CD player comparisons

[Charles]

I just listened to Rotel, Classe, Rega and a Sony CD players yesterday with a friend. We have been listening to his demo Rega CD for several days and were blown away with it. The whole experience was an incredible improvment over his Sony DVD player and my OPPO, we A/Bed the Rega on both our 800 series systems and heard things we never heard before and the sound stage moved to upper center just like you were at the concert. We were convinced that a good CD player made a huge difference over playing CD's through a DVD player so off to the stores we went. At the first store we heard a Rotel 1072, Rotel amps with 703's in a tiny room and it just didn't sound good (due to the room size). Then we moved the 1072 to another room with Classe amps and 802's. It sounded a bit dry with little imaging. We then switched to the Classe CD player on the same setup expecting great things and the world opened up and all was right!! Sounded as good or better than the Rega and the Classe amps were very sweet!!, we were convinced with our research and ready to buy. Before we left we heard Mcintosch 501's through 800's...WOW, I will have to address this again when I win the lottery!!! Then off to another store with a Rotel DVD palyer, Krell KAV amps and Krell speakers. Going in to this the Rotel was not in the run anymore and especially a DVD since we were looking for a standalone CD player for better audio than a dual system, but this store was my most used dealer and on the way home. The voices were grainy, though the music was very detailed and powerful through the Krell if you can picture this (I thought if we had a better CD player the voices would clear up). I talked to the dealer about what we found with the different players and how we were convinced there were very distinct differences in them. Classe and Rega being at the top of what we heard and the Rotel and Sony lacking in imaging and sound stage. He then asked if we did a blind fold test and gave them a true run for the money, we said no but we would try since the Rega and Sony was set up to easily do this back at the friends house. We were totally convinced this would be easy and we could tell the difference like night and day and would bet the farm on it. We did the blind test 5 times for each song and did 3 songs , one would swap players around while the other left the room, you know the drill. The outcome was right at 50% correct, it was very tough and we were wrong half the time. We were astonished and still very confused coming to the conclusion that something must be going on with our subconscious. There were differences in imaging, but hard to nail down one from the other while taking the test. At this point we had to ask the question is it worth the money to upgrade? The short conclusion was no. Since our subconscious got busted, the additional music we were hearing and the magical soundstage dissapeared upon further listening. Has anybody else done this honestly with different sources and cables and if they have, what differences did you hear? I would think you could nail it with speakers and amps but we could not with the lower end CD or CD/DVD players. I would love to do this again with more expensive players and compare them to less pricey ones to really hear the difference. The prices of the ones we tested were Sony-$300, Rotel-$700 and Rega $1000. My dealer was right with this test, instead of taking someones word for it and even trusting your own judgment (your subconscious may play tricks on you), get a buddy to help you do a blind test, this will help you make the right purchase.

[Gump]

The Captain has activated the "fasten your seat belt" sign....please stand by for some turbulence.

[dknightd]

First, I have to wonder if you did 5 tests, on 3 songs, how could you possibly have the outcome be "right at 50% ? 5 is an odd number, 3 is an odd number, 15 is an odd number, it is impossible to be wrong exactly 1/2 the time ;-)

I've done this (or a similar) test twice. First comparing an M-Audio audiophile firewire to a Benchmark DAC1 (both using lossless music files from my computer as source). It was easy to A/B them. My son tells me I got it right 10 out of 10 times. The second test was comparing my Mac connected to a Benchmark DAC1, vs, a Yamaha CDC685 CD player. This was a tougher test. Based on sighted tests I had a slight preference for the Benchmark. When I did the blind A/B test, my son tells me I was right 7 out of 10 times. I'm not sure if 7/10 is statistically significant, probably not - but it was significant enough for me, I prefer using a computer as source so my CD player is essentially retired. These tests were done at home, using music I knew, using an Adcom 5550 driving B&W 703 speakers (btw, I prefered the Yamaha to my Old Denon DCD1500, but did not blind test them)

DAC's are so much better today than they were 20 years ago that comparing any two recent ones is much more difficult than it used to be.

