How much difference does a CD player make?

[Carl Reid]

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???

[PeruvianSkies]

Well, my only thought is that CD's have only sounded better as I gradually upgraded in 3 areas: the source, the speakers, and the amplification. However, it also depends on the CD. Poor quality masterings still sound like crap even when my speakers went from a $100/pair to a $4000 pair.

[Feanor]

Well, my only thought is that CD's have only sounded better as I gradually upgraded in 3 areas: the source, the speakers, and the amplification. However, it also depends on the CD. Poor quality masterings still sound like crap even when my speakers went from a $100/pair to a $4000 pair.

When all is said and done, 90% of high fidelity enjoyment comes the recording itself. Small differences, e.g. between CD players, aren't going to make or break a recording.

[Dusty Chalk]

I fully believe the source is a big deal, though not as big as the "source first" contingent on Head-Fi believe it to be, for example. I've heard a Meridian G08 in a well-tuned system, and no other source (in a system tuned to that source) I've heard comes close to the detail retrieval (out of redbook, mind you) I heard out of that setup. So on a scale of one to ten -- one being a complete skeptic, ten being a complete believer -- put me in the 9.x category.

Oh, and just to set things in perspective: I am in the school of "your system is only as good as your weakest link".

[Feanor]

CD players and DACs make less difference than speakers, amps, or preamps in my experience. But they make more difference than inteconnects and -- typically -- speaker cables, although the latter are sensitive to the amp+speaker combination. Depending on the environment of your system, they can make more or less difference than power conditioning and cables, and/or anti-vibration measures.

[Carl Reid]

CD players and DACs make less difference than speakers, amps, or preamps in my experience. But they make more difference than inteconnects and -- typically -- speaker cables, although the latter are sensitive to the amp+speaker combination. Depending on the environment of your system, they can make more or less difference than power conditioning and cables, and/or anti-vibration measures.

That's actually the conclusion I came to when I first joined this forum... That the order of priority should be Speakers, Amp/Preamp, Source and lastly Cables & Interconnects.

And so far in my experience it seems to hold true... But I'm still interested in testing these theories.... but I lack the desire to spend significant money on say a CD player, if I could have kept that cash or allocated it to a better amp or speakers...

For example, as I mentioned earlier... I'm considering a Marantz PM7001 Integrated with SA8001 CD, driving Revel Concerta F12s...

However, I already have a Panasonic DVD player.... so if I was to use that as the source, I could take the money I would have spent on the 2 Marantz products and buy a Musical Fidelity A3.5 Integrated Amp instead....

[anamorphic96]

Carl why are you considering the PM7001 ? Thats an entry level integrated amp. Did you not keep your Rotel equipment ? The Rotel, Revel and Marantz SA8001 would be a stellar combo. I owned your Rotel combo for a couple of years and it would make those Revel's sing.

[Carl Reid]

Carl why are you considering the PM7001 ? Thats an entry level integrated amp. Did you not keep your Rotel equipment ? The Rotel, Revel and Marantz SA8001 would be a stellar combo. I owned your Rotel combo for a couple of years and it would make those Revel's sing.

Nope... The Rotels had to go... for a whole lot of reasons.... So I'm rebuilding from scratch...

Now as for the Marantz being entry level... it's in the same price class as the Rotel RA-1062 (the integrated amp version of the Rotel amp/preamp combo I owned)...

I've given up on seperates for now... I don't see the benefit unless you need extra power or want to mix and match... e.g. Tube Preamp with solid state Power amp... I found that the 1062 Integrated sounded just as good as my 1070pre/1080power combo, just with a third the power (which is no issue given the size of my listening room and the 90.5db efficiency of the Revels I'm considering)....

So I'm considering either:
1) Marantz PM7001 for $650US + Marantz SA8001 $900US = $1550 US
2) Rotel RA-1062 $700US + Rotel RCD-1072 $700 US = $1400 US
3) Musical Fidelity A3.5 $1650US + my existing DVD player = $1650 US

Other options in the price range I've ruled out are NAD and Cambridge Audio... I have too many concerns about their reliability....

The reason why Musical Fidelity is high on my list despite the cost difference is because my two favourite speakers the Monitor Audio GS20 and the Revel F12 have both sounded amazing on Musical Fidelity gear....

[Dusty Chalk]

3) Musical Fidelity A3.5 $1650US + my existing DVD player = $1650 US

If you can stretch your budget just a little bit more, an external DAC such as the MSB Link DAC III (on the used market) or the Zhalou/Zhaolu (?sp) DAC (new) would improve a DVD player's sound greatly. Maybe not quite up to the level of an excellent stand-alone CD player, but renders the music perfectly listenable.

