Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 83
  1. #51
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman
    You don't understand what I'm saying. If you hear a difference, then there IS a difference to you. There may or may not be an actual difference.
    Most everyone hears and no one has asked you to be responsible for that. We don't hear the same. The field of Psychology is having a wonderful time with how we preceive our senses right now. Hop over to you local college library and have a read. Facinating stuff.

    David
    Some people buy just from trhe spec's and some buy just from listening and some use both. I think both is the best way for me. In the cycling forums,many will not sit on or test ride a bike before they spend 5K. I think thats nuts but they go only on the measurements of the bike. They say it works out fine.
    Look & Listen

  2. #52
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman
    You don't understand what I'm saying. If you hear a difference, then there IS a difference to you. There may or may not be an actual difference.
    Most everyone hears and no one has asked you to be responsible for that. We don't hear the same. The field of Psychology is having a wonderful time with how we preceive our senses right now. Hop over to you local college library and have a read. Facinating stuff.

    David
    How would you determine an "actual" difference? By measurements? Which ones? Is 0.0005 THD an actual difference that is audible from 0.00001 THD? I don't see how there would be a set of measurements currently in use that would show "actual" differences that would be audible. I think the ability to hear these differences can be developed by anyone with normal healthy hearing and the proper ancillary components so I'd have to call them "actual" differences.

    Psychoacoustics is indeed an interesting field. I do need to look more into that.

  3. #53
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968

    Jeremy;

    This thread now seems to need two seperate postings, one directed at Jeremy since his question has gotten lost. The second at the old yes it is no it isn't question of sound quality and perception.

    Jeremy;

    As I read these postings I see a wide range of possible responses to your original question. All the respondents have good intentions but disagree on the correct answer.

    It seems that we could start by asking you an important question.

    What kind of listening do you do? That is to say is this mostly background music with an occasional party or do you participate in what my neighbor calls "active listening"? Active listening is where you turn the lights down low perhaps with some wine and listen attentively to a set of musicians performing their art.

    It is this second form of listening that drives much of the audiophile community and causes at least some of us to invest significant amounts of money in our systems.

    If you listen in this way there is some advice about the upgrade merry-go-round. Many of us have bought not inexpensive electronic devices only to discover that as our passion matured newer better and more expensive gadgets were called for.

    I for one upgraded several pieces more than once and my advice is to buy each item of equipment so that it stretches your finances. This saves money over your lifetime because you will replace individual pieces less often. Most of this stuff will last 20 years and commands a good price on the used market if it is name brand quality equipment. The previous statement is rarely true for Pioneer, Yamaha, Technics and other mass market brands. Not to disparage their value and the fact that they basically work fine but do not on the whole achieve a level of performance that encourages that active listening I am talking about.

    If on the other hand this form of listening is not what you are after then by all means consolidate pieces and buy multi-function all in one devices. This saves fortunes on cabling and will greatly simplify the interconnections and reduce the space this stuff occupies.

    Once we have a better idea of what you want then the forums can offer a more exacting response to what particular brands and system complexity should be considered.

  4. #54
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy
    Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?
    Yes there is. A good DVD player will work just as well as a good CD player.
    Look & Listen

  5. #55
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968

    The sound perception war

    The debate about what is and is not important what can and can not be heard resounds throughout much of the forum and not just this one. People repeat statements made by someone with a fervor even though the original context or detail has long been lost, and in the process of repeating these things they take on an absolute quality of purest black or white when the whole discussion actually revolves around grey.

    ABX testing;

    If so much as one person exceeds statistical probability on a double blind test then they have proved conclusively that there is a difference and that they can hear it. This has been done (and much more than once)! So instead of repeating the often quoted "double blind testing proves there's no such thing", the opposite is true. This doesn't answer in any way whether you or your equipment meets this test but others have. There are differences and they can hear them reliably.

    Expensive gear sounds no better.

    A $79 boom box does not sound as good as a $50,000 system. Although we can agree that the differneces near the top of the price curve become small, it is not rational to draw a line and say beyond this number of dollars no further improvement is possible. So we can argue effectively about the value or quality of a given piece but the "it all sounds the same" crowd simply can not escape the boom box example.

