Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35
  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    98

    What do u think about this CD Player??

    It's a KENWOOD 5 Disc Carousel CD Changer with a gold headphone jack Model # DP-R6070 appears to be TOTL. The best CDP I have ever owned & heard. What do you think? It has all kinds of features on it. I even have the original KENWOOD Remote Control for it.
    Last edited by VintageTurntable; 05-03-2010 at 12:37 PM.

  2. #2
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by VintageTurntable
    It's a KENWOOD 5 Disc Carousel CD Changer with a gold headphone jack Model # DP-R6070 appears to be TOTL. The best CDP I have ever owned & heard. What do you think? It has all kinds of features on it. I even have the original KENWOOD Remote Control for it.
    SAW it in your gallery.
    Whats to think about?
    A old, used CD player that was at best midlevel when new.
    Kenwood was a serious company, then in an effort to surrive went mass market.
    The quality of their equipment depends on when it was made, the earlier the better,
    basically.
    BTW most of those "five disc" changers are mass produced by third parties to the spec
    of a paticular customer, your CD changer was probably made alongside a Technics,
    JVC, etc, with certain features added at Kenwoods request.
    For instance, a RCA five disc at RADIO SHACK once had the identical faceplate of
    a YAMAHA five disc that I used to own.
    Most of these generic players are quite good, however.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  3. #3
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Pix's reply is generally accurate but if it's givin' you the goods then God bless...

    ...I'm more interested in that Tandberg Reel-To-Reel, betcha get some beautiful sounds out of that assuming it's still operational.
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  4. #4
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    98
    Yep the Tandberg R2R is in mint or even better condition works like new.

  5. #5
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    98
    What do u think about Kenwood in general? CD Changers are nice. I wouldn't say Mid Level only the more exspensive ones have gold Headphone Jacks & fully loaded with features. I have a 1970's KENWOOD Stereo Receiver KR-4070 really impressed with it!!
    Last edited by VintageTurntable; 05-03-2010 at 01:37 PM.

  6. #6
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Yeah, the Kenwood changer is mid level at best. If it's the best you've heard you need to get out more. Gold headphone jack and features mean nothing to sound quality. With that being said Kenwood has made some good players. In CD infancy they made a DP-1100 that I thought was awesome. Not very reliable but when working had a nice analog sound which was rare then. I owned a DP-3300d which was light years beyond Kenwood's typical consumer gear. The 3300 was only 16 bit and ran circles around their new top of the line 20 bit. The 3300 being a couple years old at that time.

  7. #7
    Chicago IL
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Chicago ,IL
    Posts
    1,188
    Quote Originally Posted by VintageTurntable
    What do u think about Kenwood in general? CD Changers are nice. I wouldn't say Mid Level only the more exspensive ones have gold Headphone Jacks & fully loaded with features. I have a 1970's KENWOOD Stereo Receiver KR-4070 really impressed with it!!

    In the 80's Kenwood was making very good stuff and slowly with the time they started going down and down. They have very nice power amplifiers and preamps. I own a lot of Kenwood gears and I am very happy with them! The KR-4070 is rated 40wpc.

  8. #8
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    I'm personally a vintage CDP fan. In general most people believe that older CDPs should be bound for the dump...not so. I have limited experience with Kenwood CDPs, although I have high opinions about their older amps and such. My Basic C1 will be with me in the grave.

    If you want to check out some excellent vintage CDPs, look no further than Philips/Marantz/Magnavox. My $6 thrift store Magnavox can give many a CDP a run for the money in terms of detail and presentation. I have pitted it against a couple of NAD Bee players and a couple of older Rotel players, it held it's own without issue.

    Anyhow, if you're enjoying your Kenwood, that's what counts. There's more fidelity available with the digital format, so visit a hifi shop and check some gear out. But again, if the Kenny does it for you, let them suck lemons!!

  9. #9
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659
    If all it took to impress you was a gold headphone jack, you're in for a rude awakening.

    Times change. Kenwoods were great in the 70's. So were Scott, Fisher, and KLH.

    Lurk and learn.

