CD or not CD
 

A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 14:19:12 +0100, Chesney Christ used
to say...

A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

Dual *anything* to a fixed price will always be a compromise,

This is arguably true for DVD/CD player separates, but it is not the
case for the transports. It really is a matter of ones and zeros.

No it isn't.

Different laser wavelengths, ability to refocus.

There are two possibilities :

(1) dual lasers are fitted.
(2) more likely, the correct laser is fitted to the transport later.

Either way, this has zero effect on the transport, which will be
specified to reproduce the recording to a certain level of accuracy, and
therefore zero effect on the sound.

--

"Jokes mentioning ducks were considered particularly funny." - cnn.com

CD or not CD
 

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 20:27:40 +0100, Chesney Christ used
to say...

A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 14:19:12 +0100, Chesney Christ used
to say...

A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

Dual *anything* to a fixed price will always be a compromise,

This is arguably true for DVD/CD player separates, but it is not the
case for the transports. It really is a matter of ones and zeros.

No it isn't.

Different laser wavelengths, ability to refocus.

There are two possibilities :

(1) dual lasers are fitted.

Thereby doubling the price.

(2) more likely, the correct laser is fitted to the transport later.

Single laser systems have been shown to be lacking when it comes to the
dual job, that's why dual lasers are commonly used.

Either way, this has zero effect on the transport, which will be
specified to reproduce the recording to a certain level of accuracy, and
therefore zero effect on the sound.

It's all part of the transport component. To my ears my 12 year old Sony
CD player sounds much better than my 9 month old Tosh DVD player (whilst
playing CDs of course!).



FWIW, having had some samples sent to me on CDR, I have had to get a spinner
organised and ended up with a cheepie DVD player back (long story). I've
struggled with this bugger all evening and finally ended up running it
through a little QED 'Digit' DAC to make it listenable.....

CD or not CD
 

"Chesney Christ" wrote in message

A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

(1) dual lasers are fitted.

Thereby doubling the price.

Perhaps someone informed could contribute a view here, but I doubt
that. Look at the price that DVD players (all with dual lasers) have
fallen to. In fact they are more readily and cheaply available than
standalone CD players. The cost of producing a transport with dual
lasers seems negligible.

The laser(s) are a tiny part of the cost of making an optical disc player.
With volume production and economies of scale, its easy to understand how
high volume dual-laser DVD transports could cost less than lower-volume
single-laser CD transports.

CD or not CD
 

It's all part of the transport component. To my ears my 12 year old Sony
CD player sounds much better than my 9 month old Tosh DVD player (whilst
playing CDs of course!).

Do you attribute this difference to the transport mechanism?

CD or not CD
 

A certain Arny Krueger, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

The laser(s) are a tiny part of the cost of making an optical disc player.
With volume production and economies of scale, its easy to understand how
high volume dual-laser DVD transports could cost less than lower-volume
single-laser CD transports.

I agree, and this is my point. In the UK supermarkets are selling DVD
players for £49 (equiv. $70-$75 or so?).

--

"Jokes mentioning ducks were considered particularly funny." - cnn.com

CD or not CD
 

I agree, and this is my point. In the UK supermarkets are selling DVD
players for £49 (equiv. $70-$75 or so?).

What we buy for £49, the Yanks usually buy for $49 :-(

CD or not CD
 

In article , Kurt Hamster
wrote:


Are you basing this statement on using the same outboard DAC to listen
to *both* the players you mention? If so, can you say what DAC you are
using?

The deck is a Sony CDP-X559ES, the DVD is a Toshiba 520.

The amp is a Yamaha 630 with the pre-out going to my Naim combo.

I've tried it using both analogue connections and digital ones (sharing
the Yamaha DAC. The effect was most pronounced using analogue, but was
marginally less with the digital connections.

OK. This implies that the Yamaha DAC is sensitive to some details of the
way the data stream is presented. Fair enough. I can't comment on that. My
own experience is that the Meridian DACs seem to be able to lock onto and
reliably reclock, etc, the sources I have. (One of which is the DVD which
I'd suspect is poor.)

