD and swap. Even more reason for a DBT listening as your memory wonders. Sighted comparisons for what you are after, audible differences, is just unreliable.

No, I didn't do a check.
The reason, I can easily make out differences between loudness and quality of sound...:)
What you are saying might be technically correct.But from my experience, they don't work that way in real life.If your claim is true, then the loudest player should have been the winner.It is not so.

[happy ears]

"Yes, you may be very careful. Did you check the level differences, to .1dB? At 1kHz? 10kHz?
If not, how do you know one wasn't louder?"

Mtrycraft are telling me you can tell the difference of +/- 0.1 dB. That's a pretty small difference. I would have to agree with those that say louder is not always better.

[Sealed]

I have a little bit of heartburn with this abx required to hear ....etc...

It all starts with speakers. Speakers differ wildly.

Off the shelf JBL,polk, etc are not revealing of much fine detail.

Move up to ATC, PMC, Wilson, JMlabs, Thiel and so on, and MINUTE differences in anything are easily audible. These speakers are relentlessly revealing.

If someone says they need a/b/x to hear any difference on a set of JBl 4312A... ok I buy that. But not on modern hyper-detailed monitors.

I also wonder about certain people that poke holes in other people's ideas and systems, but will not openly describe thier own system. That is ultra suspect IMO.

If I owned a denon reciever, JBL speakers and a sony cdp... I probably could not tell much difference in cd players or cabling either.

[happy ears]

Well Sealed I use a pair of high quality Nuance Magic One speakers. I paid $500.00 CDN for these small 2 way bass reflex speakers and I would not consider them high end. In fact they are my weak link by a long shot, every component far surpass what these speakers can do. Although they can sing on my stereo differences can still be heard.

Although speakers are important and have a large affect on the final sound of any system a good source cannot be over looked. Just like computers garbage in garbage out. The Tjoeb CD player is just a bit better than the Pioneer it replaced.

Just because you can hear differences does not mean that others do, this applies both ways. Also we all do not listen to the same music or the same way, sometimes I listen to music as background only and at other times just for the music by myself. One thing is for sure neither side will be able to convince the other that they are right. Debate and discussion is good but on this site some people are set in their ways and will repeat the same argument over and over.

My first stereo cost me more than my first car this was an easy decision for me. My friend bought the nice car and no stereo. To each their own it is not for others to tell them what to spend their money on. However if they ask then it is a different. Then there is always the money issue, even if you can afford you still have to want or should I say need it. I still think everything costs twice as much as it should and I only make half as much money as I am worth. Still got to take care of the must have (needs) before we buy the wants, or you can do as my friend says “just move the wants into the need list”.

Enjoy the music as life is to short

[Sealed]

"Well Sealed I use a pair of high quality Nuance Magic One speakers. I paid $500.00 CDN for these small 2 way bass reflex speakers and I would not consider them high end. In fact they are my weak link by a long shot, every component far surpass what these speakers can do. Although they can sing on my stereo differences can still be heard. "

)No doubt. There are plenty of affordable speakers that are revealing.

Although speakers are important and have a large affect on the final sound of any system a good source cannot be over looked. Just like computers garbage in garbage out. The Tjoeb CD player is just a bit better than the Pioneer it replaced.

))The statements I made are listening to the output. Some speakers do not convey enough detail for a variety of reasons to make fine judgements, even in ABX.

I definately feel you need not spend a ton to enjoy music. Nor do you need to spend a ton to get revealing speakers. NHT super zeros with a murphy blaster xover kit are amazingly detailed...for under $450 total.

My basic point is similar to some of the things you said.
1) People don't hear the same.
2) All equipment isn't created equal

That is why I am skeptical of the skeptics. Especially a few of the semi-anonymous ones that throw rocks. I have read the statement "You cannot hear...or it's a placebo...etc" but ask that person or persons (I know of about 1/2 dozen of this type) and they will tell you what THEY own is irrelevent. That is a cop out to me, and a total elimination of credibility.

I enjoy the music so long as it's not a mess.

[happy ears]

"I definately feel you need not spend a ton to enjoy music. Nor do you need to spend a ton to get revealing speakers. NHT super zeros with a murphy blaster xover kit are amazingly detailed...for under $450 total."

You might not have to spend a ton of money on the stereo parts but the music can add up to a ton of money. All those CD's I have bought add up to a large dollar value and know that I have upgraded my turntable I will have to buy some more records as well.

[Sealed]

Yep, it's a hobby like anything else.

I can't tell you how many times I met someone who said "I'd NEVER spend that much on a stereo..."

But they will have aggregious amounts of money into a car, boat, or other hobby.

Most stereo's start out modest and grow over time anyway. It's a journey of taste and discovery.

