| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
CD-player died, need advice
Gentlemen,
I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? -- Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack show their worth by hitting back." Piet Hein |
CD-player died, need advice
|
CD-player died, need advice
|
CD-player died, need advice
"Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:57:34 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? |
CD-player died, need advice
"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:57:34 +1100, "Trevor Wilson" wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. **A waste of time. Go listen to it. It is a very fine sounding machine. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? **Nope. IMO, the good sound of the HD970 is likely to be related to the excellent DAC used and the very impressive, all discrete transistor output stages. Quality OP amps complement the mix. Like I said: "Listen to it." Forget all the bull**** and the hype (which pretty much ALL companies are guilty of) and just listen to the thing. It's not an expensive machine, but it will easily best fancy machines costing several times more. The HK is designed using good, solid engineering. Nothing more, nothing less. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote: "Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote "Trevor Wilson" wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. **A waste of time. Go listen to it. It is a very fine sounding machine. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? **Nope. IMO, the good sound of the HD970 is likely to be related to the excellent DAC used and the very impressive, all discrete transistor output stages. Quality OP amps complement the mix. I look forward to your detailed analysis of why a DISCRETE output stage performs any better than an INTEGRATED one. It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. Graham |
CD-player died, need advice
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote "Trevor Wilson" wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. **A waste of time. Go listen to it. It is a very fine sounding machine. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? **Nope. IMO, the good sound of the HD970 is likely to be related to the excellent DAC used and the very impressive, all discrete transistor output stages. Quality OP amps complement the mix. I look forward to your detailed analysis of why a DISCRETE output stage performs any better than an INTEGRATED one. **It doesn't per se. It depends on the topology of the discrete stage and the topology of the IC. A decent OP amp will outperform a crappy discrete stage any day. It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Trevor Wilson wrote: "Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote "Trevor Wilson" wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. **A waste of time. Go listen to it. It is a very fine sounding machine. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? **Nope. IMO, the good sound of the HD970 is likely to be related to the excellent DAC used and the very impressive, all discrete transistor output stages. Quality OP amps complement the mix. I look forward to your detailed analysis of why a DISCRETE output stage performs any better than an INTEGRATED one. **It doesn't per se. It depends on the topology of the discrete stage and the topology of the IC. A decent OP amp will outperform a crappy discrete stage any day. I'm glad you agree. It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. Still doesn't change the fact that the marketing of it is pandering to quasi-snake-oil (negative) perceptions about ICs. Graham |
CD-player died, need advice
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:31:24 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote: It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. I'd need convincing that the extra few pennies they spent on the power supply and output circuit (if they did) were worth it. |
CD-player died, need advice
"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:31:24 +1100, "Trevor Wilson" wrote: It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. **Sure. Transports are the least significant part of any system. The important stuff occurs elsewhere. I'd need convincing that the extra few pennies they spent on the power supply and output circuit (if they did) were worth it. **Then listen to one. You may well be convinced. Or not. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Trevor Wilson wrote: "Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote "Trevor Wilson" wrote: **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Looked it up. **A waste of time. Go listen to it. It is a very fine sounding machine. The "...exclusive sound improvement system based on the Real Time Linear Smoothing III, optimizing the sound level and quality" worries me a little. Smacks of audiophile snake-oil. Can it be switched out? **Nope. IMO, the good sound of the HD970 is likely to be related to the excellent DAC used and the very impressive, all discrete transistor output stages. Quality OP amps complement the mix. I look forward to your detailed analysis of why a DISCRETE output stage performs any better than an INTEGRATED one. **It doesn't per se. It depends on the topology of the discrete stage and the topology of the IC. A decent OP amp will outperform a crappy discrete stage any day. I'm glad you agree. **Never been in doubt. There are some exceptionally excellent OP amps available now. It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. Still doesn't change the fact that the marketing of it is pandering to quasi-snake-oil (negative) perceptions about ICs. **Really? Care to cite where HK mention that it uses a discrete transistor output stage in any of it's advertising propaganda? Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:31:24 +1100, "Trevor Wilson" wrote: It's just yet more marketing ******** appealing to pseudo-technical prejudices. **Just listen to one and get back to me. Until then, you are arguing from a point of ignorance. Don't forget: We aren't discussing some fancy multi-thousand Dollar CD player. The HK is very modestly priced. It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. I'd need convincing that the extra few pennies they spent on the power supply and output circuit (if they did) were worth it. well just go a cheapy TEAC then |
CD-player died, need advice
"Trevor Wilson" writes:
"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message ... It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. **Sure. Transports are the least significant part of any system. The important stuff occurs elsewhere. Ahem, I know what you mean but I can't help myself: The transport is what does not work in my case and if that does not work... My other and more significant comment: this had already turned into a food fight. I should have known better than to ask for advice here. -- Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back" Piet Hein |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! Rob |
CD-player died, need advice
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:47:13 +0900, "corks"
wrote: It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. I'd need convincing that the extra few pennies they spent on the power supply and output circuit (if they did) were worth it. well just go a cheapy TEAC then That would be my advice. I'll pay big money for a musical instrument, a microphone, a loudspeaker, because I can hear the difference. The only difference I've ever heard between modern CD players was when one overloaded the input of a domestic amplifier. |
CD-player died, need advice
|
CD-player died, need advice
"Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
""Schöön Martin"" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" writes: "Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message ... It's several times the price of a utility model. It doubtless uses the same transport. **Sure. Transports are the least significant part of any system. The important stuff occurs elsewhere. Ahem, I know what you mean but I can't help myself: The transport is what does not work in my case and if that does not work... **Duh. My other and more significant comment: this had already turned into a food fight. I should have known better than to ask for advice here. **Just go listen to the HK. You will not be disappointed. At worst it will sound no better than any other player. At best, it will surprise and delight you, by clobbering some very expensive machines. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"Trevor Wilson" wrote
in message "Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. If you listen with a salesman in attendance, or after reading the usual ignorant hype in one of the high end ragazines, or if you speak with a friend who has spent stupid money on a high end optical disc player, then you may well hear better sound from the more expensive player. That's the major problem with sighted evaluations - you never know why you perceive what you may think you perceive. Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. |
CD-player died, need advice
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message "Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. If you listen with a salesman in attendance, or after reading the usual ignorant hype in one of the high end ragazines, or if you speak with a friend who has spent stupid money on a high end optical disc player, then you may well hear better sound from the more expensive player. That's the major problem with sighted evaluations - you never know why you perceive what you may think you perceive. Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. **Agreed. And some differences were audible, when used with suitably high quality speakers. In some cases, the differences are not subtle, though these instances are rare. In the case of the HK, I've compared with some obscenely high priced players and some very cheap players. In most instances, the HK has won hands-down. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. **Agreed. And some differences were audible, when used with suitably high quality speakers. In some cases, the differences are not subtle, though these instances are rare. In the case of the HK, I've compared with some obscenely high priced players and some very cheap players. In most instances, the HK has won hands-down. WON by what criteria though ? Graham |