  10. #10
    Rob_a rob_a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Yucaipa
    Posts
    232
    It's hit or miss. You had really good and really expensive players made back in the 80's and early 90's or you had bad (like my old Sony 5 disk changer from the early 90's, what a piece of cr@p that thing was). I have learned to look past all the pretty stuff and look for what's under the hood. But im not knocking Kenwood or your player. Their stuff used to be good and lasted. Not so much now adays.
    HT system:
    Marantz SR7001 receiver
    Emotiva UPA-2 Amplifier
    Adcom GDV-870 DVD-A/CD player
    Yamaha S1800 DVD/SACD player
    Panasonic DMP-BD60K blu Ray player
    PSB Image series speakes s/s
    Dayton RSS210HF 8" reference sub
    Hitachi 46" HD projector screen

  11. #11
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    98
    That not all it took to impress me the features. My CDP has features not currently on Todays CDP'S like Time Display,Edit,Check.

  12. #12
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659
    Quote Originally Posted by VintageTurntable
    That not all it took to impress me the features. My CDP has features not currently on Todays CDP'S like Time Display,Edit,Check.
    And these enhance the sound how?

  13. #13
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    Quote Originally Posted by VintageTurntable
    That not all it took to impress me the features. My CDP has features not currently on Todays CDP'S like Time Display,Edit,Check.
    Who cares about about time display? Does it sound better than my modified Marantz CD-63SE or Yamaha DVD-S1800, both using digital out to an MSB Full Nelson DAC? I think not.

    If your CDP has a digital out you might want to try a stand alone DAC. It will most likely give you better sound while allowing you to keep that really important display.
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  14. #14
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Sound quality aside, Kenwood did know how to make a time display. My 3300 would count the song time and disc time both forward and backward. Probably not so important today but came in handy back when I used cassette. Oh, and the track display looked like a calendar, especially with one of those discs with 16 or more tracks that nearly filled up the 20 numbers. I think with the impression that some how the display effects sound manufacturers have gotten away from so much information in the display. Or, maybe some one asked one day, "do we really need all of that?".

  15. #15
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    There's many things vintage that can be very good but CD players frankly have improved dramatically. I realized this in the DAC domain recently when I connected up the Grant Fidelity Tube DAC 09 to my mid 1990's Cambridge Audio (entry level high end) single disc player. The Tube Dac is $300 and other Chinese companies for a time were selling them for $150(with suspect warranty but still). Bottom line - it destroys the Cambridge (Which was $800 at the time).

    Even within the same company progression can be staggering. I am currently reviewing a new one box player from Audio Note which beats up their older more expensive series 3.1 which I didn't think could really happen.

    If the Kenwood has a digital output you could add an external DAC to try out (borrow one from a dealer for a weekend) and then you can hear for yourself that a good new DAC or CD player will probably beat the best ~1990 players. Of course there were plenty of players from that era that had uber built transports - but the DAC (the guts of the thing) have been improved.

  16. #16
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    There's many things vintage that can be very good but CD players frankly have improved dramatically. I realized this in the DAC domain recently when I connected up the Grant Fidelity Tube DAC 09 to my mid 1990's Cambridge Audio (entry level high end) single disc player. The Tube Dac is $300 and other Chinese companies for a time were selling them for $150(with suspect warranty but still). Bottom line - it destroys the Cambridge (Which was $800 at the time).

    Even within the same company progression can be staggering. I am currently reviewing a new one box player from Audio Note which beats up their older more expensive series 3.1 which I didn't think could really happen.

    If the Kenwood has a digital output you could add an external DAC to try out (borrow one from a dealer for a weekend) and then you can hear for yourself that a good new DAC or CD player will probably beat the best ~1990 players. Of course there were plenty of players from that era that had uber built transports - but the DAC (the guts of the thing) have been improved.

    All this talk of beating and besting...are we talking about RBCD here? Sure there have been wondrous improvements, so that means that what came before is now no good?

    I'll be watching for your 3.1 at the thrifts Rich.

