High-End CD players -- are they worth it?

[ThomasW]

I have a SCD-777ES most people know that it's sort of a 'detuned' SCD-1. Unfortunately the Redbook playback while pretty good, is no longer state of the art.

A 3yr old Hawk Audio MP3-DAC is better than the stock Sony DACs (any of the filter settings) and the current Benchmark DAC-1 is considerably better than the stock Sony DACs.

Later in the week someone with a hands-on engineering experience with DACs, and who is a twice published member of the AES, will drop in and post as to why jitter is audible. He explained it to me, but since my brain is the size of a peanut, the info dribbled out and fast as he explained it .... :wink:

[Khorn]

I have a SCD-777ES most people know that it's sort of a 'detuned' SCD-1. Unfortunately the Redbook playback while pretty good, is no longer state of the art.

A 3yr old Hawk Audio MP3-DAC is better than the stock Sony DACs (any of the filter settings) and the current Benchmark DAC-1 is considerably better than the stock Sony DACs.

Although I'm very happy with the redbook performance of my stock SCD-1, I will very likely consider either a mod or outboard DAC sometime in the future depending upon how things progress. How do you think the various mods compare with reasonably priced outboard DACs like the Benchmark?

[whoaru99]

Hey -

I have a Denon DCD-1560 CD player that I've been using for years. The problem is that it "skips" (probably not technically correct term, but I think you know what I mean) every now and then; seems to be getting worse.

I can usually tell when it will be a problem because the player will repeatedly click after I put in a CD. Most of the time it does not click and loads up the track info pretty quick, but sometimes this clicking happens and it may or may not load up the track info. It does not seem to be specific to any CD. Also, the CD tray sometimes does not fully retract and stays out a few millimeters from flush. I have had CD's play fine with the tray not fully retracted so I don't know that the "skipping" and tray retraction are necessarily the same issue, although I can't discount the possibililty.

If memory serves me this was a pretty decent player in it's time - it certainly seems well built if weight is any indication. Is it worth bringing it in to have it looked at/repaired, or do I need to start shopping around?

If I need to start shopping, what is the price point of a good player that is at least as good as the DCD-1560?

Perhaps a universal player as a replacement?

[ThomasW]

How do you think the various mods compare with reasonably priced outboard DACs like the Benchmark?

I've not heard a modded player. And I'm not sure for Redbook playback, that modding is the best option, given the price of the Benchmark.

Mods done to the Sony's main PCBs and power supplies are going to have a positive impact on both Redbook and SACD. Given the DAC1's extremely low jitter, I have my doubts regarding the benefits of a clock mod for the Sonys

What's beneficial about the DAC-1 is that it's not specific to any transport, (my 7yr old 5 disc Sony carousel player sounds as 'good' as the digital out from the 777ES when fed throught the DAC1) and one can try before buying if purchased from Audio Advisor.

As I type this it dawned on me that I haven't done a shootout between SACD and the Benchmark using the 777ES. I'm going to take a high quality hybrid and compare the SACD layer vs the Benchmark processed Redbook layer. I'll post back later today with the results of that comparison. Hopefully the SACD layer with it's 10X more data will prevail.

[Khorn]

As I type this it dawned on me that I haven't done a shootout between SACD and the Benchmark using the 777ES. I'm going to take a high quality hybrid and compare the SACD layer vs the Benchmark processed Redbook layer. I'll post back later today with the results of that comparison. Hopefully the SACD layer with it's 10X more data will prevail.

One of the main and most important differences that I find between SACD and Redbook is that IMHO SACD exhibits a "more musical, relaxed, natural and realistic presentation" of the music. I don't just concentrate on things like obvious detail or "soundstage". If you want to maybe you could try when comparing the two by just sitting back and enjoying the music and see if you can detect any differences that way. Just a thought.

[Bam!]

Good point Khorn

For me my redbook player sings.....it really sings....I truly love it and for me I think I hit Nirvana heaven with it (for now LOL)

I've compared SACD players in my house......and the difference went to my redbook player....by far.....no comparison....

Now I realize that an SACD player at around 4000.00$ could start singing...and I would probably like it....where aI have a problem with that is on the undecided technology that will win....and the software avalaible....while there is more than ever....it's still nothing like redbook.....or DvD's even!

[purplepeople]

One of the main and most important differences that I find between SACD and Redbook is that IMHO SACD exhibits a "more musical, relaxed, natural and realistic presentation" of the music. I don't just concentrate on things like obvious detail or "soundstage". If you want to maybe you could try when comparing the two by just sitting back and enjoying the music and see if you can detect any differences that way. Just a thought.

I agree. Even on my cheapo DVP-NC650V changer, their is a difference between playing 16/44 or DSD, even if it can only be heard at 5:00am when there is no extraneous noise from outside, the computers are turned off and the fridge compressor is not running. I admit, not in the same league as others on this NG, but good enough to tell the difference and still better than many.

ensen.

[Bam!]

Purplepeople....I dunno...I haven' t had the same positive experiences with SACD.....

I know it's better...I know there is less jitter...less steps to gpo through.......but I can' t say it sounds better.....