I will enjoy it despite some people insisting "YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY TELL THE DIFFERENCE IN _________ and ___________ ." I laugh it off and put on the Lp version that sounds better to me than any cd version of the same thing anyway. If someone says I can't tell the difference between LP and Cd, they are truly medicated.

[plextor guy]

No offense but paying a G note for a cd player is insane. For about 700 less buy soemthing every bit as good as the niche market cd players (excluding tube/ss hybrids for those with a taste for the 'warm' ) and far more versatile - a Samsung DVD-HD931 for example. Funny how cd players are becoming what turn tables were about 15 years ago - championed by a few but ultimately obsolete.

[happy ears]

By this logic we all should drive the cheapest cars that are sold as it will go from A to B and back as the most expensive one does. The person I am working with has 3 snowmobiles and 2 quads does this make him insane as well. Maybe these are toys and a hobby for him, heck one of those sleds goes like a bat out of hell. I will ride it but never buy one for myself, just not my thing. Also should we all by the same type and size of house because one model fits everybody’s needs. If I had never bought a stereo, CD player, records, saved all the money from the meals I bought and the wine that I drank with it I still would not be able to afford Skeptic's house. I do not tell him not to buy it, heck go for it I would if I could. Given a choice having a life or sitting at home doing nothing I will pick having a good time. Should have gave Bill Gates $500.00 when he was desperate for money.

If you think the CD player costs too much do not even look at the bill for all the CD's. Heck I do not like to think about how much this adds up to. Honestly if you do not hear a difference buy the cheap one because anything more than that would be a waste of money for you, no insult intended. I bought a cheap pioneer CD player which did not impress me my father has it now, so you better add another $300.00 to the bill. Does the Samsung player get me a beer when I need one; maybe it plays two CD's at the same time that would be neat.

If you cannot afford the upscale models I fully understand, as I have been there myself. Unwilling to pay for the next model up I also understand. If you do not hear any difference there is no need to waste your money. But when you start telling me what I can hear and how much to spend it is a totally different story. Still think that everything costs twice as much as it should and I only make half as much money as I'm worth.

Oh, someone should tell the Radio Shack store I was in today that records are obsolete and ancient. Wait, that's exactly what the young kids told me at Circuit City one day, CD's are obsolete and everyone knows that MP3's are the only way to listen to music. Then they told me that they had 40,000 songs and did not pay for one of them, to which I said, is it correct to steal from the musicians. Apparently music is free because it is public information but they wouldn't give me free software.

Have A Great Day

[Sealed]

No offense but paying a G note for a cd player is insane. For about 700 less buy soemthing every bit as good as the niche market cd players (excluding tube/ss hybrids for those with a taste for the 'warm' ) and far more versatile - a Samsung DVD-HD931 for example. Funny how cd players are becoming what turn tables were about 15 years ago - championed by a few but ultimately obsolete.


UMM..bad idea...very bad idea. :mad:

My system is ruthlessly revealing of any flaw in the chain. The least expensive cd player that is listenable on my system is thr AMC cd-8/solid state version. But there are cd players under and over $1k that have poor internal sheilding, cheap analog section and poor parts. That manifests itself in harshness that comes through (clearly) on a high resolution system.

The major design flaw of small and cheap cd player is that the power supply/switching p/s is too close to the motherboard and other sensitive components and the resultant mess gets amplified. The idea here is to achieve HIGH fidelity...not crap in=crap out.

One of those Samsung multi-carousel/cheap/ $100 multiplayer dvd's is virtually unlistenable at worst, poorly detailed or thin and unmusical at best. It would be like putting a $49 PC cd output into a hifi. I have a Technics DVD-A-10 , and the harshness on cd playback is very obvious. And no, it's not malfunctioning.

I have been there, tried that, and it sounds very bad.

Vinyl is not championed by just a few. In fact, I just bought a great turntable. In the past year, SACD sold 100,000 units. Vinyl sold 600,000 units, and that's just NEW sales. Give me a used $300 Rega p3 deck with an $80 cart over any cd player under $2k any day.

[92135011]

Sealed, I have heard you rave on about vinyl (and many others who have also).
I will soon start with my vinyl collection once i find a local place to buy a new stylus. (I dont want to pay the big shipping charges online)
However, even then I think I would buy BOTH CD and vinyl.
Some stuff you just can't get on vinyl anymore. In addition, although the quality is better, sometimes the convenience is just not there, such as skipping a track or something.
However, if I was devoting time to just listening to stuff then sure vinyl would be great!
Sometimes just not the most practical.

