Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 81
  1. #51
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    As is typical with most high end audiophile equipment, the web site you referred to gives partial truths which are intended to lead you to the wrong conclusion without telling you and outright lie. They play on the fears and fantasies of non technical prospective customers to convince them that they have the best solution to a problem which frankly doesn't exist.

    How do they do it? How is it possible that your $70 cd player has exactly the same degree of digital jitter as a $2000 high end model which is to say inaudible? How does your $3 flea market wristwatch keep time just as accurately as a $10,000 Rolex? The answer is simple. The jitter is eliminated in the digital circuit. It has to be or the system wouldn't work at all. Here's how its done. ALL mechanical rotating systems no matter how expensive have some degree of speed variation or jitter. Many schemes are used to minimize it from servo mechanisms to using the enormous rotational inertia of a massive carefully balanced platter on a precision journal bearing. But cd transport mechanisms usually don't go to such extremes. The one in your computer hard drive and cd drive only costs a few cents to make and doesn't have any problems. How can that be? The answer is called reclocking. The jittered pulses from the cd after being converted to electrical pulses are fed into buffer registers. One register fills while a parallel register empties. The time available to fill each memory element in the registers is greater than the pulse's width. They must enter within that time span or the system breaks down. That's the accuracy required for the cd transport. When they leave the register they leave at time intervals determined by a quartz oscillator which is far more stable and accurate than any mechanical device could ever be. The warbling of the quartz oscillator is the degree of digital jitter you actually get from the output. That is to say orders of magnitude below the audibility threshold. What happened along the way is unimportant. This is another case of people naively believing that optimizing every last element of equipment inevitably results in overall superior results. It just isn't so. It's not a matter of diminishing returns. It's a matter of no returns. Too bad you practically have to be an engineer to understand when you are being given a snow job these days. Even many of the people who sell it and make it believe in it.

  2. #52
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    123
    Someone else is going to have to argue on Jitter - I have only got the jist of it and am in no position to argue one way or another. I do seem to remember some article on why jitter was important in audio playback and not in data and think it was something to do with the design of CD audio that doesnt allow for buffering of the signal - the rate the data comes off the disk determining the speed - or something.

    As I said - just not my area - I was just expecting someone to chime in with Jitter correction as a reason behind CD player price differences.

    as you say: "Too bad you practically have to be an engineer to understand when you are being given a snow job these days"

    I am no engineer - so it is very difficult to sort out the wheat from the chaff and all of this is very much of academic interest to me....

  3. #53
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by maxg

    as you say: "Too bad you practically have to be an engineer to understand when you are being given a snow job these days"

    I am no engineer - so it is very difficult to sort out the wheat from the chaff and all of this is very much of academic interest to me....
    Audio doesn't have the marketplace cornered on this Most anything in consumer marketplace is like this.
    Marketeers had centrury and more to advance their skills to hook gullible customers
    mtrycrafts

  4. #54
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    you have to be FREAKING DEAF!! go listen. some things dont require hirsch-houck labs to verify. this is one of them.

    instead of posting here, you should be rereading you consumer reports back issues. that will reinforce your 'BELIEFS'. then you and emptycrafts can sit and nod in agreement at each other.

    Hit a nerve, did I? What about YOUR beliefs? As has been pointed out many times to many others: what I listended today, tomorrow, or yesterday cannot establish fact - other than I listened. You believe you've heard differences, wonderful. No doubt you did. Can you factually back it up though?

    -Bruce

  5. #55
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    my observations

    thats what they are, you dont know whether to believe me or not because you dont know me.

    no nerves hit. its obvious that CR is where most mrtyites get their info.

    factually? actually listen for yourselves. you may be surprised.
    ...regards...tr

  6. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    thats what they are, you dont know whether to believe me or not because you dont know me.

    no nerves hit. its obvious that CR is where most mrtyites get their info.

    factually? actually listen for yourselves. you may be surprised.
    You under estimate CR. Your loss.
    What is there to believe. Better to know. The evidence does not support your beliefs.
    mtrycrafts

  7. #57
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    for refrigerators

    CR is great. same for stoves and toasters. for audio and automobiles, not so. SOME of that data is useful but for the qualitative differences, they lack experience and interest.

    for the average consumer, they are fine, for the enthusiast, they are laughable. i would sooner be at a loss for those laughs. my loss.
    ...regards...tr

  8. #58
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    CR is great. same for stoves and toasters. for audio and automobiles, not so. SOME of that data is useful but for the qualitative differences, they lack experience and interest.

    for the average consumer, they are fine, for the enthusiast, they are laughable. i would sooner be at a loss for those laughs. my loss.
    You're not alone with those sentiments. I agreed with woodman's similar comments here.