While we talk about the soundstage in SACD vs Redbook........I would say that Analog sound reminds me more of SACD.....is it better.....maybe....but it's different....I dunno about better.....

don' t get me wrong...I love analog sound.......I enjoy listening to it cause it is different...it's not my how should I say.....base point like the redbook is....

My reference point is what I am trying say!

[purplepeople]

As far as most of my listening is concerned, the difference between formats is not enough to warrant buying high-resolution media.

More important is the tendency for recordings to be made better when one of the release formats is going to be SACD or DVDA. There is a consensus that Brubeck Take Five is one of the most beautiful recordings available. Some would say that the remasters are as good as they get. Those old Ampex tapes must be some of the finest analog recordings that exist.

I think the only reason we notice the difference at all is because the recording is so good and this may be the reason your experiences have been iffy. It is well known that a good PCM system can pretty up a mediocre CD, whereas I think SACD is more likely to translate the warts. I think this is the reason so many vinylists and tubists still exist... the system is even more forgiving than PCM of badly made recordings.

ensen.

[JonMarsh]

Hi guys!

Why do all the interesting threads happen while I'm away traveling on business? Oh, yeah, it's because these days, I seem to be away traveling on business all the time! Sort of a catch-22, then, isn't it?

My first thought for everyone is to just trust your ears about what works in YOUR system. For example, if you don't find that high res audio disks or players make or have any positive impact in your system, then, what the hey, why worry about it. That's the pragmatic approach, I guess.

Second thought, though, is to ask where you see your system going over the next 5 - 10 years. Are you quite happy with things as they are now, or or there things that are kind of nagging itches or annoyances?

Third thought, just to calibrate your expectations, do you occasionally go into a few really high end emporiums and sample what they have, just to see if there's something you are missing? Yeah, just because the top of the line CD player or transport with DAC they're offering is 10K plus and out of your reach, doesn't mean you might not find something that's 90-95% of the performance for a whole lot less money, hmmm? But this type of experience might re-calibrate your expectations for home music a bit. Now, the Russian military has an old saying that "there's a certain kind of quality in quantity", but in audio, that's not always the best or only route- i.e., there are some substantially more "high res" playback components that won't hit ear bleed levels (think mid to upper 90's peak), but do what they do within that range exceptionally well compared to most components. That's part of what we've been working on with some of the DIY speaker projects of the last few years, for example. My M8 MkIV with SS9800 don't have the dynamic range of my X1 Klones, but they're more accurate and transparent within their limits from about 50 Hz on up.

Back to digital sources.


Making good comparisons between high res and CD digital isn't easy to do reliably, becasue of the vagaries in mastering methods and techniques. One of the logical places to start is with SACD hybrid disks, which feature both DSD and Redbook layers. Some of these are made with the CD layer being just a down-res conversion of the DSD layer (Police Greatest Hits, Alison Krauss, others), while others use a different source master for the PCM layer (Pink Flyod). The mastering technique and source tape has a big influence here; I think the former can be used to draw some conclusions, the latter are pretty much useless. BUT, as far as the listner experience goes, it's what's available, so perhaps it's not unfair to factor the benefits or drawbacks in using those also.

But consider CD- how many of you remember Sony's Super Bit Mapped CD's? The used their proprietary process for CD mastering to extend effective resolution, and that was the "big deal" promoted; but they also did the smart thing and went back to first generation tapes and carefully remastered the disk. THAT was where most of the audible performance improvement came from. Still, improvement is improvement, right? But that has some unfortunate implications for the mastering quality and care used for the average CD, doesn't it? I have quite a few of those SBM CD's; Pink Floyd, Jeff Beck, Boston, etc. Ya ought to go listen to one of those on a good system, sometime- it's the "pop" equivalent of an XRCD2 disk.

Ah, yes, JVC XRCD and XRCD2. I'm not going to take the time to discuss those in detail, just to say, if you haven't heard of JVC's fanatical mastering processes and XRCD album library, and want to really hear what Redbook can do, Google it and pick up a couple. I have quite a few...

SACD vs. Redbook. Hmmmm. I have one of the original statement players from Sony, too, an SCD777ES, which is basically an SCD-1 without the balanced outputs, and a black instead of silver finish. These were a pretty serious attempt by Sony to hit all the numbers in high end CD and SACD playback. The CD playback is managed by using a digital filter (with user selectable filter rates, like some of the options offered by Wadia and Ayre), and upconverted the redbook to DSD, and played DSD back through the same DAC as SACD.

A noble attempt, and one that looks pretty good on paper. But, as Willie the Shake said, there's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip.

Because most of the first gen SACD disks were NOT hybrids combining CD and SACD layers, making any kind of comparison is fraught with risk. But there wasn't any questioning that some of those early SACD's sounded pretty remarkable compared with the comparable CD's that were on the market. For reference, my system at that time used a Marchand passive preamp, my own custom ultra low noise and distortion electronics crossover with AD815 drivers (normally used for driving multiple video loads), and my X1 klones biamped with Aragon Palladiums and 8008.

The SCD777 and SCD-1 measure fairly well, peak jitter around 148 PS, but even with the upsampling and using the DSD DAC, the low level linearity and noise is bested by many more recent units; a reasonably telling test in this regard is the reproduction of -90 dB 1 kHz sine wave, which at 1 LSB toggling, should exhibit a reasonably clean step function, with minimal noise. Errors here come from both noise in the anlog reconstruction filter and subsequent buffers, as well as issues with image rejection in the digital filters used before the DAC stage.