[Sealed]

Well as I stated before:

I have been agonizing over getting into vinyl since 1999. I had to many "yeah" "but" if's"
I did a lot of listening to decks from $200 up to (censored)

I found that even a simple Rega p3, RB300 arm, and $80 Grado moving magnet cart (all of this for $200- $300 used) is simple to set up and it does in fact do something that most cd players don't.
http://www.rega.co.uk/product_images/P3silver.jpg
http://www.gradolabs.com/product_images/prestige_ctrg_gld.gif
The fluidity, dimensionality, transparency, detail and musicality of the midrange suck you into the seat, and you just don't want to leave.

Good example. Steely Dan: Gaucho. Play the cd. Even on expensive cd players this recording sounds less involving than an inexpensive TT and vinyl. You feel compelled to listen.

I found the absoloute key is to get a vacuum based record cleaning machine like the Nitty gritty or VPI. I purchased the manual model Nitty Gritty for about $290 (with shipping)
http://hcmaudio.com/images/model10.gif
This machine will extract dirt from grooves that hand cleaning cannot. I hand cleaned some noisy lp's, and that got rid of 80% of the noises. The machine took care of the rest. Putting on the vinyl now, there is DEAD silence from the lp. Just music.

Yes analog takes a bit more work, but unlike cd, it has a soul. And if you clean the lp's you will be immersed in magic.

[92135011]

WHAT!!!!? you can clean them with some sort of machine???
the nitty gritty what??
where can i get them??

hmm...what am I saying...I need to build up a collection first...I have nothing to clean!
well...not very many anyways.

[Sealed]

WHAT!!!!? you can clean them with some sort of machine???
the nitty gritty what??
where can i get them??

hmm...what am I saying...I need to build up a collection first...I have nothing to clean!
well...not very many anyways.

Many place have them,

Needle doctor among others. I did a google search for nitty gritty 1.0
www.amusicdirect.com is the cheapest. Any dealer that sells vinyl will get them also.

[Number9]

Hello,

Hello fellow Audio buffs. I’m looking to upgrade my CD player in my system. It’s a Sony CDP-C745 5 disk changer with optical out. I upgraded once to a HK fl8450 but the stupid thing died on me. The Sony is about 7 years old and has been faithful. I think it’s one of the weakest links in my system but I do love the changer feature. I know some audiophiles may scoff at the thought of a changer but I love the convenience. I’m willing to go single if I have to but would prefer a changer. My system is a follows.

Anthem AVM 20 1.12
Citation 7.1 x 2 amps
Revel M20 mains
Atlantic technologies center (I looking for a Revel C30)
Dynaudio audience 40 rears
Audioquest Mammoth speaker cables
Cardas interconnect to all sources
Sony DVP-NS700P DVD
JVC direct view TV
No sub I live in an apartment

I think my system is fairly good. Hey I'm trying...... I am willing to spend $700 to 1K on a player. Any suggestions and how should I hook it up?

Thanks
Vansonrider
Music Hall MMF CD-25 HDCD 24/96 CD Player
Tjames, 03/3/2004 It ONLY plays redbook CD's & HDCD's. It sure got my attention, has me rethinking my whole system upgrade plan. Audio Advisor has it for $535?
& HCM has it for $500 & change (which includes special anti jitter feet, interconnects & some sort of anti jitter(?) pad). I urge you to read this review. It's one of the best that I've read on this site. Good luck, Michael

[Number9]

I'm a cut & paste novice but here goes.Music Hall MMF CD-25 HDCD 24/96 CD Player
Tjames, 03/3/2004. It did'nt work again . Oh well, check out this review here in Audioreview. Good luck, Michael

[plextor guy]

You're comparing snowmobiles and houses to cdp's? You might as well compare digital watches to brands of herbal tea. CDP's are in fact obsolete. Way obsolete. Terms like 'revealing' are laughable. The only more wasteful hardware purchase ('high-end' cdp that is) would be high dollar interconnects.

[Sealed]

You're comparing snowmobiles and houses to cdp's? You might as well compare digital watches to brands of herbal tea. CDP's are in fact obsolete. Way obsolete. Terms like 'revealing' are laughable. The only more wasteful hardware purchase ('high-end' cdp that is) would be high dollar interconnects.

It is readily appearent that your presence here is just to troll, and thread-crap.

It is obvious you have never heard a high end system, nor are you an audiophile.

You don't belong in this thread.

Enjoy your mp3's. Ignorance is bliss.

[plextor guy]

Do you have any idea how ignorant you sound? Ten years ago I might have entertained a post like this but no longer. Don't drag newbies down a dead-end as I was dragged (albeit willingly - my fault). Stop the insanity and give credit where credit is due - speakers, speaker placement and source material. CDP's are APPLIANCES and are now obsolete, especially if the d/a is done by your receiver or preamp. Stop it, stop it, stop it.

