What makes one CD player perform better then the other?

[E-Stat]

And your experience amounts to what? How does it establish scientific fact or validate claims made?

I'm not a labcoat and couldn't care less what is statistically proven. Nor does anyone else who buys any number of expensive consumer goods that defy simplistic measurements. Do you remember our conversation about tires? Remember your thinking that the UTQG rating actually meant something? Do the engineers at Ferrari and Honda (or for that matter, their customeres) really care that the Bridgestone S-02 tires they specify on their products "rate" no better than ones costing a fourth as much?

Or do you think that having a piano in your living room qualifies?

That is merely a piece of the puzzle. One does develop a musical memory of how live unamplified music should sound. My garage Advent-Threshold-Pioneer system never sounds like my wife playing the piano. The downstairs system, on the other hand, does to these ears. What does qualify is extended exposure to a wide range of high performance components. I have experienced what is possible. And my new $70 Toshiba 3960 is not even in the same ballpark as my GamuT. If you limit your driving experience to a Saturn, you will have absolutely no perspective as to what high performance cars can do. Pick up a Car & Driver sometime and read one of their full reviews. You will find some simplistic and largely useless performance metrics. Which are wholely inadequate by themselves. Far more importantly, you will read "opinions" on how the vehicle feels under various conditions. They do not share your insecurity in the ability to characterize the driving characteristics of that which they test.

rw

[FLZapped]

I'm not a labcoat and couldn't care less what is statistically proven.

Yet you make claims of superior sound that cannot be verified, so what good are they, then?

Nor does anyone else who buys any number of expensive consumer goods that defy simplistic measurements.

How do you know? You just got done saying you don't care. And if they don't, how can you explain the sucess of Consumer Reports?

You make so many claims and that's the problem, until validated are useless to be used to establish fact. Yet, like Jon Risch, you keep making them, thinking that they will suddenly become truesimply because they are repeated over and over again.

-Bruce.

[E-Stat]

Yet you make claims of superior sound that cannot be verified, so what good are they, then?

There are a number of people in the world who use other's educated opinions as a starting point for narrowing down their choices for devices that defy quantification by simplistic metrics.

And if they don't, how can you explain the sucess of Consumer Reports?

The same way you explain the success of McDonald's. The same way you explain the success of Wal-Mart. The same way you explain the success of... Do you get the picture?

You make so many claims and that's the problem, until validated are useless to be used to establish fact.

I guess where we differ is that I don't think of others as mindless automatons, incapable of independent thought. It is for others to freely validate or not, depending upon their circumstances.

rw

[996turbo]

and grounding have a profound influence on players. In order to increase resolution you need to reduce the noise floor. At the same time making sure the supply is well grounded. Electronics in order to have a low noise floor need well built power supplies. These supplies are both costly and esoteric. Vibration control is also extremely important. The higher end units go to extreme measures to combat these problems. Like all things at the fringe of performance you must pay for it.

[Thomas_A]

So E-Stat,

what are the differences you percieve between the Toshiba and the GamuT? In the GamuT CD1, the f response falls -1.1 dB at 20 kHz, around -0.35 dB at 10 kHz and so on using non-balanced outputs. Using pre-emphasis the player's f response starts to fall at 1 kHz with 0.2-0.3 dB drop at 3-4 kHz.

Although distortion is very low, this result is far from "high-end" performance.

The Toshiba 9200 may not compare to your Toshiba model but it is basically flat, with the exception of the low bass (-0.5 dB at 10 Hz). Distorsion is, similar to GamuT, very low. But all things equal the GamuT falls short of the Toshiba 9200. Now the Toshiba 9200 is quite expensive. The old Musical Fidelity X-24K DAC, cheaper, measures equal to or better than the Toshiba.

I have made tests using the X-24K dac against 3 different players, Marantz CD6000, a Toshiba and an Audiolab. No audible difference could be established among 4 listeners, except for a difference attributed to 0.5 dB level difference.

The speakers were DIY active three-way speakers with low distorsion at moderate listening levels, ±1 dB frequency response 40 Hz-19 kHz, damping panels in behind speakers effective down ?100 Hz.. Amps were Audio Analogue, Rotel, NAD, parametric EQ of one standing wave (47 Hz).

T

[RGA]

blahblahblahblahblah

Man alive. Cd players are pre-preamplifiers - if you think an amp sounds different then you must believe a cd player could sound different...at least most are consistant.

See Hi-fi choice - a panel of listeners - even some from the manufacturer's presidents themselves sit in and review gear(and don't always choose their own as best - now that's funny). They listen to everything blind and level matched. Not a test - but close than any other publication. They do find differences:

http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_l...category=CDPLY

[E-Stat]

So E-Stat,

what are the differences you percieve between the Toshiba and the GamuT?

Increased stage width, better midrange and lower treble focus. High frequencies don't splatter on the GamuT.

Although distortion is very low, this result is far from "high-end" performance.

If merely frequency response is your sole criteria, that is the case.

The speakers were DIY active three-way speakers with low distorsion at moderate listening levels, ±1 dB frequency response 40 Hz-19 kHz, damping panels in behind speakers effective down ?100 Hz.. Amps were Audio Analogue, Rotel, NAD, parametric EQ of one standing wave (47 Hz).

I appreciate your including your reference system as it provides me a point of reference for your conclusions.

rw