    CR thoughts


    rw

  9. #59
    Can a crooner get a gig? dean_martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Lower AL
    Posts
    2,838

    Is this a DBT?

    I was looking for a new cdp a couple of years ago. Although biased in favor of a single disc player because of supposed superiority, I was looking for a changer for its convenience. I went to a shop that had 2 on display both of which were driven by the same Marantz a/v receiver and played through Klipsch speakers. One was a Parasound 5 disc changer for $650 and the other a Marantz 5 disc changer for $299. The switch box was behind the listening chair and controlled by the salesman. It didn't take long to determine that one of the players definitely played deeper bass. The other player, by comparison, sounded like the compressed crap I've heard on most fm radio stations though not quite as exaggerated. The player with the deeper or more extended bass also was more extended in the higher frequencies. It was more natural and open on top. After identifying and articulating these differences, I then watched as the salesman did the switching and discovered that the Parasound had the more extended bass and treble.

    This was a couple of years ago and at the time I just didn't think to ask "Why?" It didn't seem important because the differences were obvious to me. After hearing these differences, there's no way I was going to buy the Marantz. I didn't buy the Parasound either because it was over my budget, but I decided to keep what I had rather than buy the Marantz. I did conclude, however, that the Parasound would have been worth at least 2x as much to me compared to the Marantz. On the other hand, if it takes $2k to beat the $650 Parasound...

  10. #60
    Magnepan HT User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Posts
    67

    Agree with you TR

    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    MY experience amounts to plenty as does that of many others here and elsewhere. scientific facts are many times established by observation. my experience is that of observation and i observe that CDPs sound different from one another.

    The reasons for that are multitude, just look inside several CDPs and see how differently they are laid out and the different levels of quality of parts and construction there are. Now and again, an inexpensive player will sound exemplary such as my sony ns500v.

    the $2k players are made quite well, and will very likely sound better than the veritable $80 RCA so loved by some on this board. personally, if i were planning a $2k expenditure on a player it would be for vinyl. in the meantime, what i have will do.

    http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/588.html
    Tr,
    I am currently borrowing a friend's Sony SCD-777ES SACD player to try out for a few weeks. Here is my experience based on both myself and spouse comparing this $2500 player to our Sony CDP-CX240 cd changer, Panasonic RP-56 DVD player and Pro-Ject 1.2 turntable with stock Sumiko Oyster cartridge. We made sure to change the inputs for each other and not letting the other know what is playing, listening with eyes closed. Both of us were able to discern that the Sony cd changer had the most digitized sound and was the least involving. Next, both the Panasonic and Sony SACD were difficult to reliability discern. This provided the Sony SACD player was in CD mode. If the Sony was in SACD mode, then the sound was again easy to discern vs. a CD being played in the Panasonic or Sony CD240 changer. Now the fun begins, once the turntable was playing, surprisingly
    both of us agreed that the turntable sounded more involving with a better capture of true-to-life rendition of sound. I guess we both liked analog the best. As you know, I recently purchased this turntable and got back into vinyl after a 15 year hiatus. I agree with you, if I had $2K to spend, it would be more vinyl. And after finding a local record shop that sells vinyl for 25 cents each, it's a bargain as well. Will let you know the outcome on the Analog Forum once my new turntable mat arrives. Can't wait as you know the stock felt mat is constantly holding a static charge. To summarize the findings in order of liking, 1. Pro-Ject turntable, 2. Sony SCD-777ES in SACD mode, Tied: Sony SCD-777ES in CD mode and Panasonic RP-56, 4. Sony CDP-CX240 cd megachanger. We both noticed that the Sony SCD-777ES played with more bass authority, forward sound stage with more openess to voice and instruments than the cd megachanger. We also ensured all SPLs we matched so as to not be lead by a louder presentation. Not sure if it would be worth spending over $2K on a CD player these days but I would definitely spend some money on a new Universal Player for both SACD and DVD-A discs. Take care.