[plextor guy]

Angry? Yes. I've came to the conclusion long ago that 80% of audio enthusiasm is based on nothing. It is an industry that is out of control in terms of hype. It is an arena where non technical people can aspire to look knowledgeable through the use of non technical, unproveable claims. All any newb wanting high quuality playback need know is that you must have speakers you like listening to, pay attention to how the speakers are placed in the room they occupy and that high quality source material makes all the difference in the world. EVERYTHING else is details. If you're being honest with yourself you'll admit that this is the truth.

[Sealed]

Do you have any idea how ignorant you sound? Ten years ago I might have entertained a post like this but no longer. Don't drag newbies down a dead-end as I was dragged (albeit willingly - my fault). Stop the insanity and give credit where credit is due - speakers, speaker placement and source material. CDP's are APPLIANCES and are now obsolete, especially if the d/a is done by your receiver or preamp. Stop it, stop it, stop it.

Don Quixote???

There is no dead end. Just because YOU made bad choices, doesn't mean I did or anyone else has. You are a bitter guy and it shows. Cd hasn't been obsoleted by anything. SACD hasn't caught fire. I have some cd's that sound better than SACD's, and vinyl sounds better than either.

You are the ignorant one. Receiver? There are no recievers in high end. They are mid-fi. D/A (digital) hasn't obsoleted anything in itself. It is compressed, sampled, and processed sounding. Even Meridian lossless packing has dither noise and other digital flaws, so it's far from perfect.

Your findings are indicative of your own sad life and bad attitude.

Unprovable? hardly. Garbage in=garbage out. You would know that if you ever actually owned revealing speakers, again--obviously you have not. You are in the 1% fringe and it shows.

You are tilting against windmills pal, you are raging against the machine. I suggest you get some anti-depressants and crawl back into your cave. You are sadly disgruntled and misguided. Get some professional help. And go away.

http://www.patriotresource.com/lotr/pics/characters/cavetroll.jpg

[plextor guy]

but you're half right. The choices I made in the beginning were not the choices I would make now. I went through a lot of trial and error until I finally got what I need and what pleases me. No thanks to people like you. I innocently bought into a lot of the crap you hear in these forums. There is nothing more despicable than someone regurgitating audio hype to newbs if that person knows in his or her heart of hearts that what they are saying is bogus. Hopefully you do not fall into this catagory. As for receivers, what exactly do you mean by 'high-end'? The term 'high-end' and 'revealing' mean nothing. Engineers, technicians and other techno savy people laugh at this terminology. It means nothing. And I didn't say CD technology is obsolete. It is the dedicated CDP that is obsolete. You did get the rage against the machine part right. It feels good to vent sometimes and if I'm saving just one newb from taking your babble at face value then I've done some good.

[Sealed]

but you're half right. The choices I made in the beginning were not the choices I would make now. I went through a lot of trial and error until I finally got what I need and what pleases me. No thanks to people like you. I innocently bought into a lot of the crap you hear in these forums. There is nothing more despicable than someone regurgitating audio hype to newbs if that person knows in his or her heart of hearts that what they are saying is bogus. Hopefully you do not fall into this catagory. As for receivers, what exactly do you mean by 'high-end'? The term 'high-end' and 'revealing' mean nothing. Engineers, technicians and other techno savy people laugh at this terminology. It means nothing. And I didn't say CD technology is obsolete. It is the dedicated CDP that is obsolete. You did get the rage against the machine part right. It feels good to vent sometimes and if I'm saving just one newb from taking your babble at face value then I've done some good.

You have a serious problem. I am not kidding.

Before you babble on ignorantly (as you have been) I have not hyped anything wrong. If you had the slightest clue about engineering, you would know how full of SH** you are.

Engineers? I'll give you the facts.

Receivers are built into an integrated chassis. They use cheaper power supplies that are too close to the motherboard. Instead of discreet components, they use integrated chips. receiver sound rates from utter crap, to very good. But they still lack openness, detail and slam of separates...BY DESIGN LIMITATION.

More expensive cd players have better anti-resonant transports. They have shielded toroids, and better quality parts. The analog stage is more elaborate, to better smooth the signal from digital nastiness.

Single resistive measurements of cd players show flat 20hz-20khz. That says very little. There are many more variables than that one number. Otherwise, why would a vaccum tube buffer cd player sound warmer, despite measuring flat? because there is more to measurements than that.

I can see you are locked into a Circuit-City mentality and have no clue what high end is or how it is engineered and contructed.

A cheap speaker can have good basic performance, but without a well engineered crossover to make those drivers integrate and work togeather, the speaker will be mediocre at best. Better speakers not only use better parts, but the crossovers have baffle step compensation, along with possible time and phase corrective measures.

A cheep sub will have a short x-max and a less rigid driver. A good sub will have a strong, linear motor and a long x-max.