[Carl Reid]

If you can stretch your budget just a little bit more, an external DAC such as the MSB Link DAC III (on the used market) or the Zhalou/Zhaolu (?sp) DAC (new) would improve a DVD player's sound greatly. Maybe not quite up to the level of an excellent stand-alone CD player, but renders the music perfectly listenable.

Thanks Dusty, I might get the Revels and the Musical Fidelity and eventually go the external DAC route...

Based on the replies, I think It makes the most sense to get the speakers and amp I really like...... and then worry about upgrading my source, by either getting a DAC or a dedicated CD player later...

[Dusty Chalk]

Thanks Dusty, I might get the Revels and the Musical Fidelity and eventually go the external DAC route...

Based on the replies, I think It makes the most sense to get the speakers and amp I really like...... and then worry about upgrading my source, by either getting a DAC or a dedicated CD player later...

Yuppers, makes sense to me.

[BillyB]

Nope... The Rotels had to go... for a whole lot of reasons.... So I'm rebuilding from scratch...

Now as for the Marantz being entry level... it's in the same price class as the Rotel RA-1062 (the integrated amp version of the Rotel amp/preamp combo I owned)...

I've given up on seperates for now... I don't see the benefit unless you need extra power or want to mix and match... e.g. Tube Preamp with solid state Power amp... I found that the 1062 Integrated sounded just as good as my 1070pre/1080power combo, just with a third the power (which is no issue given the size of my listening room and the 90.5db efficiency of the Revels I'm considering)....

So I'm considering either:
1) Marantz PM7001 for $650US + Marantz SA8001 $900US = $1550 US
2) Rotel RA-1062 $700US + Rotel RCD-1072 $700 US = $1400 US
3) Musical Fidelity A3.5 $1650US + my existing DVD player = $1650 US

Other options in the price range I've ruled out are NAD and Cambridge Audio... I have too many concerns about their reliability....

The reason why Musical Fidelity is high on my list despite the cost difference is because my two favourite speakers the Monitor Audio GS20 and the Revel F12 have both sounded amazing on Musical Fidelity gear....

I wouldn't buy the better integrated amp while counting on the DVD player as a competent source.It would be the weak link and compromise your goal unless you can also swing a good CD player in the near future.Unlike many here I don't buy into the opinion that you don't need a very good CD player to achieve great sound.Like Anamorphic I'm a little confused with your amp/pre-amp combo choice because at least in theory separates should sound better not just provide more power.

That being said to your ear the integrated sounds as good and that's all that matters.I'm admittingly partial to Rotel especially at your price point.I think the Rotel 1072 is a very good player and would mate well with the Rotel integrated amp.The Arcam 73T is also a very good unit for the same price as the 1072.Very different sound so you would need to listen to it very thoroughly.Good luck with your choice.

[Carl Reid]

I wouldn't buy the better integrated amp while counting on the DVD player as a competent source.It would be the weak link and compromise your goal unless you can also swing a good CD player in the near future.Unlike many here I don't buy into the opinion that you don't need a very good CD player to achieve great sound.

Though it might seem obvious that you need a good source (CD player) to achieve great sound, there is still a lot of debate over it... I don't doubt that CD players can sound different from one another....But I'm still not convinced that CD players make a huge difference in sound quality....

The way I've generally tried to prioritize buying components is based on which ones make the most obvious contribution to overall sound quality....

I believe (though I could be wrong) that the more debated a product's contribution is, the less likely I will find any major differences by upgrading it...

Speakers - I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that all speakers sound the same & in my own experiences so far, speakers have made the biggest impact on the sound of a system.

Amplification - Generally accepted as making a difference, though not as much as speakers... and I have heard a few people claim that all Solid State sound the same... In my own experience I've found that amplification makes a difference but still substantially less than speakers.

CD Players - Highly debated, with many people claiming that it makes no difference.... When I compared two budget CD players to a DVD player and a Computer sound card, the differences were minimal.... nothing worth the added cost of buying a dedicated budget CD player...

Cables - Debated is too soft a word to describe the wars over cables.... This one is disputed to the point that it seems that one or both sides of the debate must be a bunch of lunatics... From my own experience.... apart from using thicker cable with decent shielding, the differences were not noticeable....

Like Anamorphic I'm a little confused with your amp/pre-amp combo choice because at least in theory separates should sound better not just provide more power.That being said to your ear the integrated sounds as good and that's all that matters.