SCD-1



DV-50



Benchmark DAC1



t's interesting to compare the SCD-1 low level linearity with another universal player (Esoteric DV-50), or a good dedicated DAC like the DAC1. I refer the interested reader to Sterephile for more details.


There are a lot of factors entering into the overall performance of a digital source component- transport jitter, rejection of transport jitter, the upsampling (if used) and filtering algorithms and time characteristics, image rejection in the digital filters, DAC HF noise, I/V converter linearity under step transients, buffer noise and distortion, etc. A lot of CD players have analog sections which barely reach 16 bit levels of performance, and of the ones proclaiming 24 bit capability, it's an exceptional one that actually has 20 bit analog resolution. Most barely hit 18 bit equivalent analog performance.


The DAC1 fascinated me for a long time (before I bought one), because the more I found out about the design details from John Siau (Dir. of Eng at Benchmark), the more I believed that, especially at this price point, he made a lot of very good engineering decisions. This was also the first commercial DAC I was aware of using the new AD1860 asynchronous sample rate converter, which while pin compatible with the BurrBrown/TI part, appears to work much better in some key regards. Examples of intelligent design trade-offs are using the AD1860 to upsample to just over 96 kHz (first series) or 110 kHz (current production), NOT going to 192 kHz, because the higher sample rate deterioriates the image rejection of the combined front end and DAC by ~ 20dB. Now, this deterioration in image rejection is characteristic of ALL DAC and filter combos out there when you push to 192 kHz; they just don't have the processing power at the higher sampling frequency; John made an intelligent (IMO) decsion to stay with analog bandwidth of 50-55 kHz, and optimize out of band distortion rejection.

Other things I like about the DAC1 are the excellent performance even with TOSLINK inputs (the way John Atkinson tested it for Stereophile, where it bested units that sell for 4K and up - even when the competing units are tested with high end transport (for example, the MSB Platinum DAC jitter goes way up on the TOSLINK RME source used for the DAC1 measured results.

That might have something to do with why John Atkinson bought the review sample, or why Doug Sax has outfitted his newest studio with DAC1's.


Conclusions?

I think the high res formats have a great deal of potential.

I think it's hard to find a good player for them at reasonable price, that reaches the potential.

Krell had the cheapest fairly good player, in the SACD Standard, but has stopped shipments because of availability issues for the transport and digital front end from Philips. Same problem as with the Philips SACD1000, which has big warranty repair problems, and many unhappy consumers.

The Esoteric DV-50, X-01 and UX-1 are probably the next step on the performance/price tradeoff, as they offer excellent performance at prices much lower than a Meitner or Elgar DAC. In my fantasy world, I can imagine someday buying an Esoteric, but not an Elgar. It's like the difference between lusting after a used Honda NSX, or a brand new Ford GT. One's in the realm of possibility if I'm willing to make the commitment and sacrifice somewhere else; the other is out of the question.

To truly reap the full rewards of the high res media, like SACD and DVD-A, that's where you're going to have to go. The moderate cost players have electronics that just don't do the media justice, IMO. YMMV. That isn't to say you won't have an interesting listening experience with SACD disks on a $500 carousel player; just don't expect it to blow away your friend's Benchmark DAC1, when you're playing the DSD layer, and he's playing the CD layer. The reverse will probably be true. OTOH, the SACD layer probably will sound better on your low cost universal player than the CD layer, but NOT always because of superior electrical performance in the player- mastering and other factors can have a big impact. Still, there's no reason you can't build up an interesting music collection, which is futre proofed; I like hybrid SACD's for that reason.

Last thought: consider re-calibrating your expectations. Take a look around and see if there's a good high end dealer in your area, someone carrying gear like Theta Digital, Ayre, Wadia, Conrad Johnson, Magneplanar, Avalon Acoustics, etc. Grab a few of your favorite music CDs (that you listen to for the music), and maybe a couple that you think are reference quality recordings, and go see what a real high end rig sounds like for good two channel. My preference would be to recommend some of the Ayre or Theta electronics, if you're into solid state, or Conrad Johnson, if you're into tubes. Try an Ayre, Theta, Wadia, or if you can find it, Benchmark DAC1 front end. (BTW, I hear you can get the Benchmark DAC1 from Audio Advisor with 30 day return policy- makes it a safe buy and try proposition).
Find out what really good Redbook can sound like. You might be surprised- it could re-vitalize your whole CD collection, or at least your perception of it.


Last, I am trying to wrap up my "review" of the DAC1; obviously travel has been a problem, but I also have a new preamp on the way (keeping up with the ThomasW's , so I want to throw that into the mix, as it will allow me to use the balanced connections, also. Stay tuned.

~Jon

[Khorn]

I bought the player that i am using now a Sony SCD-1 primarily to play SACDs. As i have posted many times i feel there are some attributes to SACD that i just don't find to the same degree if at all with Redbook. Having said that i must admit that recently there have been some admirable releases put forth by the majors that have raised Redbook reproduction to a noticeable degree. I think much of this is due to excellent mastering engineering probably as result of more funds being alloted to do a proper job. A very well mastered Redbook done by the likes of Steve Hoffman implementing tube stages and other top engineers can be an extremely satisfying experience.

