Yep, it's time to rekindle that age old debate:

How much difference does a CD Player make?

I was reminded of this question, when I saw Resident Loser stiring up trouble in the $1k CD thread...

So my question is:

Based on your own listening experiences, how big a difference have you found between using different digital sources.... i.e.... computer sound cards, DVD players, cheap CD players, expensive CD players etc?

I notice a lot of people swear that the whole audio world revolves around having the most expensive CD player in their setup, while others will tell you that there is absolutely no difference between one digital player and the next... all 1s and 0s... I think I'm somewhere in between at the moment... I think there's a difference... I'm just torn on whether it's a big enough difference to justify the extra outlay of cash....

My Experience so far

I haven't been able to hear a huge difference between dedicated entry level CD players (NAD and Marantz), ultra cheap DVD players and the sound card of a Mac Mini... Though I did hear differences and my favourite was undoubtedly the Marantz CD5001 (which was actually cheaper then the NAD it replaced)....

I have heard great sounding setups driven by expensive CD players and ones drvien by cheapo DVD players... So I know it's possible to have a thoroughly enjoyable setup without an expensive CD player.

Unfortunately, I've yet to do a direct A/B comparision between say a $1K CD player and my $75 DVD player.... I'm dying to do one of those...

P.S. I'm in the slooooow process of rebuilding my stereo setup - so far I'm considering Revel F12 Floorstanders with a Marantz PM7001 Integrated Amp and MAYBE a Marantz SA8001 CD Player.... So that's part of why I'd love to get some feedback, before I drop nearly $1K on the Marantz.... I mean, why drop $1K if I can get virtually the same sound with a $300 Marantz CD5001 or even my Panasonic DVD player???