On a related note: The scary thing to me is that no matter how many times I try I still have not been able to tell a 320mp3 from a lossless file. These tests were done using ABX software using my computer/DAC1/ headphones (both Senn HD650 and AKG 701). Perhaps I'm going deaf (probably we all are, but slowly I hope), or my system is still not resolving enough, or maybe there really is no audible difference, or maybe I should try using speakers instead of headphones.

[dknightd]

p.s. blind a/b testing is an interesting thing. I think everybody should try it. But I don't think they should always believe what it tells them. If my memory serves blind a/b testing can show there is a difference, but it cannot be used to tell if there is no difference. Even if it shows a difference some people will tell you the test must not have been truly blind. And if they can't "pass" the test they will tell you the test was flawed (for a variety of reasons).

It is a useful tool, but just one of many. I don't bother doing it much since I'd rather listen to music than test equipment. If something sounds better to me that is good enough (sometimes). Some people swear by it, some people swear at it. . .

[Charles]

The blind a/b testing was to give us a real pick to which player each of us liked better without the subconscious influence of "more money-more better" mentality. Even then, knowing we were comparing $300 vs $1000, you seem to choose the $1K player when hearing something more revealing, but in this case half the time (2 people x 15=30 which can be halved) it turned out to be the $300 player. My point was in this case was to try this and test yourself before spending the extra money. My 46 year old hearing may be more limited in detail and freqeuncy range than a 20 year old so my money may be better spent on amplitude (Geezer!!). Let your own ears decide which sounds better to you without the cost being a factor. It should not matter if Bose sounds better to you than Wilson, a blind test would help weed out most factors involved to give you a better more personal decision. If there is a better way, please let us know.

[dknightd]

First, do the test without your friend. It is much easier to determin what pleases your ears the most if you don't have to deal with the subconcious desire to agree with your friend.
Second, only do the test between pieces you have already decided to buy.

It is too easy to find no difference between equipment if you are worried about
not agreeing with your friend, or, if you are worried about not being able to comfortably afford both pieces you are comparing.

Just like listening test with vision can influence your ability to find a difference,
so can other influences make it easy to determin there is no difference when their might be one.

In the end just do what makes you happiest. There is no right answer. .. .

[AptosJeff]

Charles,
This may sound strange, and it's just an opinion. But to my way of thinking, listening to music involves some things that are not apparent in typical A-B comparisons. Some things show up right away in an A-B test and some things don't. Some things take more time to form an impression. And some aspects of the musical experience are impeded by the A-B process itself. I've found I don't really hear the music sometimes if I am trying compare A to B. And in a way, judging the quality of an audio component is not terribly relevant if you are not actually experiencing music. I mean, what are you listening to if not the music?

Now if you are interested in a specific and relatively simple thing, like say, how deep the bass is or something like that, and you can hear it without worrying about the music, then the A-B method works well. But for more complicated things, I find it is not the best method.

In summary, (and imo) there are things that contribute to the perception of music that are just not apparent in an A-B test. It very useful for some things, and I do use it, but it's not the whole story.

[Boombox]

The Captain has activated the "fasten your seat belt" sign....please stand by for some turbulence.

I'm with Gump here......,

but let me just add to AptosJeff's point. Once your ears have adjusted to the character of your home hi-fi, you start hearing positives and short-comings of your set with your favourite and familiar tracks. A/B testing componets on your home set, is far better than going to the dealer's demo room and A/B'ing there. I have A/B/C'e my Rotel RDV1040, Rotel RCD02 and the Shanling CD-T80. The 1040 was clearly last, in my comparison tests....with the CD players, I was able to move my seat and speakers, toe-in the speakers, and try different interconnects, etc. Clearly, the RCD02 is a good CD player that provides good imaging, soundstage and resolution......but the Shanling improved firstly, by leaps and bounds, resolution (I'm not talking about "clarity" here) and secondly in all other departments as well...Other short-comings of the RCD02 were also highlighted by the Shanling.....with all that said, I am certain, that should I drag another CD player to my place and audition it in the comfort of my home, then I'll be able to draw conclusions from my tests....