Unless the situation like my winning the lottery were to come up i will probably never be able to afford a true "state of the art" system. As i am very happy with the SCD-1s SACD performance and gaining a renewed interest on Redbook, i can forsee getting a "near SOTA" outboard DAC sometime in the not too distant future. This will give me a really decent level of source for both formats.

Yes, while i feel that a well mastered SACD is demonstrably superior to Redbook the recent improvement in the latter warrants investement in a very high quality Redbook outboard DAC.

[mante]

CD player advice

Welcome back Jon,

A very nice article on CD players and the DACs. I think you mentioned me in the above article: up until July, I was the proud owner of a Philips SACD1000. After loosing my player for three months, Philips repair has promised to refund my purchase plus send me a free 963SA. My question: should I get a better CD player, or should I keep the 963 and add the Benchmark? Or neither, just use the money to build the Arvo project and enjoy.

How would you wise people spend my money ;>).

Thanks for the advice.

Craig

[whmacs]

Hi Guys,
Well just as a follow up, I received my ShengYa S-10CS direct from the factory in China on Thursday (DHL cleared it through Aussie customs for me). The player is built like a tank! It arrived with no damage and is very attractive when you power it up and the valve starts to glow in the front window. Ok, how does it sound? Well, as I said below I already have a Rotel RCD-1072 which I love the detail but lacks a little in the muscial department (can sound a little bright on bad recording), and the NAD C542 which has good bass as is quite musical, but a little more detail would not go astray. Well the S-10CS seems to have the best of both these players. It is detailed (without ever being bright, due to its valves I assume), a warm musically midrange, solid bass and oh so smooth sounding. It also seems to create a much larger sound stage than the other two players. Needless to say, I'm very happy with the purchase Best of all, I got the player for a 1/3 of its price here in Australia.

cheers,
Stephen

Hi Guys,
This is a very interesting discussion, I have the RCD-1072, NAD C542 and a Yamaha 396 (I kind of collect CD players, so my wife says ) The 1072 and C542 are both outstanding players for their price point. For anyone looking for a good sub $1000 CD player, it hard to look past these units. If you are going to spend big dollars on a CD player just be sure that you are paying for the components inside the unit and not just dealer mark up. Case in point, there is a CD player here in Oz called a Vincent CD-S6 (Vincent is German) its a valve hybrid CD player that costs $2500. In fact its a Shengya A-10CS that's made in China for Vincent. I've just ordered one directly from the Chinese factory (via a US dealer) for $800. While this is risky (no warranty), I can't stand the fact that I'm paying $1700 is dealer charges! I'll post how this experiment turns out on the Audio Hideout forum.

cheers,
Stephen

[purplepeople]

Hi Jon,

Please bear with me as I'm still trying to digest what you wrote there (in addition to all the stuff at the premiere of the Bruce Mau exhibit).

Seems to me that you are saying that good DACs (inboard or out) can make Redbook sound really good provided the recording is well made. Then you go on to say that DSD can also sound good but only on the stratospheric players. Since I've only listened to an 777ES only once and not for any extended period, nor have I been in a hi-end shop in awhile, I can only ponder the DSD vs CD debate by the technicalities. Your analysis now poses some new questions for me...

How much of that is poor studio choices translating the original to DSD?

Does the conversion from 24/96 studio tracks to DSD master make a difference, especially since down-conversion within PCM is considered to be easier?

Does DSD work better when the original is analog tape from the vault?

ensen.
M. Jensen Didulo, Vancouver

[ThomasW]

DSD is a recording format, not just a system to transfer recordings. Here's what it is....

DSD = 1-bit signal sampled at 2.8224 mHz with noise-shaping. It provides even response over the audio band, and some amount of response in the very high ranges of 200 or 300 kHz - well beyond the range of direct human hearing. The time-domain resolution, then, is even more accurate than 96 kHz, or a hypothetical 192 kHz PCM recording.

Seems to me that you are saying good DACs (inboard or out) can make Redbook sound really good provided the recording is well made.

A good Redbook recording can sound very good when played back through a good DAC. But it doesn't sound as good as a DSD original of the same recording. There's roughly 10 times more data recorded with DSD as compared to standard PCM.

Then you go on to say that DSD can also sound good but only on the stratospheric players.

He's saying that as with most things in life, one gets what one pays for. The DSD signal will sound 'best' when played back on the 'best' machines.

Does DSD work better when the original is analog tape from the vault?

The 'best' sounding SACDs are made from original DSD recordings. DSD doesn't work 'better' or worse' with analog recordings vs any other kind.

[JonMarsh]

I'll elaborate a few points over what ThomasW posted-

Seems to me that you are saying that good DACs (inboard or out) can make Redbook sound really good provided the recording is well made. Then you go on to say that DSD can also sound good but only on the stratospheric players. Since I've only listened to an 777ES only once and not for any extended period, nor have I been in a hi-end shop in awhile, I can only ponder the DSD vs CD debate by the technicalities. Your analysis now poses some new questions for me...