    If you can't measue it, it doesn't exist.

    This might be true or not, the problem is that not every possible measurement is performed, in fact very few behaviors of an electronics device reproducing music are actually measured. Almost all testing is done steady state at a constant level and frequency quite the opposite of music. Musicians can easily tell you the frequency of a given note in a complex piece, test equipment is very poor at this if the note is short and mixed in with others

    By me in another thread
    An example: I know of no automatic testing device that will verify that low level signals are not being differentially attenuated in the pressence of varying high level signals - huh? What I mean is that one thing that expensive electronics seems to do better to my ears is that quality we audiophiles call harmonic sustain. The ability to hear a single note die off slowly even thought the rest of the musicians have moved on. This is quite difficult to measure and as far as I know it isn't done. I could think of other measurements that aren't performed but I admit that I have little idea how any of these measurements in particular relate to those sound qualities audiophiles value.
    By me in another thread
    Certainly much more complex measuring equipment could be invented. Although I do not work in an audio design capacity I do know that design shops in the end do listen to their product, some for extended periods . If measurement was the end all of sound quality they wouldn't bother
    Much of the sound quality that audiophiles value and treasure can be described as small, incremental or even miniscule imrpovements. This does not make them less real or invalidate the positions on cables, bi-wiring and a host of other issues that impact the sound in small ways. It is up to an individual to decide if the improvement vs cost equation justifies a given purchase decision, probably few people would agree that the $30,000 amplifier is enough better than their $2,000 amplifier to justify the expense but some do and those systems I have heard with stratospheric pricing sounded pretty damn good to me.

  6. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    [QUOTE=
    Much of the sound quality that audiophiles value and treasure can be described as small, incremental or even miniscule imrpovements. This does not make them less real or invalidate the positions on cables, bi-wiring and a host of other issues that impact the sound in small ways. [/QUOTE]


    You forgot to add "imperceptable to anyone but the audiophile" to your list of "small, incremental or even miniscule." If it's "small, incremental or even miniscule" to you, the chance that it even exists are large, big or even huge. These changes exist to the individual listener. If you preceive them and it makes you happy, go for it. If they were really there for everyone, we'd all hear it. No matter how much you rationalize, we don't.

    David

  7. #57
    Forum Regular N. Abstentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,671
    Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?

    Cowinkidink?

  8. #58
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968

    Sigh

    This forum exists because most people in it hear these things if they didn't there be no reason for its existence. Nothing to talk about.

    There is no chance that performance differences exist there is a proven fact that they exists; the only person between the two of us that used large, big and huge was you.

    Do you really mean you hear no difference between a $79 boom box and a $50,000 system or only a miniscule one? That is hyperbole, let us discuss the performance or price point at which you no longer hear a difference, and then we can ask others where that point lies for them.

    Trying to lump it all in the "it just doesn't exist box" is pure reactionary emotional escalation. Tiresome.

  9. #59
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    "This forum exists because most people in it hear these things if they didn't there be no reason for its existence."

    What are you hearing?

    " Nothing to talk about."

    ?


    "There is no chance that performance differences exist there is a proven fact that they exists;"

    We're not arguing that differences exist.

    "the only person between the two of us that used large, big and huge was you."

    You've failed to comprehend how I used those terms. I used them in regard to perception. What we preceive can be, and often is quite different from what is actually occuring. Again, perceptual psychology is turning out a great deal on this.

    "Do you really mean you hear no difference between a $79 boom box and a $50,000 system or only a miniscule one?"

    Where have I mentioned a $79 boombox? Please stick to my argument and not what you would like my argument to be.

    " That is hyperbole, let us discuss the performance or price point at which you no longer hear a difference, and then we can ask others where that point lies for them."

    What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.

    "Trying to lump it all in the "it just doesn't exist box" is pure reactionary emotional escalation"

    Not my point. And I believe this is why you are having difficulty with the discussion.

    ". Tiresome"

    Spare me.