[bleeding ears]

I also have to agree with AptosJeff to some extent, I have found it can take a bit of time to really get to know a player, or amp or speakers well.

What at first may sound better can later leave you with the opposite opinion.
The sound you hear may be different to what you are used to, but not necessarily better in the long term.

The best way to describe it is that first impressions may not last.

Having said that, I actually use a dvd player which I preferred over my Rotel cd player.

This of course could change depending on the brands involved and your preferred type of sound.

[gianni]

I'm with Gump here......,

but let me just add to AptosJeff's point. Once your ears have adjusted to the character of your home hi-fi, you start hearing positives and short-comings of your set with your favourite and familiar tracks.

I'm also in agreement here. Listening skills take a while (practice) to develop. I did not hear differences when first comparing the 1072 via analog to the DAC in my RSX-1055. After giving the 1072 time in my system, and for those who beieve in it - burn-in, the differences slowly began to become apparent. But I really believe that a large part of this was the fact that it took a while to become intimately familiar with the sound of my system.

Also, trying to compare 4 CD players in one sitting in an unfamiliar system is really asking alot of your senses. An easier task would be to compare 2 players in your system over several days or longer. I was a real fence sitter at first, not wanting to surrender to the notion that the better quality CD players were worth it. Now, they are to me. How far up the ladder one should go is an entirely different topic, with no 'one' correct answer.

BTW, don't know what was going on in your sessions or what your expectations are, but I have heard the RCD-1072 image to the point of being quasi holographic. There are better CD players out there, but I'm certain it does sound better than a digital feed to my receiver's onboard DAC. Whether you prefer Rega, NAD, Arcam, Sony etc, is a matter of system matching and personal preference. But I will suggest you do not give up on this quest because if you give yourself a little time under the right circumstances, I'd bet you'll eventually start to find those diffreneces you were looking for.

Than again, a fatter wallet is nice too. Maybe you should quit while you are ahead.

[Nick M]

Once your ears have adjusted to the character of your home hi-fi, you start hearing positives and short-comings of your set with your favourite and familiar tracks.

Couldn't agree with this statement more! It's the source of legitimate upgradeitis. :roll:

I just swapped a Rotel RCD-1072 into my two channel setup (replacing a $50 combination player), and definetly hear a difference. I'm not talking psychoacoustics either. I probably couldn't tell a difference with heavy rock tracks recorded in studios and cleaned-up/smoothed over/heavily processed - but live performances where there is a lot of environmental detail, or performances in large halls are so much more refined. I'm listening to Berlioz Requiem right now (A Telarc Disc, just the Redbook layer) and you can hear so much more. It's like having a subtle layer of detail opened up after tearing down another filter between my ears and reality.

Of course mine feeds into a RC-1070 stereo preamp, and then my (pretty-clean) RB-1080. You might not preserve those details if you pair it with a $200 receiver. An interesting experiement...

I was quite skeptical at first, but have become a believer. I thought I was at 90%+ satisfaction with the cheapo CD/DVD player. If I were to go back, I'd say it would drop to 75-80%...

The old saying... "Crap in, Crap out".