There is a lot of theory in the audio world, but a lot of it is meaningless in actual listening tests.... Also keep in mind that there is theory to support the use of Integrateds instead of seperates (i.e shorter signal paths etc..)... so two sets of opposing theories could just cancel each other out... lol

I'm admittingly partial to Rotel especially at your price point.I think the Rotel 1072 is a very good player and would mate well with the Rotel integrated amp.The Arcam 73T is also a very good unit for the same price as the 1072.Very different sound so you would need to listen to it very thoroughly.Good luck with your choice.

Thanks for the suggestions.... I know Rotel is a good option.... But I'm tempted to try something different.....

[BillyB]

Though it might seem obvious that you need a good source (CD player) to achieve great sound, there is still a lot of debate over it... I don't doubt that CD players can sound different from one another....But I'm still not convinced that CD players make a huge difference in sound quality....

The way I've generally tried to prioritize buying components is based on which ones make the most obvious contribution to overall sound quality....

I believe (though I could be wrong) that the more debated a product's contribution is, the less likely I will find any major differences by upgrading it...

Speakers - I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that all speakers sound the same & in my own experiences so far, speakers have made the biggest impact on the sound of a system.

Amplification - Generally accepted as making a difference, though not as much as speakers... and I have heard a few people claim that all Solid State sound the same... In my own experience I've found that amplification makes a difference but still substantially less than speakers.

CD Players - Highly debated, with many people claiming that it makes no difference.... When I compared two budget CD players to a DVD player and a Computer sound card, the differences were minimal.... nothing worth the added cost of buying a dedicated budget CD player...

Cables - Debated is too soft a word to describe the wars over cables.... This one is disputed to the point that it seems that one or both sides of the debate must be a bunch of lunatics... From my own experience.... apart from using thicker cable with decent shielding, the differences were not noticeable....




There is a lot of theory in the audio world, but a lot of it is meaningless in actual listening tests.... Also keep in mind that there is theory to support the use of Integrateds instead of seperates (i.e shorter signal paths etc..)... so two sets of opposing theories could just cancel each other out... lol



Thanks for the suggestions.... I know Rotel is a good option.... But I'm tempted to try something different.....

Just wanted to add that by no means do I equate much more expensive to much better sound as if it is a given.At around $700 your really not in the land of diminishing returns at least in my opinion.

To put so much thought and emphasis on good quality speakers,amp/pre-amp or separates, and think the CDP isn't at least just as crucial or at least very important is lost on me.The companies that make higher quality CDP's aren't just stealing our money.They put a lot of R&D into the design of their product.They also put higher quality parts into building their players.Of course they need to be compensated for this.Do these more expensive players perform better to justify their higher cost.I think they usually do but this is not a subject to be agreed on but rather talked about.I don't pretend to be the final word on audio.

I guess to wrap this up before I get into more trouble let me simply say this.If your willing to spend around $2000( I assume that's close to what your existing speakers and your new integrated will cost you) on a good set of speakers and power source, you should also be prepared to need to figure a few coins into the budget for the CDP.I don't think the CDP is the best place to save money.This by no way means your universal player can't sound good, thus allowing you to upgrade the CDP later as the budget allows.

I completely respect your intent to get the very best sound you can without spending money un-necessarily.Enjoy the hunt as that is half the fun.

[Woochifer]

Though it might seem obvious that you need a good source (CD player) to achieve great sound, there is still a lot of debate over it... I don't doubt that CD players can sound different from one another....But I'm still not convinced that CD players make a huge difference in sound quality....

The way I've generally tried to prioritize buying components is based on which ones make the most obvious contribution to overall sound quality....

I believe (though I could be wrong) that the more debated a product's contribution is, the less likely I will find any major differences by upgrading it...

Speakers - I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that all speakers sound the same & in my own experiences so far, speakers have made the biggest impact on the sound of a system.

Amplification - Generally accepted as making a difference, though not as much as speakers... and I have heard a few people claim that all Solid State sound the same... In my own experience I've found that amplification makes a difference but still substantially less than speakers.

CD Players - Highly debated, with many people claiming that it makes no difference.... When I compared two budget CD players to a DVD player and a Computer sound card, the differences were minimal.... nothing worth the added cost of buying a dedicated budget CD player...

Cables - Debated is too soft a word to describe the wars over cables.... This one is disputed to the point that it seems that one or both sides of the debate must be a bunch of lunatics... From my own experience.... apart from using thicker cable with decent shielding, the differences were not noticeable....

In general, I'm very much in agreement with how you've prioritized things. In my experience, CD players can sound noticeably different, but these differences are less significant than the other factors that you've noted. Plus, in more recent years, the sound quality differences between CD players have narrowed considerably. Comparing a first generation Sony CD player that used an analog brickwall filter with no oversampling, with one of Meridian's early reference players (IIRC those cost over $5,000 back in the mid-80s), the difference was more obvious.