    David

  10. #60
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by N. Abstentia
    Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?
    Cowinkidink?
    You will find me in many forums under the same name. I like consistency.

    David

  11. #61
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by N. Abstentia
    Where is Hershon, and why did he dissappear around the time Bikeman showed up?

    Cowinkidink?
    I hope your not saying if the spec's say X and i hear Y,i cant hear Y because the spec's say X?
    Look & Listen

  12. #62
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    18

    Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by hermanv
    This thread now seems to need two seperate postings, one directed at Jeremy since his question has gotten lost. The second at the old yes it is no it isn't question of sound quality and perception.

    Jeremy;

    As I read these postings I see a wide range of possible responses to your original question. All the respondents have good intentions but disagree on the correct answer.

    It seems that we could start by asking you an important question.

    What kind of listening do you do? That is to say is this mostly background music with an occasional party or do you participate in what my neighbor calls "active listening"? Active listening is where you turn the lights down low perhaps with some wine and listen attentively to a set of musicians performing their art.

    It is this second form of listening that drives much of the audiophile community and causes at least some of us to invest significant amounts of money in our systems.

    If you listen in this way there is some advice about the upgrade merry-go-round. Many of us have bought not inexpensive electronic devices only to discover that as our passion matured newer better and more expensive gadgets were called for.

    I for one upgraded several pieces more than once and my advice is to buy each item of equipment so that it stretches your finances. This saves money over your lifetime because you will replace individual pieces less often. Most of this stuff will last 20 years and commands a good price on the used market if it is name brand quality equipment. The previous statement is rarely true for Pioneer, Yamaha, Technics and other mass market brands. Not to disparage their value and the fact that they basically work fine but do not on the whole achieve a level of performance that encourages that active listening I am talking about.

    If on the other hand this form of listening is not what you are after then by all means consolidate pieces and buy multi-function all in one devices. This saves fortunes on cabling and will greatly simplify the interconnections and reduce the space this stuff occupies.

    Once we have a better idea of what you want then the forums can offer a more exacting response to what particular brands and system complexity should be considered.
    I like all sort of nice music ( pop, jazz, classic & etc ) but not into heavy metal rock.
    With light off & closing your eyes can really give you a very pleasing moment while listening to the type of music u like.

    Yeah, I am intending to upgrade slowly at a time so as not to burnt my finance one shot.

    True, I notice that the discussion here had somehow gone a bit too far that its too much for me. Anywhere, I really enjoy the discussion here.

    I am yet to connect up my system & see how it sound. However, I am quite busy lately.

    I think every brand had their own high end range. But the question is price verus sound quality. Does it mean that a very expensive player ( >$5K ) will always sound better than a conventional player (<$5K) ? Is it worth the price paying for ? Can the difference been heard ?

    As u mentioned, mass production brand do not offer good sound quality. I do agreed. A piece of good equipment need extensive research & workmanship to build. That's why good stuff always come limited build.

  13. #63
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968
    bikeman;

    There is a consistent thread in your discussions that you dont hear the subtle differences between various audiophile components that others prize and discuss at length. You then certainly appear to claim that since you can't hear them they couldn't exist and cite as proof the fact that most audiophile are not engineers so their opinions which are not backed up by learned discourse and scientific papers are therefore worthless


    originally posted by bikeman
    From a technical standpoint there are no differences that a consumer would be able to benefit from. .
    originally posted by bikeman
    but there is not one ioda(sic) of evidence .....that build quality translates into "improved" sound.
    originally posted by bikeman
    I'm asking for an explanation of how those differences relate to sound. Again, that involves a technical explanation which you admit you are unable to provide. .
    originally posted by bikeman
    we'd all hear it. No matter how much you rationalize, we don't..
    I hear it, many others hear it. I don't use the word all but you do. It is the absolutism that is offensive, the idea that nothing outside your personal experience could possibly be valid.

    These posts are but snippets by nature, many of your responses intentionally demand huge discourse and seem meant to obscure and diverge rather than illuminate and strive for any common ground. Example:

    originally posted by bikeman
    What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.
    This requires no answer if you are older than 16 you already know what needs to be known here and so do the rest of us.