The only "mythology" polluting this forum is your obvious inability to grasp what highend is, and how big a difference engineering makes.

You need to go away and get a clue. You obviously learned ZERO in your "years" of audio...which is a laugh and a half.

Here is your FIRST clue:
http://www.audioperfectionist.com

These guys are REAL engineers, and they don't laugh. They only laugh at clueless drones like you trolling and babbling. Go away, and learn. You have polluted this thread with your doom-and-gloom mindless babbling.

[happy ears]

from plextor guy "CDP's are in fact obsolete. Way obsolete."

Sounds just like the young kids at the big box stores and I quote here "Everyone knows that CD's are obsolete and ancient" Apparently any computer will match and surpass any stereo regardless of cost and there much cheaper too. Well I must be the exception as my computer cost plus software just keep going up and up. Still looking for the computer that will last me 20 to 25 years.

“There is nothing more despicable than someone regurgitating audio hype to newbs if that person knows in his or her heart of hearts that what they are saying is bogus.”

Well I will agree that it is unacceptable for people to lie, I do not know about your political leaders but most if not all of them lie. However you should prove your statement that these people know that they are misleading the newbies.

I presently own a Nakamichi TA-4A receiver and a Musical Fidelity A300 integrated amplifier. The preamp section of the A300 surpasses that of the Nak and I would never say night and day difference but there is a difference. Comparing the amplifier section I would not say better but different, the Nakamichi sounds warmer while the A300 sound more analytical. Both sound good but there is a distinct difference and I would have no problem between the two in a DBT.

As for CD players I believe that they are sounding more alike all the time and they are much better than they have been in the past. Bought my first CD player 6 years ago a model made by Pioneer and I was not impressed at all. In fact it turned me off to CD’s. Then I bought a Pioneer CDR-W839 player/recorder, this was much better than the first player I bought. However again it left something to desire although it makes excellent copies. Hence why I bought the AH CD player. It may be out of many people price range or desire to spend that much on a CD player but I like it much more the Pioneer player recorder.

Not being an Engineer or technician what I hear is flawed and incorrect from what you are saying. Would have never guessed that every EE builds stereo equipment being that it is such a large field but it is not the first time I have been wrong.

I have no problem that you may not hear a difference as there are many times I have heard don’t you hear the differences it’s like night and day. Nope, non at all to be honest, gee sir you have terrible ears. So I am forced to live with my flawed ears. I will stand by my belief only spend as much money as you need to, if you cannot hear a difference why would I spend more money. I do set a limit on how much I will spend for any given product. That stupid Chevrolet truck of mine is due for replacement it has gone in price from 1/3 of a house and is now worth less than what my stereo is. Been told if I bought a Ford I would not have this problem, now this is someone stretching the truth.

Do not know how much equipment you have bought but I am basically on my second main stereo in thirty years. My friend keep telling me that I am one of the lucky ones, except when it came to buying CD players

Have A Great Day and enjoy the music.

[plextor guy]

I bet it sounds good to the uninitiated though. Shielded toroids (BWAHAHAHA! - good one), integrated vs discreet circiuts, anti resonant transports and so on. All good except none of it necessarily makes a difference. It is after all the human ear that filters everything you hear. To make matters worse, it is the human brain that processes what you hear. Are you saying that your hearing is so acute and your knowldge of what to listen for is so advanced that you could tell the difference between similarly spec'd separates and receiver? Likewise between a ss cdp (insert any brand you wish regardless of cost) and a 300 dollar dvd player? If so you would be the first person on the planet to do so. I do agree speakers make a lot of difference. The most difference along with speaker placement, room accoustics and source material. EVERYTHING else is details. My inability to grasp your definition of high end is not rooted in a lack of understanding. I'm reasonably sure of where you're coming from. Unfortunately it is an unenlightened and dark place. I can only hope that people visiting this site for useful ways to spend their hard earned money on audio product aren't swayed by your lack of enlightenment. You don't yet seem to get that high dollar or elaborate engineering = high-end in modern day parlance. Which isn't to say one shouldn't buy a 'high-end' cdp if you find it esthetically pleasing or otherwise interesting but know what you're buying. Thanks for the shielded toroid reference - good one.

[Sealed]

I bet it sounds good to the uninitiated though. Shielded toroids (BWAHAHAHA! - good one), integrated vs discreet circiuts, anti resonant transports and so on. All good except none of it necessarily makes a difference.
It all does...you are simply digging a deep hole of of ignorance around yourself. You have proven how little you know right there. You should have stopped, now you look REALLY stupid.


It is after all the human ear that filters everything you hear. To make matters worse, it is the human brain that processes what you hear. Are you saying that your hearing is so acute and your knowldge of what to listen for is so advanced that you could tell the difference between similarly spec'd separates and receiver?