  11. #61
    Can a crooner get a gig? dean_martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Lower AL
    Posts
    2,838
    slbenz - congrats on your purchase of a new turntable. I also have the Pro-ject 1.2. It's a nifty little table with what I think is a very good tonearm for its price. My initial impressions when I bought it a couple of years ago was that it didn't sound as warm and involving as the Dual it replaced. I don't know whether I gave the Oyster time to break in (or whether it even needed a break-in period), but I immediately set out to replace it. I found a NOS Parasound cart for cheap and it balanced out the sound adding more weight and bass. Next, I stumbled across the none-felt mat that is supposed to prevent static and enhance performance. Again, this item was relatively cheap - $23. I found that the mat tightened up images. This was most notable with acoustic bass lines on jazz tracks. With the felt mat the bass notes ran into one another. With the none-felt the individual bass notes are more discernable - they actually start and stop instead of running into each other. The difference isn't night and day, but it is there.

    My only recommended change for the table is cosmetic. I think it would look more substantial if the dust cover was a smokey charcoal gray. IMO, you just can't beat classic rock (the Stones) and jazz on vinyl. I have a couple of jazz titles on both cd and vinyl. Some sax passages on cd can drive me out of the room. The same passages on vinyl are just smooth. Enjoy! - Tim

  12. #62
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    woW!

    all this response, and and i was just going to tell mtry that the new catalog with the kings new clothes arrived. that is the new absolute sound (tas). it is really fun deluding myself that there are better CDPs than the $80 rca.

    all the usual goons there, hp, RH, REG (you know, the ucla math professor). that and the acoulstic sounds catalog thats onyl half as thick as tas.

    as for where my next hifi dollars are going, i am getting tempted towards an ortofon cartridge in the Kontrapunkt series. i have been privy to the jubilee and Kb which my friend bought after hearing my mc200. and last night i switched from a krell mc to the mc200 and the music quality went up about 4 or 5 notches.

    orchestral bass drum went from a convincing and satisfying booommmm to a more convincing and satisfying conveyance of the drum head vibrating. instruments became more individually unique and the experience convinced me that the orto would remain in the system for a long while and my budget would be investigated.

    this all occurred while listening on the:http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/588.html system
    using the pioneer tt because of the interchangeable headshell. and oh yeah, i switched from the arc pr to my soundcraftsmen 2215 pre/eq (eq not used) and this runs through the b+k surround processor (transparent as hell and only used for its switching ability, surround visa dynaquad). music-leroy andersons fiddle faddle by maurice abravanel on vanguard. this is a reference disc. i paid $2 at arons in hollywood for it.

    just to shoot the shirt out of the contention that the bean counters are getting rich on me (holy shirt!), i play my CDs on a sony ns500v that i paid $169 delivered on the recommendation of tas (the unit, not the price, i was of the belief that i would have to pay $300 and would have willingly after reading their review) and am enjoying sacd and perhaps more importantly, my rbcds more than ever on it (go figure).

    well, gee, this was fun, now to the tas. c u later.
    ...regards...tr

  13. #63
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by maxg
    Someone else is going to have to argue on Jitter - I have only got the jist of it and am in no position to argue one way or another. I do seem to remember some article on why jitter was important in audio playback and not in data and think it was something to do with the design of CD audio that doesnt allow for buffering of the signal - the rate the data comes off the disk determining the speed - or something.

    As I said - just not my area - I was just expecting someone to chime in with Jitter correction as a reason behind CD player price differences.

    as you say: "Too bad you practically have to be an engineer to understand when you are being given a snow job these days"

    I am no engineer - so it is very difficult to sort out the wheat from the chaff and all of this is very much of academic interest to me....
    '

    There are some notable engineers that may wish to disagree - not all scientists nor engineers agree which is why one gets a second opinion - and believe it or not the majority rules approach does not make it right.

    Check out some articles by Martin Colloms on many of these issues - he is one of the world's formost experts in the field with some impressive educational credentials for a viewpoint no doubt which is different from Skeptic's view. http://www.colloms.com/

  14. #64
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    I couldn't seem to get to his article on jitter in cd players but I read the article he wrote for Stereophile Magazine on negative feedback.
    http://www.stereophile.com//reference/70/index.html
    At first he seems like an intelligent well trained engineer. He wrote;

    "By and large, negative feedback works. It has made a vast variety of audio products possible and manufacturable. It is hard to conceive of the world of audio engineering without Harold Black's negative feedback."