    I am an engineer I can discourse at some length about theory and math. As an engineer I have performed the math that made me doubtful about these various claims especially regarding cables. But and this is the big issue here, I went and I listened. I let others demonstrate these performance differences and to my own surprise I could hear them, most were subtle but they in fact improved the quality of the music in increased detail and clarity. The cumulative result of a host of minor improvements was substantial, enough so that I spent a lot of money to duplicate these results in my home with considerable success. I have discussed these things at some length with other engineers and although there are some theories no one who truly understands these things seems to be talking.

    There is evidence that at least some people do understand. Certain manufacturers are consistent in producing those qualities audiophiles value. For example Kimber cable products are highly regarded at every price point in their line. They seem to have found some fundamental reasons that they apply to all their products to achieve better than usual results.

    So, many of us discuss our perceptions of sound quality and the possible cause in the hope of finding common ground and understanding. For me at least the result would be a better idea of what to buy and to decrease the financial risk while maximizing the financial benefit. The better stuff is by no means cheap.

    On a fairly regular basis someone like yourself seems to spend a great deal of effort to derail the discussions, replacing maybe and might with absolutes and demands, questions with pronouncements, I with we, and some with all.

    You are not the first and you won't be the last. It doesn't change what I hear and what I hear is largely confirmed by others when we listen in groups. My interest is in passing on things I have learned to perhaps to save someone else from a quite expensive learning curve. I have never claimed any exclusive knowledge or any direct path to the audio almighty.

    To force every discussion to continuously reset to square one is what I mean by tiresome.

  14. #64
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    [QUOTE=bikeman If they were really there for everyone, we'd all hear it.
    David[/QUOTE]

    Not true. Much the same as someone can't play basketball without practice and with a hoop that's too small, just because someone has two ears and a brain it doesn't mean they can hear with the same acuity and comprehension as others. Listening skills have to be learned. Further, I could swap any CD player into my basement system and not hear a difference at all. Swapping CDP's in my upstairs system would produce an obvious and noticeable difference. More revealing gear is just that... more revealing. Finally, a particular component may react differently to two different higher definition systems. I do not always hear a difference when I swap components in and out of my system. Other systems can react differently... and do. I auditioned two sets of highly regarded speaker wires recently that I could not discern from what I already had in place. Similar situations have exhibited themselves on preamps and other pieces of gear.

    I'm not alone here in being a bit lost as to what your point is. Are you saying that there are no quantitative differences in audio gear and those of us who hear otherwise are simply creating a difference in our minds, creating a singular reality? If that's it, fine - we've heard that argument before, but I have no problem refuting it again. If that's not it, can you please clarify?

  15. #65
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    "I hear it, many others hear it. I don't use the word all but you do. It is the absolutism that is offensive, the idea that nothing outside your personal experience could possibly be valid."

    I have never disputed that you hear "it." Where do you come up with this argument?
    What's valid for you dosen't translate to someone else without reservation. You seem to have trouble with this concept. Pity.

    "These posts are but snippets by nature, many of your responses intentionally demand huge discourse and seem meant to obscure and diverge rather than illuminate and strive for any common ground. "

    All your examples are taken out of context. Post it all or don't bother.

    Quote:
    originally posted by bikeman
    What does price have to do with it? I'm confused on this. Do you believe you get what you pay for? Please advise.

    "This requires no answer if you are older than 16 you already know what needs to be known here and so do the rest of us."

    What the heck does this mean? Is English not your native language or don't you believe in puntuation? I've been involved in this debate for almost four decades. My thoughts have changed dramatically over this time and so has the hardware. The only thing I haven't see change is the attitude that "you get what you pay for."

    David

  16. #66
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    [QUOTE
    I'm not alone here in being a bit lost as to what your point is. Are you saying that there are no quantitative differences in audio gear and those of us who hear otherwise are simply creating a difference in our minds, creating a singular reality? If that's it, fine - we've heard that argument before, but I have no problem refuting it again. If that's not it, can you please clarify?
    I can see that my point has been lost. I will refer you back to the OP. This is it in it's entirety.