There is no such thing. Japanese manufacturers have lied for years from power output to distortion and drive. There is a big difference between a kenwood reciever that claims 100 wpc and a 100 wpc musical fidelity integrated. Tighter tolerances guaruntee it can drive two channels 20hz-20khz in a linear manner without gross levels of negative feedback.

Likewise between a ss cdp (insert any brand you wish regardless of cost) and a 300 dollar dvd player? If so you would be the first person on the planet to do so.
No, you'd be one of the few deaf ignoramus not to.

I do agree speakers make a lot of difference. The most difference along with speaker placement, room accoustics and source material. EVERYTHING else is details.
Garbage in= garbage out. A stereo is only as good as it's weakest link. You are the weakest link, so you are voted off the thread. Goodbye.

My inability to grasp your definition of high end is not rooted in a lack of understanding. I'm reasonably sure of where you're coming from. Unfortunately it is an unenlightened and dark place.
I have infinately more experiance and knowledge than you in every possible aspect of audio and electronics. I'd say that is very enlightened. They concel information about audio in BOOKS. You should read some.

I can only hope that people visiting this site for useful ways to spend their hard earned money on audio product aren't swayed by your lack of enlightenment. You don't yet seem to get that high dollar or elaborate engineering = high-end in modern day parlance. Which isn't to say one shouldn't buy a 'high-end' cdp if you find it esthetically pleasing or otherwise interesting but know what you're buying. Thanks for the shielded toroid reference - good one.

Thanks for being the village idiot. Have you any clue whatsoever that virtually all of the high end, highly reguaded and accurate gear has shielded toroids? Do you have the least F-ing clue what a toroid is? No, you don't. You will have to run and look it up.

God, you are a dolt.

[plextor guy]

Sealed. An airtight enclosure. Impervious to outside influence. Nice - if you're a can of soup. Personally I think you ought to change your moniker to 'Shielded Toroid'. Hysterical. Your explanations are weak, expletive laced, hand wringing but most notably you didn't say if you could distinguish between similarly spec'd solid state components, ie integrated vs separates, niche market cdp's and dvd players and so on. No one - ever - has been able to do so. As far as I know and in a controlled environment. So if you can I bow to your golden ears and humbly beg your pardon. If, as I believe, you are just another audiophool, shame on you. Keep reading your books (Robert Harley perhaps?) and adding to your 'infinite' knowledge. In the mean time I hope I've exposed to the newbs reading this just what it is they're up against.

[Sealed]

Sealed. An airtight enclosure. Impervious to outside influence.
--Retard...it refers to a infinite baffle design, like you, who is infinitely baffled.

Nice - if you're a can of soup. Personally I think you ought to change your moniker to 'Shielded Toroid'. Hysterical.
--You have not a f-ing clue, so it would be hysterical. I am sure you are a point genius when it comes to explaining core saturation, hysterisis, copper loss, ICBO, CEMF and all of the operating parameters of a quality power supply. NOT.

Your explanations are weak, expletive laced, hand wringing but most notably you didn't say if you could distinguish between similarly spec'd solid state components, ie integrated vs separates, niche market cdp's and dvd players and so on.

--I can, and I abbreviated the expletives. Everything you said up to this point is common brainless troll BS. I have been quite concrete, you have been trying in vain not to look like a dumbass. You are tap dancing and wording your way around the fact you are lost in this topic and don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. It doesn't work that way. Your act is transparent, and you are obviously a moron.

No one - ever - has been able to do so.

--according to your non-existent knowledge. Richard Hardesty, Stereophile, AES, and hundreds of other real sources contradict that.

As far as I know and in a controlled environment. So if you can I bow to your golden ears and humbly beg your pardon. If, as I believe, you are just another audiophool, shame on you. Keep reading your books (Robert Harley perhaps?) and adding to your 'infinite' knowledge. In the mean time I hope I've exposed to the newbs reading this just what it is they're up against.

You should be humble,you are too stupid not to be. I have designed and built speakers, modified components, modified speakers, performed alignments and testing that you don't have the ability to comprehend. Newbs are up against retards like you who have no clue. You have strong opinions based on weak knowledge. You have no idea who Vance Dickason, Richard Hardesty, Antony Michealson, Ivor Tefenbaum, or anyone else is for that matter. You need to STFU because you have no knowledge, no facts, and no substantiation of your skewed and dimwitted attitude. You are a mad kid that wasted money on mid-fi junk, can't tell the difference, now wants to proselytize to the whole world that everything sounds the same. That argument is as completely void and vapid as the space between your ears. You could not explain a waterfall plot, Nyquist theory, or interpret FFT results to save your life. You have no idea what I just said just now either. At least when Mtrycrafts argues things like this he has developed his sources to work off. You just pull things out of your ass without any form of fact. You are pathetic. Now go back to your crappy low-fi system and leave us alone.