    But then he goes off the deep end into what is mostly religion and very little science. He jumps to conclusions, makes unjustifiable assumptions, and seems to come up with a parade of off the wall ideas. All of his arguements are based on subjective reactions and are voiced in purely subjective terms. He basically rejects the notion that you can measure what you hear and jumps right off the cliff of rationality with the usual high end claptrap that the golden eared audiophile knows whats best and nobody will ever be able to measure why. Small wonder he writes for consumer publications specifically designed to cater to this point of view. He could be one of their gurus. Sorry, I'm not jumping off that cliff with him. IMO, this guy is a wacko with a loose screw in his head.

    As for negative feedback, as I have said before, a very difficult concept to impliment correctly but if all you ever listen to are those which don't you could easily jump to the wrong conclusion just as you would if all you heard were pianos out of tune and decided that all pianos are unmusical.

  15. #65
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    123
    We leap in this forum from one topic I dont understand to another with abandon these days. Negative feedback is yet another (in a growing list). I have seen both sides wax lyrical on this one (as to whether it is a good thing or not) and the only conclusion I have come to so far is that in PP pentode tube amps (like mine - well ultra-linear but lets not split hairs) it is generally good whilst in low power SET amps it is generally bad - according to the prevailing weight of opinion anyway.

    There are, it seems, as ever, exceptions to even this generalization.

    Yet another example of why I do all my judging by ear. Yes I may be fooled by the sound, but I am even easier to fool with flawed science.

  16. #66
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    "Yes I may be fooled by the sound, but I am even easier to fool with flawed science."

    How unfortunate and expensive for you. Sadly, that is the case for most audiophiles without any technical understanding behind their purchase of very technical equipment. Your bank account is fertile ground ripe for the pickin'. And boy can they ever pick.

  17. #67
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    123

    As you look down from those lofty heights of yours...

    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    "Yes I may be fooled by the sound, but I am even easier to fool with flawed science."

    How unfortunate and expensive for you. Sadly, that is the case for most audiophiles without any technical understanding behind their purchase of very technical equipment. Your bank account is fertile ground ripe for the pickin'. And boy can they ever pick.
    Just consider the following:

    1. You have no idea how good, or otherwise, my system sounds (especially to me).
    2. You have no idea how much I spent on it to get there.

    It is not beyond the bounds of reason for me to have spent less than even you have - and have ended up with better sound as a result.

    Unless we have both experienced the other's system, and maybe even reached agreement, it might be better to try to look me in the eye rather than at my bald pach.

  18. #68
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    "I have come to so far is that in PP pentode tube amps (like mine - well ultra-linear but lets not split hairs) it is generally good whilst in low power SET amps it is generally bad - according to the prevailing weight of opinion anyway."

    Every technology on the market has its proponents including the SET low power triode amplifiers. As for the cost of beam power pentode amplifiers, they were once the mainstay of the high end of the industry and relatively inexpensive to build. Had vacuum tube technology not become extinct and then re-emerged as a niche market, they would still be very inexpensive. Old Dynaco Mark III s can still perform very well and many new ideas have been applied to improve on their fine performance for their day. Some are in the form of tweaks such as replacement of capacitors and upgrades to better power supplies, some come in the form of remanufacture such as those offered by the apparantly now defunct Sound Valves of Ohio, and some are knockoffs pretending to be someting altogether new. But unless you bought them a long time ago originally yourself, most of today's recently manufactured vacuum tube amplifiers are in the category of expensive because the parts necessary to build them such as multisection high voltage electrolytic capacitors for the power supply stages, high voltage transformers for powers supplies to bias vacuum tubes, and output transformers are expensive themselves because of limited production for the niche market. There may be exceptions such as those manufactured in China, or you might have gotten one used or in some special "deal." So you are right, I don't know what you paid, what you got, or how your system sounds. BTW, practically all of the most successful vacuum tube amplifiers built during the heyday of that technology used negative feedback extensively. At that time most amplifier designers were actually electrical engineers, not tinkerers.

  19. #69
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    Ah, your usual dodge from my question. Let's try again. What do you do with your audio equipment if not to hear it? Watch the LCD display ? Just like to push buttons?

    rw
    You can't seem to get it through your head that what I listen to does not establish any fact regarding the topic of this thread. Or any other thread on audibility of X, Y, or Z......

    -Bruce

  20. #70
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by FLZapped
    You can't seem to get it through your head that what I listen to does not establish any fact regarding the topic of this thread. Or any other thread on audibility of X, Y, or Z......
    I guess you have forgotten your original question.

    Heard how?