[Charles]

I can definitly see all of your thoughts and should have spent more time with each player before posting my findings on the forum. My outcome was obviously suprising to me and I was looking for some quick input and education before going foward for which I now have thanks to your insights. I re read my initial post and it appeared as I was bashing Rotel a bit, but didn't mean to since I do like Rotel gear and was really looking to buy the 1072. As a matter of fact I was rooting for the 1072, it would have saved me $300 over the Rega which got all of this started. This forum has been a wealth of information and has really focused on the point of "llisten for yourself" before buying. Maybe the blind testing was not the way to go about this, I was looking for a fair way to sell one to myself without outside influence. There were differences in each player we heard, but in this 300-1K price difference I guess I was expecting to pick out which was the $300 player and which was the $1000 while blinded more easily. Maybe I need to test my $200 Oppo against a $4000 Krell or Cary to get a real feel of the differences just to satisfy my curiousity and get a good starting point on exactly what the differences are, then work my way back. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be over analytical about this, it is actually fun. Thanks again for all your input and please feel free to add to this. I am not a newbe, but by no means an expert! Maybe my 46 year old hearing has really started to cloud my judgment, I'll pull out my 8 tracks tonight and if they send me to audio utopia I'll pass the stick on you guys and start researching shuffleboard techniques.

[chinets]

If you play your CD player with there own DACs or have a benchmark-1 DAC to play directly In Stereo as a Bypass mode from your processor or direclty to your amp then I agree that a better CD player will give you that slight difference, but if you play your CD through the DACs of your processor then any CD player would do you fine, unless your processor was a real Cheeepo!!! The 1072 is a great CD player but then NO SACD or DVD-A and that is when a good universal player comes into play such as the Marantz DV 9600!!

If you like 5.1 channel music through your processor go for the Rotel , Rega or Sony but if you like Stereo Bypass Music then I would opt for LINN, TEAC, AYRE, CLASSE or KRELL.

Your ears should make your choice for you, as only your ears have your taste in Music ,whether it is good taste or bad taste ,at the end of the day ,It is your choice and your taste..Right!!

I say: Audition, Audition,Audition!!!! Frustrating, hectic and sometimes boaring but you will end up getting the best player with your ears and your choice and your money!!

My 2 cents!!
Keep us posted,
Cheers

[Charles]

We have done all of the testing in direct mode bypassing the processor using only the DACS from the CD player. I am not in 5.1, just 2 channel stereo at this point. I am about to place an order with my dealer Tuesday for a Krell Showcase, Krell 3250 amp and DD-18 sub. Hopefully he will have a Krell CD I can demo to start with. The better detail with the Krell amps over my B&K setup may help some, but I will have to start all over again.............shuffleboard is looking pretty appealing at this point! Thanks again, for the info, just trying to weed out some of the snake oyl that this hobby has blessed us with.

[Nick M]

To be more specific about what I hear with my new RCD-1072 vs the $35 Walmart Universal.

- Spatial detail. I got a better sense of how much space surrounds an instrument. It's not just "Studio" or "Hall". The sound in the recording room/hall reflecting and fading has much better definition. It's almost as if before I was listening to a CD-R with MP3's with background noise and high frequencies that were compressed a little bit. Live recordings have always been my favorite, and they still are for the "real" ambience. On some titles I can tell when the audience has been mixed in rather than being there live (read extremely lame!). That little bit of extra clarity in the background and highs just seems to be much more natural. The soundstage depth is amazing with some recordings.

[Chris D]

Well isn't that spatial... (best church lady voice)

[wolfgang]

........Maybe the blind testing was not the way to go about this, I was looking for a fair way to sell one to myself without outside. influence. There were differences in each player we heard, but in this 300-1K price difference I guess I was expecting to pick out which was the $300 player and which was the $1000 while blinded more easily. Maybe I need to test my $200 Oppo against a $4000 Krell or Cary to get a real feel of the differences just to satisfy my curiousity and get a good starting point on exactly what the differences are, then work my way back. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be over analytical about this, it is actually fun. ......

Maybe there is really nothing wrong with the Oppo and it is a good player. Listening with your ears only is certainly the purest way. There is nothing wrong with so call blind listening comparisons rather that is how should all along. It would certainly be worth proceeding with longer sessions of blind comparisons as it might even be more convincing for yourself.

Some days I think is it really a pity ABX comparators for hardwares are not easily available. Otherwise more people could do this in the own home to just find out what is all this blind tests or ABX are really about and we wouldn't have to spend all these time on pointless debates again and again.