[musicman1999]

people need to spend less time checking out the spec sheet and listen to the music,after all is it not the most important thing.sometimes you might be suprised.in the past 6 months four disc players have spent time in my system,they range ed in price from 350-950 dollars cdn.they could play dvd-v,dvd-a,sacd,and redbook in various combinations.as redbook was the only thing they did in common it was the best comparison.which was best was subjective,but they were all clearly different.everything in the system was identical and i used the same music to make comparisions.people should try this type of test before jumping to conclusions.

[Tourist On Tilt]

If you cannot afford the upscale models I fully understand, as I have been there myself. Unwilling to pay for the next model up I also understand. If you do not hear any difference there is no need to waste your money. But when you start telling me what I can hear and how much to spend it is a totally different story. Still think that everything costs twice as much as it should and I only make half as much money as I'm worth.


Well said.

[mtrycraft]

"Yes, you may be very careful. Did you check the level differences, to .1dB? At 1kHz? 10kHz?
If not, how do you know one wasn't louder?"

Mtrycraft are telling me you can tell the difference of +/- 0.1 dB. That's a pretty small difference. I would have to agree with those that say louder is not always better.


Sorry for this late post which I just saw :(

No, that is not what I am saying at all. That is the necessary level to match it so there is no chance of detection level difference caused differences.
Test tones can be detected at about .2dB spl difference, or if the difference is over a broad spectrum.

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_crit.htm

You would not use a voltmeter to measure at its threshold, right? It would not be accurate or reliable. You need to use a better meter.

again, I didn't say louder is better, you just detect it better and select that player. Human nature, unless you are an expert, well trained on this. Audiophiles are not.

[DMK]

Are you saying that your hearing is so acute and your knowldge of what to listen for is so advanced that you could tell the difference between similarly spec'd separates and receiver? Likewise between a ss cdp (insert any brand you wish regardless of cost) and a 300 dollar dvd player? If so you would be the first person on the planet to do so. I do agree speakers make a lot of difference. The most difference along with speaker placement, room accoustics and source material. EVERYTHING else is details. .

On the separates and receiver, yes. I'm not sure when Sealed first did so but there were three others with me when I did so perhaps all together we're the first 5 people on the planet to do so. This was done with preamps and the preamp section of a receiver. On power amps, we didn't do so well.

On CDP's the only difference I could hear among similarly spec'd players was by way of the headphone output jack and there may be other explanations for those diffs... the quality of the headphone jack, perhaps. Even so, they were minute differences and not worth the money.

I agree with your speakers, room acoustics and source material comment. But the details in everything else can be important also as a finishing touch.

[Poss]

On the separates and receiver, yes. I'm not sure when Sealed first did so but there were three others with me when I did so perhaps all together we're the first 5 people on the planet to do so. This was done with preamps and the preamp section of a receiver. On power amps, we didn't do so well.

On CDP's the only difference I could hear among similarly spec'd players was by way of the headphone output jack and there may be other explanations for those diffs... the quality of the headphone jack, perhaps. Even so, they were minute differences and not worth the money.

I agree with your speakers, room acoustics and source material comment. But the details in everything else can be important also as a finishing touch.

I own 4 CD players and there's quite a bit of difference between all of them. If you really want to discern it, you need to take room/ speakers out of the equation so all that's needed is a good pair of headphones (even the Grado SR60 s would fit the bill quite nicely) and a nice pre/amp or headphone amp.
Some of the things I found over years:
1. Some CD players will extract more details than others even with carefully matched levels (easy to do with just a basic multi meter).
2. Some CD players will get "congested" or harsh during loud, busy or trebly passages. A good tune to check for this is Pink Floyd's "One of my Turns" on The Wall.
3. Some CD players will cause listening fatigue in as little as 30 minutes at a moderate (or normal) level. Some others will go a little louder even for prolongued listening sessions with no fatigue whatsoever.
4. I tend to dislike bitstream machines mainly because of point # 3.
5. Some CD players tend to have different tonal characters depending on their output stage but tubes aren't neccessarely better than solid state or viceversa. Sometimes you can use some EQ to compensate for this however for headphones use this should not be neccessary.
6. Higher priced CD players aren't neccessarely better. I've auditioned awfull expensive ones and pretty good sounding cheap ones. However there are a few expensive faboulous sounding players that none of the good cheap crowd can't match playback quality wise. As a corrolary I never heard any unit at $300 or under that I liked except for second hand ones and that includes DVD players as well.
7. As aresult of #6, your favourite's audio dealer second hand /trade in shelf is your best friend.