Careful here, you're close to putting words in my mouth that I didn't say.

On any given dual mode (say, SACD and CD) player, SACD/DSD will usually sound better...

NOT necessarily because of the difference in technical performance of the recording, though, as often different/superior mastering is used- so drawing conclusions about the relative merits is dangerous.

What I AM trying to nudge folks into seeing, is that the potential for CD or SACD is rarely met by existing players- and since SACD aspires to higher effective bit depths of resolution at most audio frequencies, reaching that level of performance in practice is even more difficult.

To make a silly but realistic example, what do you think might sound better- SPIF output from a $50 Chinese DVD player driving a Benchmark DAC1, playing back the JVC XRCD2 version of Patricia Barber "Modern Cool", or a thousand dollar Sony SACD capable megachanger playing back the SACD version of this recording? Hmmmmm? Any takers? (BTW, I only bet on sure things....)

It's only in the last 3-5 years that there are a reasonable selection of CD playback rigs which really do a fairly good job for the most part of fully realizing Redbook CD's 16 bit capabilities - and certainly only recently that you can get any of them for under $1K. Most are still in the $4,000 and up range. $9-15K being fairly typical, especially for better build quality examples.

My point being that for a significant number of SACD disks, it may be the better mastering process which helps them sound better on even medium price players. BUT, don't assume that what you're hearing is better than what CD sounds like on a really competent player- or that you'll reach SACD's potential on a $1K player.

Don't get me wrong- I like SACD's, especially hybrid ones with high performance CD layers. MOST of my listening to those disks lately is done with the CD layer through my DAC1- because it's quite competitive with the SCD777ES on the SACD layer, IF the CD layer is a good quality down conversion.

Because there are so many different "sources" for SACD disks- analog tape, PCM digital recordings, and original DSD recordings, the sound quality of SACD disks is rather varying- and frankly, a good downconversion of DSD to CD, or a good analog tape to CD master will often, on a good redbook dac, outperform many SACD recordings made from PCM sources.

So, caveat emptor.

Lastly, think about it this way- if you had a Ferrari V8, and put it in a Japanese mini-van body, though it would have a lot of horsepower (on paper), you wouldn't be able to put much of it on the road, compared with, say, a Honda S2000. SACD disks on low cost players is a similar problem....

~Jon

[purplepeople]

Careful here, you're close to putting words in my mouth that I didn't say.

That's certainly not my intent. Thank you for bearing with me so far.

ensen.

[purplepeople]

I think I am beginning to see...

Let me first explain my own choices. I bought the Sony DVP-NC650V CD/SACD/DVD carousel because I like having several discs playing on random and because I figured that the analog stages would be a bit better to try and match the capability of the SACD dac. I never once expected it to be the equal of a hi-end redbook player, but it was the cheapest way to start HT and 2-ch and still get analog stages that weren't crappy. In that respect I have been quite happy. I haven't gone shopping for upgrades because I just can't afford to do so right now and I have the flawed tendency to be very loose with the credit card when in the presence of stuff I like.

But, one day I hope to be able to buy the next piece in the puzzle. It probably won't be a player, transport or processor. I'm more likely to add speakers or projection. But the the hi-res formats intrigue me because I know I can hear a difference, however little of it that my own ears can discern.

So... when the occasion to upgrade the 2-ch comes along, it looks like the advice is to stick with any player I've got, use the digital outputs and get a very good DAC. Since I really don't expect DSD or DVD-A to take off, or to be able to afford any of the Ferrari-class players for them, this is definitely the path I would take anyway. What I didn't realize was that there were reasons other than price/performance to choose this over playing redbook CD in a hi-res player.

ensen.

[ThomasW]

The nice thing is that unlike vinyl or high speed tape, CD/SACDs never wearout. So one can start with a modest system and the discs keep sounding better and better with each equipment upgrade.

One can also 'hedge' their bets by buying hybrid SACDs. These are only sightly more expensive compared to their CD counterparts.

[Danbry39]

The nice thing is that unlike vinyl or high speed tape, CD/SACDs never wearout.

Actually, and unfortunately, I'm not sure if this is true. I've read some articles in the last few months which indicate that they aren't as eternal as once was thought.

[Bam!]

Actually, and unfortunately, I'm not sure if this is true. I've read some articles in the last few months which indicate that they aren't as eternal as once was thought.

....could it be cause of things like cd rot ?

[JonMarsh]

I've heard rumors about this, but I'm inclined to treat them as urban myths for now. I quite literally have 20 year old CD's, which appear to be just as good as when I bought them at the dawn of the CD era. Of course, I don't live in a high humidity area like Georgia or Florida, and I don't allow store bought CD's in the car, either- only CDR's or CDRW's.

~Jon

[ThomasW]

I have quite a few CD's pressed as early as 1983 that are perfect.

[Burke Strickland]

Well I do live in a high humidity area, Houston, Texas, which also happens to be where I bought my first CD in 1984 and most of the ones since, and where all of them have been stored in the intervening years. No signs at all of so-called "CD rot". (For the record, a few of my laser discs did develop laser rot -- the "usual suspects", pressed at plants known to have produced discs with problems of that sort.)