  17. #17
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    This is RBCD I am referring to. Oddly, in the case of AN cd replay they are one of the only makers who actually make the original CD player initial design - they just make it a lot better. The first cd players were zero times oversampling no filters but had serious problems (largely because the makers cheaped out). Then came a series of error corrections and ways to "smooth" out the sound via oversampling, error correction (which is essentially a type of feedback) and adding filters that would hack off all sound above 22khz and their effects on frequencies that may ripple off those frequencies in the audible spectrum.

    I don't own an AN cd player - frankly I am envious of people who don't hear the vast improvements in this digital replay that I hear, because they can generally afford the stuff they like while I can't afford most of the stuff that I think is at an elite level and never will. Though I can get somewhere in the ballpark on my budget I suppose - eventually.

  18. #18
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    I don't own an AN cd player - frankly I am envious of people who don't hear the vast improvements in this digital replay that I hear, because they can generally afford the stuff they like while I can't afford most of the stuff that I think is at an elite level and never will. Though I can get somewhere in the ballpark on my budget I suppose - eventually.
    I'll give you this, I am not passionate about digital. Hearing the new Marantz SACD has raised my interest quite a bit. Obviously hi-rez is the way of the future for digital. In this format I hear some of the qualities that analog posesses, and I like.

    RBCD? Vintage player will do me fine. You aren't alone in your opinions, I get flack from everyone on this topic. Of course, visit Audio Karma and I am worshipped as a vintage CDP god.

    I do have limits, and tastes, with regard to what I think is a good sounding, older player. I would certainly pass on the majority.

  19. #19
    I put the Gee in Gear.... thekid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    VB VA
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    I'll give you this, I am not passionate about digital. Hearing the new Marantz SACD has raised my interest quite a bit. Obviously hi-rez is the way of the future for digital. In this format I hear some of the qualities that analog posesses, and I like.

    RBCD? Vintage player will do me fine. You aren't alone in your opinions, I get flack from everyone on this topic. Of course, visit Audio Karma and I am worshipped as a vintage CDP god.

    I do have limits, and tastes, with regard to what I think is a good sounding, older player. I would certainly pass on the majority.
    Don't worry Pops I will stand with you regarding older CDP's. My two Denon's (1500 and 1800) can hang with many of the newer players out there today.

    The OP's Kenwood dates from around 97-98 so it is not like it is from the stone age. As mentioned in a couple of threads the R3080 that I have which is a few steps down from the unit that the OP asked about is a decent player. Not in the league of the 2 Kenwood CDP's that Mr. P mentioned but it listenable.
    NAD D3020
    Denon 2910
    Denon DMD 1000
    MSB Link DAC III
    Von Schweikert VR2
    NAD 7240PE
    NAD 5240
    Hughes AK 100
    Tascam 122
    Technics SL 1700
    Rogers BBC Monitors LS3/6

  20. #20
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    We should not speak in such a wide scope, vintage versus new, it depends on the player. A good player will always be a good player within reason and entry level will always be entry level new or vintage. For instance, an Arcam Alpha 9 is getting long in the tooth but you'd still have to pay a good price to find something better. Of course, retail was $1500.00 or so. So if you can pick up any of these gems at a good price it's better than a new player up to a certain point. Another thing about vintage the lasers and certain other parts of these players only last so long, so a CDP is not like an amp or good speaker that will last for 25 years. I'd say if you have one last ten you are doing good.

  21. #21
    I put the Gee in Gear.... thekid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    VB VA
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    We should not speak in such a wide scope, vintage versus new, it depends on the player. A good player will always be a good player within reason and entry level will always be entry level new or vintage. For instance, an Arcam Alpha 9 is getting long in the tooth but you'd still have to pay a good price to find something better. Of course, retail was $1500.00 or so. So if you can pick up any of these gems at a good price it's better than a new player up to a certain point. Another thing about vintage the lasers and certain other parts of these players only last so long, so a CDP is not like an amp or good speaker that will last for 25 years. I'd say if you have one last ten you are doing good.
    Agreed. Despite the quality of sound you often are living on borrowed time regarding the laser on older CDP's......
    NAD D3020
    Denon 2910
    Denon DMD 1000
    MSB Link DAC III
    Von Schweikert VR2
    NAD 7240PE
    NAD 5240
    Hughes AK 100
    Tascam 122
    Technics SL 1700
    Rogers BBC Monitors LS3/6

  22. #22
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    for not much money

    a sony dvd player capable of sacd will make RBCDs sound better than most others and certainly for the money. there are numerous VERY affordable sonys that are available that will fit that bill. the marantz 6001 also is affordable and sounds VG and also does dvda.