CD-player died, need advice
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. **Agreed. And some differences were audible, when used with suitably high quality speakers. In some cases, the differences are not subtle, though these instances are rare. In the case of the HK, I've compared with some obscenely high priced players and some very cheap players. In most instances, the HK has won hands-down. WON by what criteria though ? **Measurements and sound quality. Is there any other criteria of relevance? Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"Bob Latham" wrote in message ... In article , Arny Krueger wrote: "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. If you listen with a salesman in attendance, or after reading the usual ignorant hype in one of the high end ragazines, or if you speak with a friend who has spent stupid money on a high end optical disc player, then you may well hear better sound from the more expensive player. That's the major problem with sighted evaluations - you never know why you perceive what you may think you perceive. All CD players sound the same. Is there any time scale to this? I have not compared CD players since around 1990. At that time most CD players to my ears sounded pretty grim and the Meridian 207 and 208 were the only players I had the opportunity to hear that did the job at all well. If the popular wisdom here is that even then they sounded the same, then I need to find a new group to read. **I, for one, know full well, that all CD players were/are not created equal. Far from it. In those days, the Meridians were, indeed, the best available. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:00:40 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote: All CD players sound the same. Is there any time scale to this? I have not compared CD players since around 1990. At that time most CD players to my ears sounded pretty grim and the Meridian 207 and 208 were the only players I had the opportunity to hear that did the job at all well. If the popular wisdom here is that even then they sounded the same, then I need to find a new group to read. Intereting historical footnote. Relevence? |
CD-player died, need advice
In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote: "Bob Latham" wrote in message ... [snip] All CD players sound the same. Is there any time scale to this? I have not compared CD players since around 1990. At that time most CD players to my ears sounded pretty grim and the Meridian 207 and 208 were the only players I had the opportunity to hear that did the job at all well. If the popular wisdom here is that even then they sounded the same, then I need to find a new group to read. **I, for one, know full well, that all CD players were/are not created equal. Far from it. In those days, the Meridians were, indeed, the best available. You can certainly find measurable differences between different players in various cases. The difficulty is assessing to what extent, and in what circumstances, this may have an audible effect, and if this is large enough to matter at all. For me, using a Meridian 263 or 563 DAC was a 'fire and forget' choice. The idea being that I could have some confidence that it would work well. However this does not mean there aren't 'better' (in some way) choices, or cheaper lesser-named ones that would have provided the same results when listening. In general, with the DACs/players I have, and with some specific exceptions[1], I don't think I could tell which one I am using from the sounds produced. Above said, I have more recently found potential reasons that tempt me to move away from the above DACs, but as yet not serious enough to prompt any action on my part as they seem to work find in practice. Slainte, Jim [1] Main exception being with the rare discs, etc, which have some form of fault. -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html |
CD-player died, need advice
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:57:11 +0000, Bob Latham wrote:
I'm not in a position to talk about now (though I have an opinion) but if anyone thinks CD players sounded the same in 1990 they didn't listen to many. Good comment, but the key point is do the more recent players sound any *better* than those earlier ones, or just "different"? I've always based my own views on the fact that you pay for every flashing light, switch & gizmo so the chances are that, if you buy a player with those things reduced to a minimum, you stand a better chance of getting a good 'un with better reliability thrown in for good measure! For those who suggest using a DVD player - first you have to find one with at least a track number display or use it with a TV. Very distracting... -- Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!) Web: http://www.nascom.info http://mixpix.batcave.net |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. Can't help with that I'm afraid. The manual just has a list of specs, rather than components (it's a xd-ax10, badged Aiwa). From what I gather (from this NG): 1. DACs are a 'done deal', and have been for about 10 years - differences such as they are are inaudible; 2. Transports are transports - it's not possible to have an audio signature, they work or they don't; 3. Analogue amplification