Just for grins, I'm playing that very first CD right now, and it sounds better today than it did then. Not because the disc itself has magically improved (no green markers have ever touched it) :>) but due to significant upgrades in my playback system since then. I'm demonstrating to myself once again that, over time, the cumulative investments in both hardware and software have been well worth it.

By the way, just to add another little footnote to the original discussion in this thread, my CD transport that I am currently using was less expensive than the first one I first bought all those years ago, and yet performs better. The "new" player reportedly uses the same transport as the same manufacturer's top of the line player,which is exponentially more expensive.

Of course, I am using this player as transport only, taking advantage of the excellent DACs, anti-jitter reclocking and algorithmic upsampling of the Integra RDC-7 via a digital connection for Redbook CD, rather than depending on the DACs of the player, which are still not bad, given the budget price of the unit.

In the past couple of years, I've compared a fair number of costly transports to some more, ahem, "budget" models (cost ranging between $150 to $12,000) and realize that I'd have to spend $20,000 for the Linn CD-12 to get a significant enough performance difference (as in "one that I can clearly hear"), so there is no need to spend ten times as much as I paid, when I know the additional performance benefit is almost negligable when scaled against the lofty heights of the Linn (which I will probsbly never be able to buy, but it sure makes one heck of a benchmark).

Of course, if you hear do a significant difference between an "economical" transport and a more expensive transport and can afford the more expensive model, go for it. (If you can afford the Linn CD-12, you are very fortunate indeed.)

Enjoy!

Burke

[David Meek]

You remember the first CD you bought!?!?!?!?!? Wow! 8O

I started collecting at Christmas of '84, and not one out of 600+ CDs has ever shown any signs of rot, or any other malfunction for that matter. A few have been SO BAD quality- and content-wise that they should be counted as malfunctions tho'. :B Oh yeah, and that's in the high-humidity town Burke's in, too.

Back OT:

I've been running my CD feed through a Musical Fidelity A3.2CR DAC for a couple of years now. After 6 months or so, I switched transports from a Sony ES-series changer to a higher-end Yamaha single-CD unit. Even filtering through the DAC, there was a noticable change in the quality of the presentation. After a couple of months, I switched back and was appalled at the loss of resolution/quality. It was not a subtle thing, not something to write off as "psycho-acousitcs", and it is something I can duplicate on an "as needed" basis. Back in went the Yamaha - and quickly! Bluntly, IMO better CD players are worthwhile - up to a cost-vs-return-point that the individual has to decide upon.

[Danbry39]

Good to know that nobody has experienced CD rot. I won't worry as much about my collection. :

I do remember my first CD, which I bought around '86 because I was about to have my first child. It was a collection of Disney songs.

Sorry, and back to the topic at hand. ops:

[TheBottom]

This is for ChrisG

Different transports make a world of difference

The characteristics of an outstanding CD transport are simple to define: while suppressing the noise inherent in digital processing, it must recover the correct data from the disc and deliver it to the digital processor without any timing errors. As simple as this sounds, achieving it in reality has been extremely difficult - as evidenced by the significant sonic differences between various CD transports.

Recovering the correct data, by itself, is not difficult. The error detection and error correction schemes used by all modern CD players are quite powerful. Since the technology used for compact discs borrows heavily from computer technology (where even a single error can cause a system "crash"), you might imagine that uncorrectable errors would be quite rare. If so, you would be right. Even badly scratched discs can often be played without difficulty.

Significant sonic differences between quality CD transports are frequently the result of differences in their timing accuracy: unlike a computer, digital audio depends on the signal being reconstructed by the digital to analogue converters at precisely the right time. Timing errors in digital audio have come to be known as "jitter," which can be thought of as the digital version of "wow & flutter." These inconsistencies in the transmission rate of digital information distort the sound, causing it to sound harsh and unnatural.

Since compact discs operate with a 44.1KHz sampling rate, there should be exactly 44,100 samples passed on to the digital processor each second. Moreover, each sample should consistently follow the previous one at precise intervals; that is, each sample of musical information should last for exactly 1/44,100th of a second before being replaced by the next one. One of the big challenges in digital audio is "clocking" these samples out with a high level of precision - without it, the system falls short of its potential.

Traditional transport designs seek to retrieve the digital audio information from the disc itself at exactly the correct rate. An oscillator mounted on the laser pickup mechanism provides a "reference" frequency that is used to control the rate at which digital information is being extracted from the disc. You might think of it as being like the transport's "metronome," determining the "tempo" at which the musical information is recovered. Any discrepancy between the "tempo" of this oscillator and the transport causes the latter's motor to adjust its speed accordingly. Thus, in conventional CD transport design, the regularity with which information is obtained from the disc depends on the quality of the oscillator as well as on many associated components (such as the motor, its bearing, control servos, power supplies, etc.).

Unfortunately, this important oscillator exists in an extremely noisy electrical environment, close to the motor that spins the disc and to related circuits that interfere with the oscillator's consistency. The resultant electrical noises introduce timing errors in the critical reference frequency produced by the oscillator. In addition, mechanical problems such as friction, vibration, and inertia prevent the laser/disc mechanism from attaining even the imperfect level of accuracy called for by the oscillator. All of the resultant timing errors, regardless of their source, carry over into the delivery of the digital signal and have come to be known collectively as "jitter."