    What kind of an answer did you expect? I heard a spec sheet?

    rw

  21. #71
    nightflier
    Guest

    Another take on selecting a decent player

    [QUOTE=gypsyhick]...I can't buy one. I'm just curious and don't - at the moment - have time to listen to these expensive CD player... [QUOTE]

    I also didn't have the money for an expensive player, so I went and compared the less expensive ones: Sony, Philips, Samsung, Onkyo, a couple of units I borrowed from friends (including an Ah!NjoeTjoeb!), and a few other usual suspects. We also didn't have expensive testing equipment either (my trusty RadioShack dB meter, was about it). So here are some of the non-scientific steps I took:

    - I'm a big believer in the idea that bigger/heavier is better, so I weighed each player I tested.
    - I also don't care for lots of plastic parts, wobbly gears, and rubber doohickies, so that was a factor, too.
    - I've always believed that mechanical devices will fail some day, so the way in which the disk tray openened and closed, the feel of the buttons and the quality of the remote were factors too.
    - When possible, I opened each unit and took a peak inside. Checked out the size of the capacitors, whether any patch jobs were performed on the circuit boards, and considered the layout.
    - I also played CD's with the volume muted to see how much noise the player made on it's own.
    - And then I played some of my favorite CD's and did the usual tests, including DB....

    In the end, Sony, Samsung, and Panasonic were out and I bought a second-hand CD player from Cambridge Audio. I don't recommend doing this, but I bought this from a friend who I could trust. That said, Cambridge Audio definitely makes some excellent & affordable audio equipment (I now also have an Azur 540A), albeit not the least expensive choice. In short, I put a lot of stock in the construction of the player, something people often overlook in favor of blue LED's, flashy names, chrone finish, unrealistic specs, etc.

    P.S. I also use the inexpensive / common-sense tweaks that people have suggested online that have made a noticeable difference: cleaning the interconnects and tightening the grip on the cables, weighing down the player a bit to stabilize it, keeping things clean, and using a good power source. None of these raised the cost, but I would guess the player compares to a much more expensive model, now.

  22. #72
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by dean_martin
    I was looking for a new cdp a couple of years ago. Although biased in favor of a single disc player because of supposed superiority, I was looking for a changer for its convenience. I went to a shop that had 2 on display both of which were driven by the same Marantz a/v receiver and played through Klipsch speakers. One was a Parasound 5 disc changer for $650 and the other a Marantz 5 disc changer for $299. The switch box was behind the listening chair and controlled by the salesman. It didn't take long to determine that one of the players definitely played deeper bass. The other player, by comparison, sounded like the compressed crap I've heard on most fm radio stations though not quite as exaggerated. The player with the deeper or more extended bass also was more extended in the higher frequencies. It was more natural and open on top. After identifying and articulating these differences, I then watched as the salesman did the switching and discovered that the Parasound had the more extended bass and treble.

    This was a couple of years ago and at the time I just didn't think to ask "Why?" It didn't seem important because the differences were obvious to me. After hearing these differences, there's no way I was going to buy the Marantz. I didn't buy the Parasound either because it was over my budget, but I decided to keep what I had rather than buy the Marantz. I did conclude, however, that the Parasound would have been worth at least 2x as much to me compared to the Marantz. On the other hand, if it takes $2k to beat the $650 Parasound...
    Well, it is difficult to say how good that setup was. After all, the salesman has an interest in selling higher priced gear.
    At the minimum, a test disc should have been used to make sure they were both outputting the same level as that is the first you will notice but causing not a volume recognition but other differences.

    Also, you have no idea how it was set up, which CD was routed which way. Any cheating?
    No, those two should sound the same if set up correctly.
    mtrycrafts

  23. #73
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    23

    Tipical errors and misunderstanding

    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    As is typical with most high end audiophile equipment, the web site you referred to gives partial truths which are intended to lead you to the wrong conclusion without telling you and outright lie. They play on the fears and fantasies of non technical prospective customers to convince them that they have the best solution to a problem which frankly doesn't exist.
    Sorry... I snipped all the rest. It is true but it shows you don't really understand this jitter thing one bit (pun intended). What you're talking about is "interface" jitter. Its level has to be indeed quite high to affect sound quality. Actually its effect is usually the DAC losing the lock on the signal so the effect is quite audible (a blank, pause or similar).

    D/A conversion also suffers from "conversion" jitter which is a totally different animal altogether. If the D/A's clock wanders (and it does) the resulting reconstructed sinewave (your analogue signal or more exactly what will become your analogue signal after dithering) will stray from the original sampled one. Not good. Also not really measurable in conventional "distorsion" terms (or better said in the manufacturer's supplied specs) but measurable in absolute distorsion.