has to be mightily wrong to create difference, and it's so simple and cheap it has no effect in practice. OTOH, if I believe what I read in the mags, differences are either presented as obvious, or technically valid (an article on jitter, for example, laid claims IIRC). Which leads me to ... I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. I have. I *think* I can detect difference, but I've never been able to reliably distinguish between digital sources using the same material, and I certainly can't state whether one's better than t'other. To this end, most of my digital music is on HD/lossless compression, and plays through a Mac Mini. I've given away about 500 CDs, and kept about 200 for some reason, probably sentimental. I use lossless compression because I can hear the effects of mp3 compression - not always objectionable, although I find the sound a little 'thin'. The conclusion I've come to - that if there is a difference it doesn't matter - could be a result of mid-fi speakers (Castle and Dynaudio), room acoustics, my hearing or some psychological factor. Or that CDPs (and indeed digital playback) are sufficiently indistinguishable. FWIW, if I did find the HK sounded better, my guess would be that something was going on in the analogue amplification stage. Rob |
CD-player died, need advice
"Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. Can't help with that I'm afraid. The manual just has a list of specs, rather than components (it's a xd-ax10, badged Aiwa). From what I gather (from this NG): **Then, without a schematic, it is impossible for me to highlight what problems the Sony may have (or not). Specs do not tell the whole story. 1. DACs are a 'done deal', and have been for about 10 years - differences such as they are are inaudible; **Not IME. 2. Transports are transports - it's not possible to have an audio signature, they work or they don't; **I'd be inclined to agree with that. 3. Analogue amplification has to be mightily wrong to create difference, and it's so simple and cheap it has no effect in practice. **Wrong. There are a raft of issues with analogue stages in CD players, where mistakes are often made. Here's a few things I've found wrong with cheap players: * Cheap, crappy OP amps used in the critical output stages. I've even found 4558-class OP amps used. These date from the late 1970s and are vastly inferior to the 5532/4 - LM833 OP amps used in the first generation Sony and Philips machines. The cost difference is minor. * High value series resistance in the output of the analogue section. * Poorly implemented muting transistors, which short output to ground. A relay is a much better idea. And costs marginally more. * The use of LM78XX and LM79XX regulators, instead of the vastly superior LM317/LM337 regulators. Again, the cost difference in in the order of a few cents. * Poor quality filters (not so much of a problem nowadays). OTOH, if I believe what I read in the mags, differences are either presented as obvious, or technically valid (an article on jitter, for example, laid claims IIRC). Which leads me to ... I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. I have. I *think* I can detect difference, but I've never been able to reliably distinguish between digital sources using the same material, and I certainly can't state whether one's better than t'other. **You've compared the HK to a cheapo Sony? To this end, most of my digital music is on HD/lossless compression, and plays through a Mac Mini. I've given away about 500 CDs, and kept about 200 for some reason, probably sentimental. I use lossless compression because I can hear the effects of mp3 compression - not always objectionable, although I find the sound a little 'thin'. The conclusion I've come to - that if there is a difference it doesn't matter - could be a result of mid-fi speakers (Castle and Dynaudio), room acoustics, my hearing or some psychological factor. Or that CDPs (and indeed digital playback) are sufficiently indistinguishable. FWIW, if I did find the HK sounded better, my guess would be that something was going on in the analogue amplification stage. **That would be a reasonable assumption. HK have clearly put a lot of effort into building a quality analogue section in that machine. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"mick" wrote in message .uk... On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:57:11 +0000, Bob Latham wrote: I'm not in a position to talk about now (though I have an opinion) but if anyone thinks CD players sounded the same in 1990 they didn't listen to many. Good comment, but the key point is do the more recent players sound any *better* than those earlier ones, or just "different"? **Excellent point. I keep an ancient Technics SLPS900 with me at all times. Although it is 15 years old, it will easily perform as well as most modestly priced (except the HK) players I've heard. It will embarass some quite expensive machines. Technics just used quality DACs, coupled to the standard 5532 class OP amps. I've always based my own views on the fact that you pay for every flashing light, switch & gizmo so the chances are that, if you buy a player with those things reduced to a minimum, you stand a better chance of getting a good 'un with better reliability thrown in for good measure! **Just forget about those stupid multi-disk machines. Carousels are OK (just), but that's it. For those who suggest using a DVD player - first you have to find one with at least a track number display or use it with a TV. Very distracting... **Yeah, they're kind of annoying. And those cheap DVD players really do sound extremely ordinary. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