Differences between source components were a lot more pronounced back in the analog era, when differences between turntables, cartridges, tonearms, reel-to-reel players, tape decks, etc. were noticeable and measurable. Tweaks such as alignment adjustments and isolation indeed improved sound quality with many analog components. I think a lot of the beliefs about differences between source components and improvements resulting from tweaking with those components got ingrained among audiophiles and carried over to digital components. The difference though is that the measurable differences resulting from tweaking with digital components and those between different digital source components are minimal at best. A lot of these debates originate because of the magnitude of difference attributed by some audiophiles to digital sources or tweaks to those sources. What might have garnered general agreement with analog sources can sound nonsensical when applied to digital sources.

In the absence of huge differences between digital source components (compared to analog sources), speakers truly define the personality of a system, and the importance of amplification really depends on which speakers you choose since low impedance and/or low efficiency speakers put a different load on the amplification.

A factor that I would add to your list is the room acoustics, since the room is actually a part of your system given the degree to which it interacts with sound. The acoustical conditions of a room can create every bit as much variation in the tonal response as speakers can. Measuring and controlling for acoustical issues can make for a far bigger improvement than any single component upgrade (aside from the speakers), and make the purported benefits from cabling, power conditioning, etc. seem laughably trivial by comparison.

[jrhymeammo]

I would never $1000 for a stock SA8001.
This is where I got mine.

http://www.amsound2.com/index.asp?Pa...TS&Category=10

As much as I love my Marantz, I would rather go with MF A3.5. That is one sweet hifi on a budget.

JRA

[Carl Reid]

....As much as I love my Marantz, I would rather go with MF A3.5. That is one sweet hifi on a budget.

Thanx, that's pretty much what my decision was about... I can always pick up a CD player later if I need to....

The MF A3.5 is looking really tempting right now...

[anamorphic96]

In this case then definitely go with the MF. It's a very sweet amp. The Revel's will thank you for it in spades.

[Resident Loser]

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

...so that's what I did! I was wunnerin'...and silly me I thought an alternative POV for more reasonable expenditure was just what the toaster parade needed...

I mean DC gave me a legit response (which I still disagree with BTW) but PS took it as some sort of personal insult with which I felt compelled to respond in a relatively matter-of-fact (well for me at least) manner...but I digress...

To insinuate myself into this thread, I recall some time ago a poster began waxing euphoric over a particular CDP with an astronomical price tag...possibly in excess of $10k...Turns out it used an off-the-shelf, top-load Marantz drive and was housed in a highly poli$hed cha$$i$ and sported a carved billet aluminum face-plate with deep and pronounced engraving...A regular work of industrial art...It's DAC had, as I recall, the ability to provide four distinct tonal outputs...they were not called tone controls (as we all know such things are considered anathema by those of the gilded-pinnae crowd) but by a pseudo-techie name like "environmental compensation" or some such circumlocution...

These things simply strike a certain note with me...and type away I will...

jimHJJ(...jus' keepin' it real, as the kids say...)

[Carl Reid]

...so that's what I did! I was wunnerin'...and silly me I thought an alternative POV for more reasonable expenditure was just what the toaster parade needed...

Toasters? Been watching Battlestar Gallactica again? LOL

To insinuate myself into this thread, I recall some time ago a poster began waxing euphoric over a particular CDP with an astronomical price tag...possibly in excess of $10k...Turns out it used an off-the-shelf, top-load Marantz drive and was housed in a highly poli$hed cha$$i$ and sported a carved billet aluminum face-plate with deep and pronounced engraving...A regular work of industrial art...It's DAC had, as I recall, the ability to provide four distinct tonal outputs...they were not called tone controls (as we all know such things are considered anathema by those of the gilded-pinnae crowd) but by a pseudo-techie name like "environmental compensation" or some such circumlocution...

Now, that's exactly the kind of nonsense I want to avoid doing... dropping a pile of cash on a piece of fancy artwork with an equalizer/tone controls... Might as well just buy a cheap eq or an integrated with tone controls and save myself some cash....

[Mr Peabody]

In my experience there is no doubt that the digital source makes a significant difference. This is a very easy thing to exhibit to yourself and I can't believe so many of you are still in denial.

Carl, www.amusicdirect.com carries a wide variety of CD players and DAC's with a 30 day return policy. If you have a hi fi shop worth it's salt in your area, you should have no problem arranging a home audition of something they carry. Why speculate and listen to those who do the same when you can easily see for your self? If you don't want to spend a fortune, try an entry level Arcam, or an Alpha 9 off the used market.

I hope not to offend anyone. I have a difficult time believeing that some of you can't hear diferences in CD players. When I bought a cdp for my daughter I compared an entry level Denon, Onkyo and Yamaha, there was not much sonic difference between the Denon and Onkyo but the Yamaha sounded quite different from them both. So if you only compared the Denon and Onkyo, I could see how maybe some one might think there's not much difference but with further experience you are bound to run across differences. I don't want to list every single experience I've had but I have had more than enough to know there is a difference in players.

I agree with the weakest link statement, there should be a balance to the level of your gear. However. you need to get the best signal and sound you can from your disc first. Speakers may change the sound but they can't give you anymore detail off the disc than what the CD player sends. My goal each time I add a new piece is to improve my sound, not just to change the sound.

[PeruvianSkies]

This weekend I will be testing the following players that I have, since I am getting a new DVD/CD/SACD player...the Parasound D3. I am going to make it a point to compare it against the following:

Denon 2910 DVD/CD/SACD
Sony DVP-NC80VB DVD/CD/SACD
Samsung HD941 DVD/CD/SACD
Denon DCM-280 CD
Philips DVD-642 DVD/CD/SACD

I am testing all of these units for their CD capabilities only just for the fun of it. These are all players that I have laying around to check out and there is a variety here of CD and DVD players so it will be interesting to see how they all handle CD's. I am expecting the Parasound to blow the competition away, but it'll be interesting how the rest compare. I am also going to be comparing them with analog connection and digital. I will be keeping all the same cables in the mix so that there are not unfair circumstances.

After doing this test I'll probably check all of their SACD skills too.

[Feanor]

In my experience there is no doubt that the digital source makes a significant difference. This is a very easy thing to exhibit to yourself and I can't believe so many of you are still in denial.
...
I hope not to offend anyone. I have a difficult time believeing that some of you can't hear diferences in CD players. ..... I don't want to list every single experience I've had but I have had more than enough to know there is a difference in players.

I agree with the weakest link statement, there should be a balance to the level of your gear. However. you need to get the best signal and sound you can from your disc first. Speakers may change the sound but they can't give you anymore detail off the disc than what the CD player sends. My goal each time I add a new piece is to improve my sound, not just to change the sound.

You come close to repeating the the Golden Ears' credo: "Every component sounds different; every difference is significant. If you can't hear a difference your system or your ears are inferior. If you don't care, you aren't really an audiophile." That layers fallacy upon fallacy.

I don't deny that I've heard, (or thought I've heard), differences among CD players and DACs. I haven't had the priviledge of hearing $2000+ players in my system, but the differences between the units I've heard have been small -- dare I say -- insignificant in most cases.

The "weakest link" approach is the best from a budgeting perspective. Does that mean you'll always trade up your speakers while ignoring everything else? Of course not, because there will be a point where a significant speaker improvement, (as opposed to mere difference), will cost more than a significant amplifier improvement for example.

[E-Stat]

In my experience there is no doubt that the digital source makes a significant difference.

That has been my experience as well. I have five CD/DVD players not counting two CD Walkmen. A GamuT CD-1 exhibits better mid range focus and has a smoother more natural top end than the decidedly less refined response of the Toshiba 3960. Is the former worth 30 times that of the latter? That's a value judgment. Sure worth it to me in the main system!

rw

[PeruvianSkies]

That has been my experience as well. I have five CD/DVD players not counting two CD Walkmen. A GamuT CD-1 exhibits better mid range focus and has a smoother more natural top end than the decidedly less refined response of the Toshiba 3960. Is the former worth 30 times that of the latter? That's a value judgment. Sure worth it to me in the main system!

rw

This is a right-on-the-money statement (no pun intended). If more people would realize this there would be less debate when it comes to upgrading, differences in cables, differences in this amp or that amp, etc etc. I have come to realize that the incremental level of distinction as you get better equipment is that it becomes less and less, yet in order to achieve the upper level you need to make that decision for yourself. Is that little bit of extra refinement A. noticeable to you and B. worth the investment. I say YES to both of those as I am in search of my personal Holy Grail of audio. I am not just able to "SLAM" and have it. I must work up to it, but that is what's fun to me. I enjoy getting a little bit smarter and wiser along the path and quite frankly I think that makes me appreciate it more. If somewhere were to just drop a 1 Million Dollar Grand Enigma Reference system at my doorstep I would certainly LOVE IT, but it's not the same as the quest for it. The saving, the toying around, the fine tuning, and the development of a 'ear' for musicality and taste.