    Conversion jitter is a big problem and it is measurable too. I did go once in this board over the entire process and its intricacies (maybe 3 years back)... I don't feel like doing it again, it takes time that I don't really have. Sorry.

    Regards.

    And Peace!
    Last edited by Poss; 05-30-2004 at 09:31 AM.

  24. #74
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    240

    No sound difference, but

    Some interesting facts:

    If you line up all the bumps and flat spaces on a cd they would be 3.5 miles long.

    The cd player must gradualy decrease the rotaional velocity as the laser moves from the inside to the outside.

    CD players have error correction circuits built in, so when a misread occurs some fuzz could come out during playback.

    Because the laser may misread a bump, there need to be error-correcting codes to handle single-bit errors. To solve this problem, extra data bits are added that allow the drive to detect single-bit errors and correct them.

    This information can all be found on

    howstuffworks.com

    I have a $400 Cambridge Audio cdp. I once compared the sound of my 10 year old portable toshiba cd player to that of my $400 cd player using headphones. I listened to a short portion of Dark Side of the Moon. I could hear no difference between the two. One shocking difference was that my $400 cdp played cd's that other players wouldn't play because of scratches. So I think spending a LITTLE extra money might be beneficial in some cases. I wouldn't expect a noticable increase in sound quality as price increase though. If I knew then what I know now I would have saved up a little more money and bought a DVD-audio/SACD/cd player. As for the best $2000 cd player, go out and by a $100 DVD player and send the extra $1900 to Africa to feed starving children. You will sleep better at night.

  25. #75
    DMK
    DMK is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by Beckman
    Some interesting facts:

    If you line up all the bumps and flat spaces on a cd they would be 3.5 miles long.

    The cd player must gradualy decrease the rotaional velocity as the laser moves from the inside to the outside.

    CD players have error correction circuits built in, so when a misread occurs some fuzz could come out during playback.

    Because the laser may misread a bump, there need to be error-correcting codes to handle single-bit errors. To solve this problem, extra data bits are added that allow the drive to detect single-bit errors and correct them.

    This information can all be found on

    howstuffworks.com

    I have a $400 Cambridge Audio cdp. I once compared the sound of my 10 year old portable toshiba cd player to that of my $400 cd player using headphones. I listened to a short portion of Dark Side of the Moon. I could hear no difference between the two. One shocking difference was that my $400 cdp played cd's that other players wouldn't play because of scratches. So I think spending a LITTLE extra money might be beneficial in some cases. I wouldn't expect a noticable increase in sound quality as price increase though. If I knew then what I know now I would have saved up a little more money and bought a DVD-audio/SACD/cd player. As for the best $2000 cd player, go out and by a $100 DVD player and send the extra $1900 to Africa to feed starving children. You will sleep better at night.
    The whole concept of sonic differences in CDP's bothers me. The reason is that many years ago I went through the blind testing routine - and sold my Theta separates, bought a cheap CDP and spent the diff on vinyl!

    However, since that time (with some baiting) I did some minor testing through the headphone jacks of two players I had on hand, the Sony XA20-ES (my current reference) and a Pioneer PDR-509 recorder. Through the headphone jacks, there were sonic differences. Could be the jacks, I suppose. The Sony is one I like because it navigates any CD and that is the biggest sonic difference I've heard! Most players I've experienced go nuts trying to play a lot of my CD's but the Sony sails through.

    Further, I've recently heard some digital gear that sounds quite different, notably the Audio Note Dac 2.1 with no digital filters or oversampling. This piece sounds not only different than the Sony, but better. My guess is that is measures like a piece of dog turd as a result. But the difference thing bothers me because while the transport either reads a CD or doesn't, the analog section of the DAC should reveal differences between players, in my mind. On sighted listening, some do, some don't. I don't care to try blind testing again, however.

    Did you us the headphone jack on your players or a headphone jack on your preamp?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Best CD player under $1000?
    By Arch in forum Digital Domain & Computer Audio
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 04:05 PM
  2. Ah! Njoe Tjoeb CD Player
    By NJ_Richard in forum General Audio
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-19-2004, 06:16 AM
  3. Looking for new CD player...
    By Invader3k in forum Digital Domain & Computer Audio
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-21-2003, 05:33 PM
  4. Xbox vs. PS2 as a dvd player and game system
    By IRG in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-10-2003, 11:02 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •