What CD player might you buy for 10K or less.

[Jesse111]

I'm shopping for a CD player or a possible tansport/dac system as in the Mcintosh MDA1000/MCD1000 combo.

I'd just like to hear real world views and opinions on the best you've heard and perhaps a word or two on why.

Thanks.

[ShadowZA]

I have not listened to this cd player personally, but the Meridian G08 is on my short list to buy in about a year to year-and-a-halfs time. I've just ordered some hi-fi hardware and am not yet ready to upgrade my dvd/cd player. That said, even though I have had the opportunity to listen and declined due to my non-readiness to buy (I'm resisting the upgrade-itis bug) ... my feel is that the Meridian "warmth" would be a perfect fit with my Krell stuff (Showcase processor & KAV amps).

If your budget can handle it, the Meridian 808 would be my choice for the very best.

Simply my untested opinion

[wkhanna]

Not nearly in 10K realm of CDP’s, but the ‘Best’ I have ever heard is the Cairn Fog v2.0 + Soft 24/192. It is run with a Bryston pre and main to Polk SDA1's. One of most realistic systems using a CD source that I have ever heard, particularly for jazz and classical.

[Burke Strickland]

Hands down the best CD player I've ever heard is the Linn CD-12. The bad news: it cost $20,000 new, and is no longer available from Linn. The good news: because of that, you may be able to find a "pre-owned" CD-12 for less than $10.000.

Just before I first heard the CD-12, the store owner played cuts from several CDs with a couple of highly regarded transports costing $7k and $12K, respectively. Both sounded pretty good, but by comparison, neither one came close to the sound of the CD-12. Simply no contest -- the CD-12 "flattened the curve" with regard to price vs. performance for all other players I had encountered before or since.

So I thanked the dealer for helping me calibrate my expectations and went home to continue to enjoy my ~$1K player, knowing that even breaking the bank to spend even seven times as much wouldn't get me close enough to Nirvana to make it worth the financial sacrifice, since I realized that to get a truly significant improvement over my player, I would need to ride a bicycle to work instead of a car. :>)

[RebelMan]

Hands down the best CD player I've ever heard is the Linn CD-12. The bad news: it cost $20,000 new, and is no longer available from Linn. The good news: because of that, you may be able to find a "pre-owned" CD-12 for less than $10.000.

Alan Clark, the principle engineer behind the Linn CD-12 recently developed the Classe' CDP-202 which I own and has recieved much praise of late from the likes of stereophile and HiFi Choice. I posted some comments comparing the CDP-202 to the Rotel RCD-1072 and the Ayre 5Cxe in Club Classe' not too long ago if you are interested. In short $6500 can buy you a player that, according to its designer, exceeds the legendary Linn CD-12.

[sonicbaer]

I kinda like the Willkommen bei T+A D10...only slightly more than $10K..
:roll: :T

[BTB]

Consonance "Droplet" CDP 5 by Opera Audio. A fantastic player, built like a tank and way cheaper than 10k.

[Victor]

I'm shopping for a CD player or a possible tansport/dac system

Jesse,

There are many excellent CD Players on the market today. The question is, - why would you want to spend anywhere near 10K on it? The days of linear relationship between the price and the quality are long gone.

I cannot fathom the reason why would a company charge $10-20K for a CD player.

Considering any amount of an R&D effort and the cost of parts and production, the end product, even if best possible parts and material used, still should not cost anywhere near that much even with 1:8 standard industry mark up.

I do not know what would 15K Linn’s CD Player give you that 2K Denon or Sony does not.

Victor

[Jesse111]

Alan Clark, the principle engineer behind the Linn CD-12 recently developed the Classe' CDP-202 which I own and has recieved much praise of late from the likes of stereophile and HiFi Choice. I posted some comments comparing the CDP-202 to the Rotel RCD-1072 and the Ayre 5Cxe in Club Classe' not too long ago if you are interested. In short $6500 can buy you a player that, according to its designer, exceeds the legendary Linn CD-12.

Rebelman, I think this B&W club can be very fortunate you are active here. Thanks and I'll check out your comments. By the way, where is Club Classe? Do you have a link? Thanks.

I am also looking at the other players mentioned so thanks to everyone. Has anyone ever heard the McIntosch MDA/MCD combo?

[Martyn]

....Considering any amount of an R&D effort and the cost of parts and production, the end product, even if best possible parts and material used, still should not cost anywhere near that much even with 1:8 standard industry mark up...

Victor

Victor, For those of us whose level of affordability does not approach the CD-12, what specifically would you recommend for a high performance player? In my case, I'll probably be looking for an SACD player.

If a $2k Denon should be comparable to the Linn, how do folk such as the Modwright manage to make significant improvements to such products (or do they?). Even $2k is more than I can afford for a player, so I'll be very interested to hear your comments and suggestions (especially if I need spend only $1k!).

[tboooe]

Maybe I am a Cary homer but I really like the new 306 SACD. The Cary house sound is perhaps a little dark but the midrange is outstanding, warm and organic. The bass is ridiculous as well. The best part is that this player only costs $6K retails but can be had for much less.

[RebelMan]

I do not know what would 15K Linn’s CD Player give you that 2K Denon or Sony does not.

Victor, I respect your input to these boards and I appreciate your contibution. I also hold a background in electrical engineering so I understand the basic priciples of applied science and the theoretical. But I also believe in the practice of building system synergy. Perhaps a less revealing system is simply too inept to exposing the audible differences between say a $2K and $15K player? A system with limited capablities wouldn't necessarily preclude the existance of said differences nor would a system without restrictions prove otherwise. Without the benefit of empirical studies between a $2K and $15K CD player, the hypothical indifference you speculate is theoretical conjecture at best. Agreed?

Sound quality aside, it (the more expensive) may give you other tangibles like better support and something nicer to look at.

[RebelMan]

Rebelman, I think this B&W club can be very fortunate you are active here. Thanks and I'll check out your comments. By the way, where is Club Classe? Do you have a link?

Thanks Jesse. Here is the post and here is the club. Stop by any time!

[Victor]

Victor, For those of us whose level of affordability does not approach the CD-12, what specifically would you recommend for a high performance player? In my case, I'll probably be looking for an SACD player.

If a $2k Denon should be comparable to the Linn, how do folk such as the Modwright manage to make significant improvements to such products (or do they?). Even $2k is more than I can afford for a player, so I'll be very interested to hear your comments and suggestions (especially if I need spend only $1k!).

Martyn,

It is always difficult to recommend anything.

Well, - as far as CD Players are concerned my approach is extremely utilitarian. The CD Players have been around for a very long time now and frankly they have not been improving at all over the past 5-8 years. The D/A chips have gotten better but the level of D/A sophistication was already high enough back in mid 90’s particularly when we consider the 16-bit PCM signal encoded on a CD.

With this in mind I, like everybody else here, have my favorite CD player. It is Denon DCD-2650 or its more expensive version the DCD 3650. Those units date back to early 90’s. Both build like tanks with excellent mechanics and equally good electronics. I particularly like the 2650 model for two reasons. First it uses 16x over sampling which is unique in a CD Players market. Second it uses superb Analog Devices AD1862 D/A chips.

The 16x over-sampling actually ensures that the CD Player does output the signal with a requisite 16-bit precision, which is still a rarity in 2006 regardless of how much money you spend in a CD Player. The AD1862 D/A chips are the ‘R-2R’ ladder type designs with laser trimmed resistors ensuring nearly perfect linearity and noise below 17-bits. Even modern 24-bit Sigma-Delta type D/A chips will straggle to produce that under the real world conditions. Some will, but most will not.

The 3650 model although more expensive at the time uses 8x over-sampling but somewhat better mechanics and in my view inferior Burr-Brown D/A chips the PCM63. Still, those chips will stand up well to anything available today and in most cases will actually do better, but I feel that the AD1862 were a better design particularly in a ‘K’ grade. The DCD 3650 will also give you XLR outputs while the 2650 will not.

You also get pitch control that can be a ‘make it or brake it’ feature for many recordings and it is also unique.

And finally both players lend themselves to modifications. The overall design and layout is extremely suitable to circuit improvements. Not that you need to do any, but as good as both payers are they can be made better.

Both players can be found on a used market for a few hundred dollars and they will either outperform or will go head to head with anything you can buy today for any amount of money.

I have the DCD-2650 that I extensively modified over the years, but I no longer use it as my system has gone into fully digital mode all the way to power amps.

In any event, if I were looking today for a conventional CD sound reproduction, I would look at a combination of an inexpensive DVD player to be used as transport with a Benchmark DAC. However, in my opinion, anything less then 5.1 sound is not worth buying into these days, so I am looking at the new Sony SCD-XA9000ES. Although I must admit that my Meridian 568 processor turns 2-channel input into superb sounding 5.1 output.

Regards,
Victor

[Victor]

Perhaps a less revealing system is simply too inept to exposing the audible differences between say a $2K and $15K player?

A system with limited capablities wouldn't necessarily preclude the existance of said differences nor would a system without restrictions prove otherwise.

Well, - a better system is always better. The question is, - what does that mean? What makes the system better? I know for a fact that these days it is not a CD Player nor it is a Power Amplifier.

A $15K CD Player will do absolutely nothing for you music appreciation relative to a much less expensive choice. I look at it from a ’bang for a buck’ perspective. Given a budget, I would spend 85% on a better, not necessarily more expensive, but better speakers and the rest on electronics.

Without the benefit of empirical studies between a $2K and $15K CD player, the hypothical indifference you speculate is theoretical conjecture at best. Agreed?

No, I do not agree. As a rule I also do not speculate. This is why I do not venture into personal preferences that all of us have when it comes to audio equipment.

However, personal preferences aside, the empirical studies you mention are there for all to see, - they are called specifications which are published for every player on the market today. If those specs were unimportant why would a manufacturing company even bother to state them? They could simply say that the Player ‘sounds’ good and be done with it.

The specifications tell you all you ever need to know about a particular player. Any CD Player that can output 16-bit clean signal over all audible frequencies will satisfy anybody’s demands. If it can do better then that, -great, - but the signal is only as good as 16 bits, so all you get is insurance. The problem is that it is not simple achieve the 16-bit output. The is nothing more to ‘sound’ then that.

Sound quality aside, it (the more expensive) may give you other tangibles like better support and something nicer to look at.

Yes, I agree. However, personally I feel that extra support and a nicer look should not cost thousands.

[twitch54]

Jesse,

There are many excellent CD Players on the market today. The question is, - why would you want to spend anywhere near 10K on it? The days of linear relationship between the price and the quality are long gone.

I cannot fathom the reason why would a company charge $10-20K for a CD player.

Considering any amount of an R&D effort and the cost of parts and production, the end product, even if best possible parts and material used, still should not cost anywhere near that much even with 1:8 standard industry mark up.

I do not know what would 15K Linn’s CD Player give you that 2K Denon or Sony does not.

Victor

Boost ones ego perhaps !!!! Victor I tend to agree with you, one could argue that a modded Sony 9000ES ( total cost around 5k) is as good as it gets, myself I'm presently using a Cary 303/300 and could't be happier.

[Jesse111]

Jesse,

There are many excellent CD Players on the market today. The question is, - why would you want to spend anywhere near 10K on it? The days of linear relationship between the price and the quality are long gone.

I cannot fathom the reason why would a company charge $10-20K for a CD player.

I do not know what would 15K Linn’s CD Player give you that 2K Denon or Sony does not.

Victor

Boost ones ego perhaps !!!! Victor I tend to agree with you, one could argue that a modded Sony 9000ES ( total cost around 5k) is as good as it gets, myself I'm presently using a Cary 303/300 and could't be happier.

Hey guys, take it easy! Just a simple question and looking for good answers. Not negative opinions of my view to audio componants. Let's be friends ok?

It's not about ego just because it's expensive.

I know I hear differences. Not only improved sound in some cases but vastly improved build quality in most cases. Many would find it laughable comparing Linn to Denon or Sony. But I won't laugh at you because I personally don't know. I haven't auditioned them all in my system to make a fair and informed statement like that. The relationship between price and quality gone? When was it ever there? Technology has always increased equally in relation to hi and midphile componants just like every thing else in the world. Hi tech is very expensive, mid tech is medium expensive. But just like in anything else, diminishing returns are a reality. Is it judgemental when folks who can't afford the cost of the very "best" components (diminished returns and all) tend to take such a negative tone?

It's easy to say global statements like "how can it be worth it" or "can't sound that much better" and things such as this. From the stand point of a person who is able to afford it, it sounds rather judgemental and envious. Unless the componants in question have been in your system with many hours of comparisons, I don't know how one can make such a definate statement as if it were fact. But perhaps you guys have had these units in your homes. If so, then those are your opinions based on your first hand experience. But am I on an "ego" trip? No. None of my friends are in to my hobby, I have no one to show off to. "Why would I want to spend this much"? Becasue I can, and becasue I want very, very good equipment. Sound quality, build quality, resale value and reliability. I believe the perfect combination of those things that I want are found in more expensive players.

[RebelMan]

Well, - a better system is always better. The question is, - what does that mean? What makes the system better? I know for a fact that these days it is not a CD Player nor it is a Power Amplifier.

A $15K CD Player will do absolutely nothing for you music appreciation relative to a much less expensive choice. I look at it from a ’bang for a buck’ perspective. Given a budget, I would spend 85% on a better, not necessarily more expensive, but better speakers and the rest on electronics.

…As a rule I also do not speculate. This is why I do not venture into personal preferences that all of us have when it comes to audio equipment.

Better by definition means “of superior quality or excellence”. Applied to the world of audio this could mean superior overall design, superior circuit topology, superior component selection, superior workmanship, superior usability and superior sound quality. All of these qualities, with the exception of sound per say, are quantitatively measurable. The specifications, to which you refer, of each audio component already demonstrate that differences, albeit numerical, exist between all electronic devices.

The audibility of these qualitative differences can only be concluded with subjectivity tests which are as varied as the listener and as complex as the parameters under study, which as we all know are debatable. Nevertheless, the fact is CD players (power amplifiers too) can and do impact the musical fabric we hear. The degree of impact between players varies as widely as the choices available, and in many cases is insignificant, but nonetheless observable in some.

The precision of the tools used and the testing methodologies employed in empirical studies will affect the results of the analysis. Likewise, the ancillary equipment used and the steps taken to compare the differences between different devices, CD players in this case, require diligence in execution. A revealing pair of loudspeakers and a transparent pre-amplifier will perform the task of spotlighting strengths and weakness between CD players better than a pair of loudspeakers and pre-amplifier of lesser build quality. If building system synergy is not in scope, then the tools (equipment) chosen for use in the study could be based strictly on their empirical results thus avoiding bias and the human equation.

In practice I have found my B&W 800D and Classe’ CP-700 superior to my B&W 803S and Rotel RSX-1056 at revealing the subtle differences between different CD players. Were the differences detected staggering? No (An observation driven by listening aptitude.) Were the differences worth their price? Yes (A choice driven by personal variables.) In any event, for anyone to state with complete affirmation that a $15K CD player will not better a system over a $2K CD player suggests theoretical speculation at best and a complete disregard for conducting a thorough examination of real world events and occurrences in audio, both CD players in this case, to support their claims. It is possible that there is no audible difference but theoretical conjecture is insufficient proof. I am willing to accept it (the theory) as a useful tool in formulating predictions but that is the extent of it.

However, personal preferences aside, the empirical studies you mention are there for all to see, - they are called specifications which are published for every player on the market today. If those specs were unimportant why would a manufacturing company even bother to state them? They could simply say that the Player ‘sounds’ good and be done with it.

The specifications tell you all you ever need to know about a particular player. Any CD Player that can output 16-bit clean signal over all audible frequencies will satisfy anybody’s demands. If it can do better then that, -great, - but the signal is only as good as 16 bits, so all you get is insurance. The problem is that it is not simple achieve the 16-bit output. The is nothing more to ‘sound’ then that.

Specifications only paint part of the picture. More often than not they are incomplete and in some cases erroneously stated or exaggerated. Heeding the advice strictly on the basis of (biased) paper based documentation is risky and naïve. The logic behind this reasoning suggests that choices between any two like products boil down to a game of numbers. Using automobiles as an example, I could base my next purchasing decision strictly on performance values, like horse power, torque and speed, and neglect other quality factors such as ride, comfort and handling. The illustration has been grossly simplified but I think the message it presents is clear. Suggesting test drives are no longer necessary may work for some but not the well informed. Thanks for the offer but I think I will pass.

Yes, I agree. However, personally I feel that extra support and a nicer look should not cost thousands.

Maybe, maybe not. As you know we all have differing criteria. 8)

[Jesse111]

Better by definition means “of superior quality or excellence”. Applied to the world of audio this could mean superior overall design, superior circuit topology, superior component selection, superior workmanship, superior usability and superior sound quality. All of these qualities, with the exception of sound per say, are quantitatively measurable. The specifications, to which you refer, of each audio component already demonstrate that differences, albeit numerical, exist between all electronic devices.

The audibility of these qualitative differences can only be concluded with subjectivity tests which are as varied as the listener and as complex as the parameters under study, which as we all know are debatable. Nevertheless, the fact is CD players (power amplifiers too) can and do impact the musical fabric we hear. The degree of impact between players varies as widely as the choices available, and in many cases is insignificant, but nonetheless observable in some.

The precision of the tools used and the testing methodologies employed in empirical studies will affect the results of the analysis. Likewise, the ancillary equipment used and the steps taken to compare the differences between different devices, CD players in this case, require diligence in execution. A revealing pair of loudspeakers and a transparent pre-amplifier will perform the task of spotlighting strengths and weakness between CD players better than a pair of loudspeakers and pre-amplifier of lesser build quality. If building system synergy is not in scope, then the tools (equipment) chosen for use in the study could be based strictly on their empirical results thus avoiding bias and the human equation.