Subsequent handling of the digital audio signal in traditional transport designs can't improve upon this "jittery" signal, lacking a better reference. To the contrary, the various stages of signal processing between the laser pickup and the final output can only contribute additional jitter of their own.

[TheBottom]

I have a Rotel RCD-1070 and I have had many auditions with NAD, I have to say the difference is chalk and cheese!

I'm now auditioning a Meridian G08 CD player and it is fantastic, the difference is so big, that is justifies the price tag. I would pay six times the price for the Meridian. I feel I am getting Six times the detail.

The general rule of thumb is that you system is only able to give you the quality of the worst link. That means that if you have a $1000 CD player with a $50,000 system, that CD player is letting you down.

This is the case for me!

[ThomasW]

To the contrary, the various stages of signal processing between the laser pickup and the final output can only contribute additional jitter of their own.

Not any more ...... :??

HERE'S why

[David Meek]

Thomas, that horizontal green line says a lot. . . . :T

[glider]

Hi Guys,
Well just as a follow up, I received my ShengYa S-10CS direct from the factory in China on Thursday (DHL cleared it through Aussie customs for me). The player is built like a tank! It arrived with no damage and is very attractive when you power it up and the valve starts to glow in the front window. Ok, how does it sound? Well, as I said below I already have a Rotel RCD-1072 which I love the detail but lacks a little in the muscial department (can sound a little bright on bad recording), and the NAD C542 which has good bass as is quite musical, but a little more detail would not go astray. Well the S-10CS seems to have the best of both these players. It is detailed (without ever being bright, due to its valves I assume), a warm musically midrange, solid bass and oh so smooth sounding. It also seems to create a much larger sound stage than the other two players. Needless to say, I'm very happy with the purchase Best of all, I got the player for a 1/3 of its price here in Australia.

cheers,
Stephen

Hi Stephen,

I live in Melbourne and I read your postings on the Shengya S-10CS with great interest (this is my first post).

I am in the same situation as you were – trying to buy a high quality CDP in Australia which doesn’t cost an arm and a leg! I have given up on DVD player manufacturers ever producing a hybrid machine that does justice to the humble CD. After all these years, not even high end DVD players are capable of top notch playback (differing opinions?).

Now that you have had a couple of weeks to properly burn in your player, grow accustomed to its sound and get past that initial emotional rush we all experience when we buy some terrific new kit, I wonder whether the sonics have improved?

You originally described the bass as ‘solid’, which isn’t a glowing recommendation in my book! How about timing and dynamics? Is it best suited to jazz and acoustic or can it rock out as well? Does it play back CDRs without problems? What is the audio quality through the headphone socket like?

If I don’t import a budget audiophile player like the Shengya, then I too will be stuck with the (generally) overpriced mainstream options that are available here in Oz.

Regards

Peter.

[whmacs]

Hi Peter,
I've been so happy with the player I went and purchased the matching ShengYa pre / power amp. These sell in Oz for around $4500-5000, I picked them up for $1500. Here is a link to what I purchased I'm getting a lend of some Ambience Ribbon Speakers from my local dealer next week to try out the whole combo. I'm currently using the CD player through my HT system.

The bass on the play is nice and tight while the overall sound is very musical and smooth. It performs much better than my NAD C542 or Rotel 1072. The timing is excellent and the dynamics are outstanding. There is loads of detail (more than I expected from a valve based player), but at no time is it bright, just nice and smooth. No issues with CD-R's. When you power it up it takes about 40 seconds to warm up (same for the pre/power) before you can play anything, and sound does continue to improve for the next 20 minutes or so. I had a few delays in getting the goods through customs, but everything worked out in the end.


cheers,
Stephen

[glider]

Thanks for the speedy reply!

I'm glad the cd player is continuing to live up to your expectations. I like my bass, so I'm glad it measures up in that department. I'm not a fan of NAD because I find their bass too 'dry' sounding. Rotel is better. Have you thought about upgrading the Philips tubes or are you happy with the way it sounds?

Thanks for the link to the website where you bought your gear. I have emailed cattylink.com for some prices, but I haven't heard back from them yet. The shipping cost of your new amps to Australia must have given you heart failure! I guess they are heavy. Cattylink prices are very similar, so the shipping costs will probably persuade me one way or the other.

The player will slot into a home theater setup for present, until I can afford a separate 'music only' system. I have a Rotel power amp which does me nicely and a Whatmough Synergy satellite/sub combo which works very well in my small living room. I use a yamaha A/V receiver as a pre amp/pro until I can afford something better.

I am tempted to build an Aksa amp for music output. I have heard them a few times and they are simply superb! They have the warmth of tubes, but with the speed and slam of solid state electrics. I do like to support local designers as well.

Ribbon speakers sound great, but can be room dependant; I hope they sound good in your living space.

Peter.

[ARAWAK]

Questions about ShengYa CD-S10CS or Vincent S6

I don't understand the point of geting the ShengYa S10CS or Vincent S6 as connectors are XLR (i.e. instead of ShengYa S10 or Vincent S3); most Pre-amps like mine have RCA connectors and major cable compnies are not making XLR/RCA cables; I know there are adaptors but I thing I might lose the benefits of quality.
Does anybody have an answer to that?