"Bob Latham" wrote in message
In article , Arny Krueger wrote: "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. If you listen with a salesman in attendance, or after reading the usual ignorant hype in one of the high end ragazines, or if you speak with a friend who has spent stupid money on a high end optical disc player, then you may well hear better sound from the more expensive player. That's the major problem with sighted evaluations - you never know why you perceive what you may think you perceive. All CD players sound the same. Nope. The CD player function of the typical computer CD ROM drive (output via an analog output) is probably so flawed that you will hear a difference. Portable CD players, particularly the ones with non-defeatable electronic skip protection, are often so flawed that you hear a difference. An old CD player with dried-out electrolytic caps (I've got a Sony like this) can be so flawed that it sounds different. Any CD player that doesn't track certain kinds of CD well, particularly CD-Rs, will sound different. CD players have analog outputs that range from about 1 volt RMS to 2.5 volt RMS, and unless you address that situation they sound different. If you don't do a near-perfect job of time-synching the two players you compare within about 10 milliseconds, they will sound different. If you listen to one player and then move the disc over to another player and listen to it, you will remember their sounds differently, because of the difference in time since you heard them, and they will sound different to you. The first few generations of CD players had DACs that had considerably different frequency response, and they sounded different from each other. Is there any time scale to this? Hmm, for the last 10 years, any reasonably competent CD player would have been very difficult or impossible to distinguish from any other or the ideal, provided you did a far more careful comparison than just about any audiophile ever did. I have not compared CD players since around 1990. I have done carefully-done comparisons from time to time up until just recently, and the two long paragraphs above catalog just about every difference I have ever heard. At that time most CD players to my ears sounded pretty grim and the Meridian 207 and 208 were the only players I had the opportunity to hear that did the job at all well. Compared to vinyl or analog tape, just about any reasonable CD player, even either of the two first-generation models, did an absolutely stunning job of reproducing music. If the popular wisdom here is that even then they sounded the same, then I need to find a new group to read. I can virtually guarantee you that unless you are among the few dozen people in the world who have done a technically near-perfect job of comparing CD players, every CD player you've heard has sounded different. If you do that technically perfect job of comparing CD players that are good modern optical players, just about all of them will sound alike. Thing is, you might easily find a $39.95 DVD player in your collection of modern competent optical players that sound alike. Certainly, if you competently compare just about any 2 ca. $100 optical players, or any of them with a good high-end player $1,000, they will sound very much alike. The genesis of CD player sound quality is that while each of the two first CD players on the market could be distinguished from each other in a really sensitive listening test. But, either sounded very good by any reasonble standard, if just a tiny bit flawed. In the second generation, there were several pairs of players that could not be distinguished from each other or the ideal, they were that good. By the time we did the CD player listening ABX tests that were published in Stereo Review in the late 80s, I recall that only the legacy first generation player could be distinguished from the rest. But, they were a pretty august group - no utter cheapies in the list. |
CD-player died, need advice
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... In article , Trevor Wilson wrote: "Bob Latham" wrote in message ... [snip] All CD players sound the same. Is there any time scale to this? I have not compared CD players since around 1990. At that time most CD players to my ears sounded pretty grim and the Meridian 207 and 208 were the only players I had the opportunity to hear that did the job at all well. If the popular wisdom here is that even then they sounded the same, then I need to find a new group to read. **I, for one, know full well, that all CD players were/are not created equal. Far from it. In those days, the Meridians were, indeed, the best available. You can certainly find measurable differences between different players in various cases. The difficulty is assessing to what extent, and in what circumstances, this may have an audible