    CERTAIN vintage units sound pretty good, like the original magnavox player i got at Target for $140 back in the day. it stood head and shoulders above the technic players of the day. it images, its clear, and has good depth without harshness.

    some of the philips/magnavox units with digital out can be paired with an outboard d/a for good results if more money.
    ...regards...tr

  23. #23
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    I'll give you this, I am not passionate about digital. Hearing the new Marantz SACD has raised my interest quite a bit. Obviously hi-rez is the way of the future for digital. In this format I hear some of the qualities that analog posesses, and I like.

    RBCD? Vintage player will do me fine. You aren't alone in your opinions, I get flack from everyone on this topic. Of course, visit Audio Karma and I am worshipped as a vintage CDP god.

    I do have limits, and tastes, with regard to what I think is a good sounding, older player. I would certainly pass on the majority.
    In some respects I consider myself a vintage guy - a new vintage guy. If you look at my system it is largely made up of pieces that are ALL vintage. My turntable is an Audio Note so it is new - but it is based on the SystemDek IIS with a new upgraded motor and dual motors instead of one - but it is arguable that it is a hot rodded Systemdek (a vintage turntable).

    The speakers are AN J but they are basically hotrodded Snell Type J's which were designed by the famous acoustician and opera house designer L.L. Berankek in 1940 - that's vintage just revamped.

    The amp is a SE tube - I don't know if we can call that vintage but the OTO was designed by Guy Adams the creator of Voyd Turntables in the early 1990. Anything tube in some sense at least has vintage leanings.

    And AN's digital uses a 1543 16 bit DAC and an 1865 chip in their top of the line which are positively as old school as it gets for cd players. Right back to the basics.

    Shows are fun and highly informative - but actually get a SACD to play with in your house along with the an Audio Note or Zanden cd player. I bet your view will change. I also think you'll find that the Marantz/Paradigm stuff won't hold up. In 20-30 minute session where one room plays exciting music and the other plays Muzak can give a very different impression of what is truly going on.

    Take my comments on some rooms - if they had played better music with a pulse my reaction may have been different. Avalon speakers at $47,000 sounded pretty boring to me - I mean REALLY boring but they get some high raves so I put a rather diplomatic comment on the room. I didn't get on them too much because I've never heard them before and the music selection would bore the dead. The next show I will bring my own collection and really push the envelope and drive gear hard. Unfortunately for Avalon - they could in fact be "amazing" loudspeakers with tremendous thunder and nuance but they were certainly the antithesis of exciting.

  24. #24
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    CERTAIN vintage units sound pretty good, like the original magnavox player i got at Target for $140 back in the day. it stood head and shoulders above the technic players of the day. it images, its clear, and has good depth without harshness.

    some of the philips/magnavox units with digital out can be paired with an outboard d/a for good results if more money.

    aaaahhhhhhhh...music to my ears. My Magnavox CDB-482 has a great overall sound and is hugely detailed. I am quite content with it. I think alot of people have a hard time getting their heads around that fact.

    My goal, if you must know, is hopefully a Philips CD 960 / Mission XX-xx / Marantz CD-84/94....modified with a tube circuit and NOS ability.

  25. #25
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    And AN's digital uses a 1543 16 bit DAC and an 1865 chip in their top of the line which are positively as old school as it gets for cd players. Right back to the basics.
    Indeed Rich, our tastes are similar. My Magnavox uses a 1543 with 4 times over sampling. I use a NOS 1543 for my comps digital output. It's truly a wonderful chip.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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