That's all I can think of now...

Peace!

[Geoffcin]

I own 4 CD players and there's quite a bit of difference between all of them. If you really want to discern it, you need to take room/ speakers out of the equation so all that's needed is a good pair of headphones (even the Grado SR60 s would fit the bill quite nicely) and a nice pre/amp or headphone amp.
Some of the things I found over years:
1. Some CD players will extract more details than others even with carefully matched levels (easy to do with just a basic multi meter).
2. Some CD players will get "congested" or harsh during loud, busy or trebly passages. A good tune to check for this is Pink Floyd's "One of my Turns" on The Wall.
3. Some CD players will cause listening fatigue in as little as 30 minutes at a moderate (or normal) level. Some others will go a little louder even for prolongued listening sessions with no fatigue whatsoever.
4. I tend to dislike bitstream machines mainly because of point # 3.
5. Some CD players tend to have different tonal characters depending on their output stage but tubes aren't neccessarely better than solid state or viceversa. Sometimes you can use some EQ to compensate for this however for headphones use this should not be neccessary.
6. Higher priced CD players aren't neccessarely better. I've auditioned awfull expensive ones and pretty good sounding cheap ones. However there are a few expensive faboulous sounding players that none of the good cheap crowd can't match playback quality wise. As a corrolary I never heard any unit at $300 or under that I liked except for second hand ones and that includes DVD players as well.
7. As aresult of #6, your favourite's audio dealer second hand /trade in shelf is your best friend.

That's all I can think of now...

Peace!

One of the major things that seperates good from better CD players is how they handle complex passages. Massed strings are a good test, but also complex layered rock is very hard to decode well. The early CD players were notoriously bad at this, but now even some of the cheaper ones are good, but not great.

Congested is a good word for it. To me it sounds grating , like the waveform is truncated as the player tries to do more than it can. As you've noted, the best player are the best at avoiding this harshness, and to me it is the real big difference between quality CD players, and the rest.

You've really got to spend some time with the player to really get to know them too. I like the fact that you have four players to compare with. To me it makes your observations much more reliable than if you had just heard them in a demo room, where time constraints are a major factor in the comparison. I was lucky in that I got to borrow several CD player at length before I made my decision.

[Poss]

One of the major things that seperates good from better CD players is how they handle complex passages. Massed strings are a good test, but also complex layered rock is very hard to decode well. The early CD players were notoriously bad at this, but now even some of the cheaper ones are good, but not great.

One of the machines I own is a Nak OMS1 made in 1986 picked up used but in pristine condition at Cash Converters for 60 Can$. Most "audiophile" people would scoff at this rather basic unit (hey I used to be just like that once) but its 16bit 8X oversampling filter wipes the floor thorougly quality wise with Marantz CD63SE's bitstream implementation. It's cleaner, with more detail and handles busy passages with more poise than the CD63SE. So if the Marrantz was once a Class C Stereophile component, the Nak is deffinitely a B class by the same yardstick. The reality is different of course. The Marrantz got a lot of good press I'm not quite sure why... It's a nice, bold sounding and quite musical player but loses steam quickly on complex musical passages.

So for the original poster, the best under $1k unit would be a previously loved $2k unit. At least for me it would.

Peace!

[Geoffcin]

One of the machines I own is a Nak OMS1 made in 1986 picked up used but in pristine condition at Cash Converters for 60 Can$. Most "audiophile" people would scoff at this rather basic unit (hey I used to be just like that once) but its 16bit 8X oversampling filter wipes the floor thorougly quality wise with Marantz CD63SE's bitstream implementation. It's cleaner, with more detail and handles busy passages with more poise than the CD63SE. So if the Marrantz was once a Class C Stereophile component, the Nak is deffinitely a B class by the same yardstick. The reality is different of course. The Marrantz got a lot of good press I'm not quite sure why... It's a nice, bold sounding and quite musical player but loses steam quickly on complex musical passages.

So for the original poster, the best under $1k unit would be a previously loved $2k unit. At least for me it would.

Peace!

Just most of the early CD players sounded terrible. The're were a few notable exception, PS Audio Lambda with seperate DAC being one, the McCormack Mod Squad being another of the vintage players that I've heard.

[Ambient fish]

Jeeze, I wish I had read Skeptic and MTRYCRAFT's take on CD players and music reproduction systems and cars before I bought my gear. If I had known that there was absolutly no difference between the cheap Sony plastic brick and the expensive Arcam metalic behemoth, I would have bought the Sony, fortuneately I had never heard of either of these guys and bought the right one, you guys ears must be painted on if you can't hear the difference between these radically different spinners, resolution, detail & dynamics are either there or they are not, no amount of tweaking will make the Sony sound similar to the Arcam.