effect, and if this is large enough to matter at all. For me, using a Meridian 263 or 563 DAC was a 'fire and forget' choice. The idea being that I could have some confidence that it would work well. However this does not mean there aren't 'better' (in some way) choices, or cheaper lesser-named ones that would have provided the same results when listening. In general, with the DACs/players I have, and with some specific exceptions[1], I don't think I could tell which one I am using from the sounds produced. Above said, I have more recently found potential reasons that tempt me to move away from the above DACs, but as yet not serious enough to prompt any action on my part as they seem to work find in practice. **I recently had a conversation with a client from Melbourne (I am in Sydney, but have sold him items in the past). His first words to me we "You *******." He had won an auction for an upmarket, late model Meridian CD player and was waiting for delivery. Impatient, he spotted a post I made some months ago I made about the HK HD970. Since they are so cheap, he purchased one and was immediately delighted. The Meridian finally arrived (total cost AUS$2,000.00). He was stunned at how the HK sounded better than the Meridian. The Meridian is going back onto eBay. It would be easy to imagine that anyone throwing so much money at a player would be convinced that it would automatically sound better than a much cheaper machine. Trevor Wilson |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Rob" wrote in message ... Trevor Wilson wrote: "Martin "Schöön"" wrote in message ... Gentlemen, I replaced the driving belt of my trusted old Thorens TD166 this week and today I find the CD-player has become so upset by this it refuses to play or even acknowledge the existence of the CDs I feed it. The CD player is a Cambridge Audio thing (everything important inside is labeled Sony) about five years old (the Thorens is 25 years old). So, even though the Thorens 166 works just fine and I have a number of LPs to play I am in the market for a CD-player. I don't care much for fancy brand names and exotic design but I want good sound reproduction. (and reliability). Any recommendations? Second hand? (New models are not always better) DVD-players? **Forget second hand, unless you are prepared to throw a new laser in a decent exotic machine. IMO, the best value around today is the Harman Kardon HD970. Brilliant machine for not too much cash. It'll even play MP3s. Trevor Wilson It's well over 200UKP. Why does it sound better than a Sony £30 DVD player? **Send me the schematic of your 30 Squid Sony and I'll tell you. The HK has a number of significant technical details which, IMO, make it sound better than all the cheap players (and most of the expensive ones) I've ever heard. Can't help with that I'm afraid. The manual just has a list of specs, rather than components (it's a xd-ax10, badged Aiwa). From what I gather (from this NG): **Then, without a schematic, it is impossible for me to highlight what problems the Sony may have (or not). Specs do not tell the whole story. I would agree - many wouldn't, I suspect ('if it can't be measured it either doesn't exist or it doesn't matter'). And then there's the issue of the accuracy of manufacturer's data. 1. DACs are a 'done deal', and have been for about 10 years - differences such as they are are inaudible; **Not IME. OK - I don't know. 2. Transports are transports - it's not possible to have an audio signature, they work or they don't; **I'd be inclined to agree with that. OK - just to reaffirm, my statement was based on what I've read on this NG. 3. Analogue amplification has to be mightily wrong to create difference, and it's so simple and cheap it has no effect in practice. **Wrong. There are a raft of issues with analogue stages in CD players, where mistakes are often made. Here's a few things I've found wrong with cheap players: Again - this has been pretty well covered here, and my statement was a summary of what I've read. * Cheap, crappy OP amps used in the critical output stages. I've even found 4558-class OP amps used. These date from the late 1970s and are vastly inferior to the 5532/4 - LM833 OP amps used in the first generation Sony and Philips machines. The cost difference is minor. * High value series resistance in the output of the analogue section. * Poorly implemented muting transistors, which short output to ground. A relay is a much better idea. And costs marginally more. * The use of LM78XX and LM79XX regulators, instead of the vastly superior LM317/LM337 regulators. Again, the cost difference in in the order of a few cents. * Poor quality filters (not so much of a problem nowadays). All sounds reasonable to me - except, I'm afraid, I couldn't possibly *begin* to appraise any of it! OTOH, if I believe what I read in the mags, differences are either presented as obvious, or technically valid (an article on jitter, for example, laid claims IIRC). Which leads me to ... I thought that all named CDPs sound identical nowadays?! **I suggest you do some listening. You may well be in for a shock. I have. I *think* I can detect difference, but I've never been able to reliably distinguish between digital sources using the same material, and I certainly can't state