    "Hi, just like to know is there a dvd player that can play good cd audio ?"

    People were telling him all sorts of myth and lore. I think he should know that good sound comes at a very small price these days compared to the last 35 years that I've been around audio. You don't agree? Fine. Post your data and I'll retract my statement.
    Persceptual psychology can teach a heck of a lot more about what and why we hear than any almost any audiophile. I say almost because there are designers/engineers who are learning fast. When we preceive a difference, that difference is valid for only one person. There may or may not be a difference and even when there is a difference, knowledgeable people don't always see that difference in the same light.
    Along with all the lawyers and marketeers that he employs, I'm told that Amar Bose has psychologists on the payroll. It wouldn't surprise me if that's true. The novice usually finds the Bose "sound" very pleasing. He's learned what the unwashed masses will react to initially. And I don't mean just the sound. He prepares his victims with the slickest advertising this side of Procter and Gamble. And we all do that to ourselves. We're just not aware of it. Everything is seen and heard through the filters that we've created over our lifetime. Can't be helped.
    In summary, very good sound is available at very low prices. No, not in boomboxes but in lots and lots of equipment. And it's only going to get better and cheaper.

    David

  17. #67
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Its been answered and its pretty easy. A dvd player will play cd's as well as a cd player. Thats it. And if you use the digital connection then it matters even less about the player. Its really a easy question and answer.
    Look & Listen

  18. #68
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman
    I think he should know that good sound comes at a very small price these days compared to the last 35 years that I've been around audio.

    David
    I don't disagree with that. I'm pretty happy with the sound I get from a pair of small speakers, a fairly low powered and not expensive integrated amp and a relatively cheap CD player that I use in my basement system. I'd call it "good" sound. I could live with it as my main rig if it became necessary. Oh, and I have no idea if a DVD player plays CD's as well as a good CD player since I've never tried CD's in one. Based on my experience with audio gear, I would tend to doubt it but I don't know for sure.

    Anyway, good sound is available for a pittance and that is something to rejoice about. However, GREAT sound... sound that transports you from your listening chair to the venue, sound that makes you forget you're listening to a reproduction... comes at a cost. Too high a cost? Probably. The additional retail cost of my Maggie 20.1's over my previous 3.6's was painfully broad. Thankfully, I bought them used! Additonally, I've listened to some very expensive equipment that I've enjoyed less than much cheaper gear.

    With regards to psychology, I understand what you're saying but I also know of many, many audio components that have their own sound, one which is evident regardless of the system in which it's employed. Certain amps, cables, turntables, etc and other components that aren't supposed to have a sound of their own do indeed exhibit the same certain characteristics that they carry from system to system. It's not all psychology; sometimes it's simple engineering.

  19. #69
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    107

    no diff between my old parsound cd and new denon dvd

    I recently simplified my system by getting rid of my seperate cd and dvd. I replaced my 1995 parasound cd player with a new denon 1910 dvd/cd. My wife and I did a sound comparison and after 3-4 times of playing the same song on the different players concluded there was no significant difference and they both sounded very good. we ended up just listening to the music not how it sounded.

    so in my opinion for a mid high end system, parasound seperates and paradigm seakers just use one source component. it simplifies everything, one less remote one less input device to change, one less interconnect jungle, one less component on the rack and so on.

  20. #70
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    It's not all psychology; sometimes it's simple engineering.
    And that's what the psychology will teach us. It's not all anything. There are lots of factors at play. Some we're consiciously aware of and some we're not. And many we haven't discovered yet.

    David

  21. #71
    Forum Regular 46minaudio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman
    In summary, very good sound is available at very low prices. No, not in boomboxes but in lots and lots of equipment. And it's only going to get better and cheaper.

    David
    I agree.I posted some examples of these new players.To the OP,a stand alone cd player will not play multi ch music,.Rather than spend 1000s on a cd player(that canot decode multi ch music) look into room treatment,speaker placement,and ways to eq those nasty peaks your subwoofer will have.Cost on these real world improvments are small.