[AndrewM]

Sure, get a DAC and a Pre-amp with XLR connectors on it. The Benchmark DAC1 has the ability to use XLR in and out (IIRC), and there are plenty of balanced pre-amps out there to choose from, usually starting at the $1k price-point.

If you want to use such a setup in a HT then you'll have to look a little higher end on the pre-pro price scale, probably around the $3k mark or so to get a balaced input/output. Doesn't the Anthem AVM20/30 offer a balanced analog input? I believe the Krell Showcase has at least one, etc.

[ajpoe]

The B&K Ref 50 and Integra Pro both have balanced I/O at around $2,000 for HT.

AJ

[whmacs]

Hi
The S10CS has both XLR and RCA connectors.

cheers,
Stephen

I don't understand the point of geting the ShengYa S10CS or Vincent S6 as connectors are XLR (i.e. instead of ShengYa S10 or Vincent S3); most Pre-amps like mine have RCA connectors and major cable compnies are not making XLR/RCA cables; I know there are adaptors but I thing I might lose the benefits of quality.
Does anybody have an answer to that?

[ARAWAK]

Happy with RCA

Thks all
I am glad to find RCA connectors on the ShengYa s10CS, I don't want to upgrade all my equipment for a new CD player.
BTW I have a question for andrewM and apjoe: I looked on the back of the Vincent S6, and I don't see RCA connectors. My question being why buying such an XLR only CD Player if, everything has to reach the $3k scale? If I had to reach that level I would consider a CD player in the range, like SHANLING T100C.

[hdshark]

All this talk about jitter & CD players is absolutely "the-word-for-which-chrisg-got-a-warning" when using digital out. With very minimal amount of buffering, a pre-amp/processor/etc. can construct the original digital bitstream from the bitstream coming from the digital out of a CD player, as long as there are no uncorrectable ECC errors.

[ARAWAK]

ShengYa S10-CS

Thanks to members in this forum, I got ShengYa S10CS CD Player today, that I plugged with Concertcats cables.
On Rotel 1070 and B&W 805 I had the most wonderfull experience, and I can only recommand this CD Player for its warm, detailed and "full" sound.
I purchased from a very nice and reliable dealer in China

http://www.timaudio.com/

[whmacs]

Hi Arawak,
I'm glad you like the S10CS. I was so impressed with this player, I went an purchased the matching SA-T3/SP-T300 pre/power combo. This combo combined with some good Aussie speakers have put me in two channel audio heaven

cheers,
Stephen

Thanks to members in this forum, I got ShengYa S10CS CD Player today, that I plugged with Concertcats cables.
On Rotel 1070 and B&W 805 I had the most wonderfull experience, and I can only recommand this CD Player for its warm, detailed and "full" sound.
I purchased from a very nice and reliable dealer in China
http://www.timaudio.com/

[NMyTree]

I wanted to share some information regarding Vincent CD Players and gear, which I've recently just heard.

Apparently,

Vincent filed a lawsuit (threee years ago) against the people who stole their designs and were producing inferior or rebadged versions of their designs. And Vincent won. Shengya and other cloners were forced to shut it down.

There was a distributor here in the USA who was carrying another Vincent clone, called "Kavent". Well, "Kavent " no longer exists and the distributor's website seem to be history too.

You will notice that all those clones have been and are disappearing off the market, and the guilty being shut down. The distributers who were selling the clones, were ordered to cease/desist.

Vincent has been re-establishing a distribution network and they are back in full swing .....

( http://www.vincent-tac.de/en/distributoren.php ) or

( http://www.vincent-tac.de/ )

If you're in the USA and interested in Vincent products contact Brian at...... http://www.q-usa.com/


P.S. From what I understand, Vincent is now being produced in a factory which only produces two high quality name brands; Mercedes Benz automobile computers, and Vincent audio gear, that's it. There is a high standard of quality control at this manufactoring plant.

[Farscape1]

NMyTree: Thanks for the information on the gear, and there in my backyard almost. Regardless of pricing I am not a big fan of Chineese gear at the moment, just because of the clones being produced out there, and that isn't just in electronics but speakers also. Hell I bet most manufactuers that are having stuff built there and calling it High End are making a killing.... My Preference is Musical Fidelity.... And you Aussies out there I like Osborn Speakers/Krix and how about Redgum are they still around?

[NMyTree]

You're Welcome.

Just wanted to share the information.

For a year or so, I was quite confused myself, about this whole issue and all the clones.

Now it seems the dust has cleared and the thruth has risen to the top.

[soundhound]

I am about to find out if the higher end cd players are worth it. I ordered one recently from Jim @ next level and am anxiously waiting to plug it in and see for myself. The Denon 1910 I have does a nice job of distinguishing the differences in recorded music, but I was one who believes there has to be better. I was convinced of the fact long ago that when a component manufacturer can concentrate on 1 goal with a product, they tend to put a little more into it versus trying to make the component accomplish multiple tasks. There are also inherant issues that are there when combining features or circuits in one cabinet. Will chime back in when it arrives and I get to sample.