For the above reason I have my doubts that it is essentially true that "all
transports always sound different". It may well be that "some do sound
different, with some discs", though. Indeed this would not surprise me at
all.

The differences tended to affect the subtle things such as 'air' round
instruments, warmth etc.

I have to admit it wasn't exactly night and day, but there was an
audible difference.

What is unclear, though, is if your experience or mine may be more typical
of what people in general find, and, indeed, what impact that has when
*not* using an outboard DAC.

The difficulty with outboard DACs is that they need (in most cases) to work
entirely with the given (usually SPDIF in this context) data stream, so
have to reclock, etc, on this basis. This gives them problems to cope with
which an inbuilt DAC may have other means to avoid. Hence we have the
problem that we may need an outboard DAC for comparison purposes (even if
it is in one of the units being compared) but this may not be the same as
when each unit is used with its own DAC. Under those conditions the
transports might be behaving in a way that would be more similar in terms
of end result, but this is masked by differences in the DACs, etc... Makes
life complicated... ;-

My own experience is that the choice of transport rarely matters much, but
I tend to prefer specific DACs. FWIW I often tend to use the Pioneer CDRW
as a transport for the 563 DAC as it works more reliably for CDRWs and
plays unfinalised discs. So far as I can tell, the results generally sound
the same as if I use the 200 transport.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

CD or not CD
 

Single laser systems have been shown to be lacking when it comes to the
dual job, that's why dual lasers are commonly used.


lacking is the wrong word, wavelength matched to pit diameter are better
words

CD or not CD
 

"Chesney Christ" wrote in message
...
A certain Kurt Hamster, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

(1) dual lasers are fitted.

Thereby doubling the price.

Perhaps someone informed could contribute a view here, but I doubt that.
Look at the price that DVD players (all with dual lasers) have fallen
to. In fact they are more readily and cheaply available than standalone
CD players. The cost of producing a transport with dual lasers seems
negligible.

Either way, this has zero effect on the transport, which will be
specified to reproduce the recording to a certain level of accuracy, and
therefore zero effect on the sound.

It's all part of the transport component. To my ears my 12 year old Sony
CD player sounds much better than my 9 month old Tosh DVD player (whilst
playing CDs of course!).

I don't doubt that. The issue there is more likely to be the DAC and the
analogue electronics. I am not trying to claim that a DVD player will
sound the same as a CD player (even if they're both high quality). I am
saying that the *transport* will have no effect on the sound.

--

"Jokes mentioning ducks were considered particularly funny." - cnn.com

I had a cheap DVD player from the CO-OP costed 120 quid, (2 years ago)
and also an old Sony CD player, switching between the two sources,
playing the original CD and a cloned copy of an album,
the CD player had slightly more brilliance at the top end.
and also the DVD player must !!! have had fuzzy logic programming in it.
it took quite a few albums for it to actualy play an audio CD......
handled DVDs ok from the start, but tried to burst read the audio CDs,
read play read play etc very nasty at first.
this happend for about 10 audio CDs then it didnt happen anymore.

CD or not CD
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Chesney Christ" wrote in message


A certain Arny Krueger, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

The laser(s) are a tiny part of the cost of making an optical disc
player. With volume production and economies of scale, its easy to
understand how high volume dual-laser DVD transports could cost less
than lower-volume single-laser CD transports.

I agree, and this is my point. In the UK supermarkets are selling DVD
players for £49 (equiv. $70-$75 or so?).

I think the current low water mark for conventional DVD players in the US
is $39.95. Pioneer are trying to sell a $179 optical disc player that does
it all - CD, DVD, SACD, DVD-A.

Portable CD players are down to about $15.

Walking around with a $300 (as configured) portable hard drive player must
make me *truly* high end!

;-)


$36 in Walmart buys a lovely radio/ mp3 CD boombox player
not massively loud but great for normal listening, indoors or outside.