  22. #72
    nightflier
    Guest

    What about buying used?

    OK, I admit that buying used has its risks, especially when talking about a CD/DVD players because of all the moving parts. That said, there are some pretty good deals to be had on sites like Audiogon. I bought a pre-owned Cambridge Audio D500 CD player, that has a few things that impressed me over the rest (very good sound, solid construction, quiet operation, a bit more heft, and still a very good price). I've had it for a while so the price I'm sure has dropped now, but it sits right on top of my Onkyo DVD player. I don't use the digital outs, but it's on-board DAC is very good. And yes, it does sound better to play RBCD's on it than on the Onkyo DVD player.

    But if you're talking about a universal DVD-everything player, there are some for $300 and even some as low as $180. But this won't be a solid player. A good quality universal player will still run +/- $400 if you include shipping/tax and you buy from a good dealer. At that price point, the decision to buy a universal player is no longer that simple. For about the same price, one could buy a good second-hand CD player (one that originally cost $600) and a very good new DVD player, or an even better second-hand DVD player.

    The real question is whether a $300 universal player still a comparable value, especially if you'll need to add a DAC to it. Anyhow, N.Abst. is right, on a budget system, it really matters little to add a DAC. The DAC in the player should be just fine. However, if Jeremy wants to build-up to a more capable setup by buying good quality components from here on out, a good CD player will be a good first step. Of course, a good ($1000+) universal player would also be a good step.

    P.S. As far as DAC's are concerned, a Musical Fidelity X10-D just sold on eBay for $137 (I realize this is not everybody's favorite design for a DAC, but it's still a bargain).

  23. #73
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by nightflier
    P.S. As far as DAC's are concerned, a Musical Fidelity X10-D just sold on eBay for $137 (I realize this is not everybody's favorite design for a DAC, but it's still a bargain).
    The X10-D isn't a DAC as it does no digital-to-analog conversion. It's to be inserted between a CD transport and a DAC and is used as a tube buffer, presumably to "smooth" out the sound. Never used one so I have no idea what it does or doesn't do. I've lost count but I already have 30-some tubes in my system and no need for another.

  24. #74
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Plaucheville, LA
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by lomarica
    I recently simplified my system by getting rid of my seperate cd and dvd. I replaced my 1995 parasound cd player with a new denon 1910 dvd/cd. My wife and I did a sound comparison and after 3-4 times of playing the same song on the different players concluded there was no significant difference and they both sounded very good. we ended up just listening to the music not how it sounded.

    so in my opinion for a mid high end system, parasound seperates and paradigm seakers just use one source component. it simplifies everything, one less remote one less input device to change, one less interconnect jungle, one less component on the rack and so on.
    That is what I did in my living room, or as some would call it, the land of remote controls. In my bedroom, where I do most of my music listening, my JVC DVD player and my Sherwood CD player sound about the same. But the JVC does not have shuffle play and cannot program tracks, which are features I use fairly often. So I use the CD player there. IMHO sound is not the only consideration. Peace.
    Mark Wellman
    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

  25. #75
    Forum Regular 46minaudio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by nightflier
    But if you're talking about a universal DVD-everything player, there are some for $300 and even some as low as $180. But this won't be a solid player..
    Is this a fact,or somthing you have been told and never bothered to check for yourself.Try playing these players side by side level matched to within .5 DBs.To the OP Please think long and hard about buying a used cd only player without warranty..

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. Thinking about a CD player upgrade.
    By jamison in forum Digital Domain & Computer Audio
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-18-2005, 01:06 PM
  2. Sonic differences between a Toshibsa SD-2700 DVD player and a dedicated CD player
    By edlchiang62 in forum Digital Domain & Computer Audio
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-28-2005, 03:41 PM
  3. Bought a Daewoo NTCS/PAL DVD player for $28.
    By Smokey in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-11-2005, 07:48 PM
  4. Cd player and Laser disc player...need advice
    By stewartchiang in forum General Audio
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-16-2004, 08:03 AM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-05-2004, 02:03 PM

Posting Permissions

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