In practice I have found my B&W 800D and Classe’ CP-700 superior to my B&W 803S and Rotel RSX-1056 at revealing the subtle differences between different CD players. Were the differences detected staggering? No (An observation driven by listening aptitude.) Were the differences worth their price? Yes (A choice driven by personal variables.) In any event, for anyone to state with complete affirmation that a $15K CD player will not better a system over a $2K CD player suggests theoretical speculation at best and a complete disregard for conducting a thorough examination of real world events and occurrences in audio, both CD players in this case, to support their claims. It is possible that there is no audible difference but theoretical conjecture is insufficient proof. I am willing to accept it (the theory) as a useful tool in formulating predictions but that is the extent of it.

Specifications only paint part of the picture. More often than not they are incomplete and in some cases erroneously stated or exaggerated. Heeding the advice strictly on the basis of (biased) paper based documentation is risky and naïve. The logic behind this reasoning suggests that choices between any two like products boil down to a game of numbers. Using automobiles as an example, I could base my next purchasing decision strictly on performance values, like horse power, torque and speed, and neglect other quality factors such as ride, comfort and handling. The illustration has been grossly simplified but I think the message it presents is clear. Suggesting test drives are no longer necessary may work for some but not the well informed. Thanks for the offer but I think I will pass.

I'll send you royalties everytime I copy and paste this to negotiate a common ground between those with contrasting view points. :T

Hey Rebelman, I just purchased the McIntosh MCD/MDA combo. No tone controls. Who'd a thunk it?

[Andrew M Ward]

CD Players have been around for a very long time now and frankly they have not been improving at all over the past 5-8 years. The D/A chips have gotten better but the level of D/A sophistication was already high enough back in mid 90’s particularly when we consider the 16-bit PCM signal encoded on a CD.
Victor

Whew.... That's a load off my mind.
Hey everybody, we can stop working to improve the sound of CD players.

This argument reminds me of when at the turn of the century 1900 (or so) a convention of scientists and inventors concluded that everything that could be invented had already been invented...

And as Victor and the rest of us all know, they turned out to be right... :W

[RebelMan]

Hey Rebelman, I just purchased the McIntosh MCD/MDA combo. No tone controls. Who'd a thunk it?

Sweeeet! Looking forward to more pics.

[bigburner]

However, in my opinion, anything less then 5.1 sound is not worth buying into these days.

Would you please elaborate on that statement Victor.

Nigel.

[sokoban]

Well, in my opinion it will be rather difficult to improve CD player performance without changing the way CD players are designed and built.

First of all, a normal CD mechanism has a really hard time getting a good read off a CD. This is made worse by the small vibrations caused by music being played at the same time, but can be worked around. The best implementations of a workaround to make the CD drive's ability to read a non-issue are EAC and CDparanoia. These computer programs use what people know about individual CD mechanisms and take multiple reads to effectively make a bit-perfect copy of the audio data on a CD. Also, they are able to reduce transport jitter to almost non-existant levels.

The next big issue seems to be getting the now digital signal to a DAC of some sort. That sounds rather trivial, but I'm guessing that it isn't. I think issues here are mostly clock related, but honestly I don't know that much about it.

The next issue is the DAC and analog sections. Audio people seem to have gotten this stuff right pretty well. The DAC-1 seems really nice, as do a lot of others that are on the market now. Probably the limiting factor for DACs nowadays is the digital cable that is used. Other digital cable formats such as the ones computers use nowadays seem to allow for longer cable lengths and higher bit rates. Maybe it would make sense to make a Transport/DAC combo that uses a more modern cable specification such as IEEE 1394 (firewire or i.link) and some sort of error correction. From what people have told me, the coax and AES/EBU specifications for digital audio are rarely adhered to as well as they should be.

That said, what I would really like to see is a head to head comparison between a top-quality CD player and a good computer using EAC or CDparanoia with a fanless external power supply, high-quality firewire to digital audio interface, and good DAC. Maybe a mac mini using bootcamp to run EAC and some sort of professional Firewire breakout box with a DAC-1.

here's a good link by someone who actually knows what the hell he's talking about:

http://www.xiph.org/paranoia/faq.html

[NonSense]

sokoban

EAC is only useful for ripping music from CD's to one of the many PC media formats. As you described, it uses statistical information from successive iterations to compensate for the mechanical drive deviations which is amazing but not practical for real time playback applications.

There are several players now available which offer IEEE 1394 fire wire. If I am not mistaken, CD format PCM data uses the Reed-Soloman FEC.

I would agree in theory, that a PC should be an excellent performer. The limiting factor may be with the PC audio card DAC's or the device creating the bit stream to the DAC. You are back to a medium where the local oscillator and it's stability becomes a factor in the quality of the reproduction. This is definitly an area of growth when you look at all the wireless network music systems becoming available.