whether one's better than t'other. **You've compared the HK to a cheapo Sony? No - I gave up when I couldn't reliably distinguish between a Marantz KI 500UKP CDP and the cheap DVD player. I've had several CDPs over the years, although I was a late adopter - 1998. Your point is, I suppose, that I should listen to the HK if i'm at all serious about CD sound quality. Well, I don't think I'm that bothered at the moment, although I'll certainly bear your points in mind should my interest become reawakened. FYI I use this in my main system ATM: http://www.superfi.co.uk/index.cfm/p...roduct_ID/2359 but as I say, I rarely play CDs, and it goes without saying I couldn't hear any difference between that and the AX10 ;-) To this end, most of my digital music is on HD/lossless compression, and plays through a Mac Mini. I've given away about 500 CDs, and kept about 200 for some reason, probably sentimental. I use lossless compression because I can hear the effects of mp3 compression - not always objectionable, although I find the sound a little 'thin'. The conclusion I've come to - that if there is a difference it doesn't matter - could be a result of mid-fi speakers (Castle and Dynaudio), room acoustics, my hearing or some psychological factor. Or that CDPs (and indeed digital playback) are sufficiently indistinguishable. FWIW, if I did find the HK sounded better, my guess would be that something was going on in the analogue amplification stage. **That would be a reasonable assumption. HK have clearly put a lot of effort into building a quality analogue section in that machine. OK. Rob |
CD-player died, need advice
Trevor Wilson wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Trevor Wilson wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. **Agreed. And some differences were audible, when used with suitably high quality speakers. In some cases, the differences are not subtle, though these instances are rare. In the case of the HK, I've compared with some obscenely high priced players and some very cheap players. In most instances, the HK has won hands-down. WON by what criteria though ? **Measurements and sound quality. Is there any other criteria of relevance? Sound quality as adjudged by whom and/or what measure ? Graham |
CD-player died, need advice
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:24:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: All CD players sound the same. Nope. The CD player function of the typical computer CD ROM drive (output via an analog output) is probably so flawed that you will hear a difference. You're counting the mini-jack output on the front of a computer CD drive as a "CD player" in the context of this thread? Rather a straw man, I'd say :-) |
CD-player died, need advice
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Trevor Wilson wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Trevor Wilson wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote Doing a decent job of comparing optical disc players is a often lot of work - the big problem is getting and keeping the discs in synch. I've done it, and the results were amazingly small audible differences, some of which were found to be imaginary when the statistical analysis was complete. **Agreed. And some differences were audible, when used with suitably high quality speakers. In some cases, the differences are not subtle, though these instances are rare. In the case of the HK, I've compared with some obscenely high priced players and some very cheap players. In most instances, the HK has won hands-down. WON by what criteria though ? **Measurements and sound quality. Is there any other criteria of relevance? Sound quality as adjudged by whom and/or what measure ? The ultimate measure of sound quality for reproduction equipment is the origional. In the case of a CD player, you compare the signal at its output terminals to the signal that was used to burn the CD being played. |
CD-player died, need advice
"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in
message On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:24:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: All CD players sound the same. Nope. The CD player function of the typical computer CD ROM drive (output via an analog output) is probably so flawed that you will hear a difference. You're counting the mini-jack output on the front of a computer CD drive as a "CD player" in the context of this thread? Rather a straw man, I'd say :-) What about the other dozen or so items I listed, or are you going to try to make out that this was all I said? |
CD-player died, need advice
"Trevor Wilson" wrote
in message **That would be a reasonable assumption. HK have clearly put a lot of effort into building a quality analogue section in that machine. An ultimate quality analog section for a CD player - a 5532, a few penny resistors, and a couple of caps. |
CD-player died, need advice
I've just announced the details of a new webpage in another thread. However
anyone interested in one way in which players may vary significantly might find http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/OverTheTop/OTT.html interesting. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:30 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk