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

[D1 Meyer]

A friend of mine just got back from Phoenix AZ where he auditioned a NAIM CD5i CD player. The player sells for $2700 US and is an entry level version of a NAIM CD player that sells for $24,000 US. A review on the Internet favorably compared the latter NAIM player to the Linn Sondek CD12 player that sells for $40,000 US. Is there no end to High-End audio?

We are putting together a new stereo system based on a Rotel amplifier and pre-amplifer and we are looking forward to auditioning the Rotel RCD-1072 CD player. Is the Linn Sondek player really 40 times "better" than the Rotel player? How are we to deal with the range of prices in High-End audio?

[H.Donald]

My thoughts...worth is determined by whether someone will pay that price...and someone will.And no there is no end to this...this is a world where you can spend thousands of dollars on cables,cords and interconnects.
I think everything is determined by levels...just like automobiles...
There's a guy driving along in his $20,000 VW,up pulls another guy in his $50,000 BMW and next to him is the next guy in$250,000 Fararri...and they are all happy...
The point is to find your level and be happy.My level is Paradigm/Rotel and I think it's a great place to be.Maybe one day I will try Krell or Bryston but not now..I have'nt finished enjoying this level.By the way I have the 1072 and it's miles ahead of any cd player I've used before...Nad 541,Arcam 62t among others.
happy hunting

[aud19]

I totally agree with pretty much everything you wrote there Herman. Well put:T

Is it 40x better? No probably not. But you'd be surprised how much a wealthy audiophile will pay to get that last one or two percent. Getting to say 90% is quite affordable, 95% starts to get in to an investment, 96-98% is expensive. That last two percent is stratospherical.

A good player like the 1072 is a good investment for a midrange system adding, or getting instead, something like a Benchmark DAC1 will take you even further. Personally I'd be tempted to get a good universal player teamed with the Benchmark or a universal player and a HTPC/music server teamed with a Benchmark.

Jason

[Bam!]

I'll throw my 2 cents in...

First off the cd5i from NAim...can be had for 1950.00$ Canadian...taxes in...I know..I almost bought it.....and one of my buddies did actually buy for that price....

That being said.....you'd be surprised at the differences a really good redbook player can make.

To get that right texture in sound....that incredible sound stage...the most subtle detail...the right ryhthm..pace....and timing (PRAT very well know with NAIM).....it does add up in $$$

Not to insult anyone's gear....but I think it is totally unfair to put the 1072 in the same league as the Naim.....there is no competition....have ONE listen and you will see.

As for spending $$$...what seems insane for some might seem not bad for others.....

Lastly...while the cd5i is a great player that I often get to listen to actually....there is better.....by a long shot on top of it......so to answer your question.....does it play 40x better......in audio....to get a little better...you must pay a premium...as you all know!

Just my 2 cents.

oh...Jason's idea with the DAc1 would be a great ensemble....

[will1066]

I agree with everyhing said. I have heard that Naim player, and it is very very sweet. I just can't get over the company's funky styling and ergonomics.

[IntegrateMe]

I thought the Linn CD12 was $12,000?

[jlee]

I too have heard the Naim and it's worth the $2000 US... it's a very good player, very pitch accurate and quick. I personally have the MF A.3.2CD because I can't stand the Naim's ergonomics... having to place the puck every time is annoying... I didn't think that little extra sound quality and $500 was worth it over the A3.2CD... PLUS... with a Naim CD player, you pretty much have to have NAIM EVERYTHING... since they make their own cables and require everything to be connected with them... very LAIM if you ask me...

A3.2CD vs. 1072:
I do think the $800 US extra over the $700 US 1072 was well worth it though... I've A/B'ed the 2 and IMO, the A3.2 is significantly better..not to say the 1072 is not a good player... it's probably the best player at it's price point and an excellent value. Actually, it was the 1071 I demoed... not sure what changes the 1072 had over the 1071, but I can't imagine it was of huge significance as the price remained the same.

[H.Donald]

My main point about the 1072 was that if you are at the level where you are spending less than $1,000 on a cd player then...go for it...but if you can spend 2,3,5x that for a player of course there is better.Even the guy who has the $250,000 two-seater will one day tire of it and look to upgrade.There is always going to be better...between what your ear tells you and what your wallet can handle determine where you are on this journey mid-fi and beyond.

[whmacs]

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

[Bam!]

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

hmmm haven't heard much on that particular Shengya...but this one has been getting some pretty good comments....

...and it's dirt cheap!

[Bam!]

...on another note......this thread should really be in the Audio Hideout.....but the worst part is it would not get half the attention as it is getting right now..... :scratchhead:

[Khorn]

I'm of the opinion that you should try and obtain the best front end that you can. Of course there has to be some sort of "balance" to the system but I would want to feed the system the best signal that I am able to start with. IMHO,from what I have seen over time, there seems to be one of the more substantial jumps in performance when moving from the sub $1K to around the $3K price range.

[whmacs]

Hi Guys,
Yes, this thread is getting way off topic...
That CD player is the ShengYa S-10 and sells for $300 US, I'm after the model up from this which is the S-10CS which sells for $500 US. It has XLR connectors, better remote and some internal changes. Could we move this thread to Audio Hideout?

cheers,
Stephen

hmmm haven't heard much on that particular Shengya...but this one has been getting some pretty good comments....

...and it's dirt cheap!

[aud19]

Ask and ye shall recieve

[BrianJD]

That CD player is the ShengYa S-10 and sells for $300 US, I'm after the model up from this which is the S-10CS which sells for $500 US. It has XLR connectors, better remote and some internal changes.

Hi Guys,

I have the S6 with a different face plate. Its a great CDP, especially for the price. I have no complaints. :T
I dont think the S-10 CS has XLR, (the S3 does). I could be wrong tho, theres so many different EU, US & Asia models now, its difficult to keep track.

[Bam!]

...well here's the thing....

for me a cd player must give a precise, wide, open and as large as possible of a soundstage without making feel blouted.
It should reproduce the sound as true to the sound of an instrument, voice or detail when heard in real life.
It should have the right pace, rythm and timing of the music
We should feel the music as much as possible
It should intise you.

Where am I going with this ?

Simple.....did a side by side comparison.....with an Arcam Alpha 7.....vs Copland cda 822....

The warm sound of the Arcam gave the same texture but not the depth of Rebecca Pidgeon...but never the less....quite close between the two.

That's it. The similarities ended there.

Soundstage....as I described above.....Copland
and all the things and more that I mentioned above....Copland.

The strange part is even on a song with nina Simone...that heat that Arcam gives.....messed up Nina 's voice pretty badly.

So for me....a redbook player either does the job.....or it doesn't....and I have yet to hear a redbook player below 2000.00$ that does it.

Do sub 2000$ players sound "good" yes.....compare them with higher end players.......and you'll see (imaging &soundstaging) and hear the differences.

This post was inspired by :

Khorn

I'm of the opinion that you should try and obtain the best front end that you can. Of course there has to be some sort of "balance" to the system but I would want to feed the system the best signal that I am able to start with. IMHO,from what I have seen over time, there seems to be one of the more substantial jumps in performance when moving from the sub $1K to around the $3K price range.

[ThomasW]

Before anyone spends the big bucks on a high-end CDP I strongly urge that the Benchmark DAC1 be auditioned with ANY transport. AudioAdvisor offers a 30 day money back guarantee, so there's not much to lose is there ?

[dave]

just my 2cents for what it's worth.
A while back I started a thread regarding this same issue.
I will repeat,your cd player is in fact the first link in the chain of command
and no matter how good your system is if the imformation isn't retrieved from
the original source then it's lost. I've found this to be true in a variety of instances. In short, Don't shortchange the rest of your highend system
with a source that can't reproduce the Images, Detail and Depth. you may pay a bit more in the beginning yet on the other hand, you more than likely will be satisfied for many years to come!

[chrisg]

Bs

Assuming the CD player is attached through a digtal output, it will make no difference what is sitting on the other end, if they are both sending identical bits, which they should be, since the goal in life for a cd player is to send out the bits that are encoded on the disk unmodified.

I don't doubt that there are meaningful differences between players when they are used in their analog mode, and I'm sure that the build quality is higher on the more expensive players (of course you could just buy 4 less expensive players and throw one out if something goes wrong).

[dave]

You have Your opinion and I have mine!!! But to say it BS is out of line!!!

[Bam!]

Assuming the CD player is attached through a digtal output, it will make no difference what is sitting on the other end, if they are both sending identical bits, which they should be, since the goal in life for a cd player is to send out the bits that are encoded on the disk unmodified.

I don't doubt that there are meaningful differences between players when they are used in their analog mode, and I'm sure that the build quality is higher on the more expensive players (of course you could just buy 4 less expensive players and throw one out if something goes wrong).

Chrisg....unless you are talking about using the cd player as a transport and using the DACs in an SP1.7 or an Anthem D1....then O.K.....other than that the DAcs in your HT receiver....is not in the same league as a high end cd player.....

[David Meek]

Chrisg, NO more "BS" comments. This is your only warning.

[Bam!]

O.K. let's not ruin this thread just cause Chris was bs....which stands for being stupid.... :lol:

It was a moment of weakness....nothing more I am sure!

Let's move on....

[chrisg]

I apologize for using the term BS.

Assuming that you use the digital connectors on your CD player, all CD players
within reason should produce the exact same output.

Assuming the analog outputs are used, differences would be expected,
and there is then room for differences in filtering, etc. It seems a little inneficient to have this functionality inside of the cd player as opposed to an outboard dac, pre-amp, etc where it can be shared with other digital components and is optically isolated from noisy things like motors (presumably
the high end players optically isolate the dac stages from everything else internally).

Many of the comments in this thread are non-sensical - for instance, referring to pitch-accuracy. Believe me, clocking bits to digital-to-analog converters at a fixed rate with high accuracy at frequencies far above those relevant to
audio is a solved problem.

[Bam!]

I apologize for using the term BS.

Assuming that you use the digital connectors on your CD player, all CD players
within reason should produce the exact same output.

Assuming the analog outputs are used, differences would be expected,
and there is then room for differences in filtering, etc. It seems a little inneficient to have this functionality inside of the cd player as opposed to an outboard dac, pre-amp, etc where it can be shared with other digital components and is optically isolated from noisy things like motors (presumably
the high end players optically isolate the dac stages from everything else internally).

Many of the comments in this thread are non-sensical - for instance, referring to pitch-accuracy. Believe me, clocking bits to digital-to-analog converters at a fixed rate with high accuracy at frequencies far above those relevant to
audio is a solved problem.

I guess jittering is not an issue for you then....

While having the DAC seperate....or in yoyur Pre pro...that debate is wide open for discussion......I think the future is having your source used only as a transport....but right now....the only really goos DACs are in pre pros that are quite pricey....

....but your point is made.....

[chrisg]

No. Where in the system is this jitter and how is its time variance high enough to cause audible differences (and why don't the PLLs and latches eliminate it)?

BTW, the CRT you are most likely reading this on has to convert digital to analog at frequencies above 100 _M_ hz, and a jitter in the range of 10ns would be easily observable as shifting pixels on your screen.

I guess jittering is not an issue for you then....

While having the DAC seperate....or in yoyur Pre pro...that debate is wide open for discussion......I think the future is having your source used only as a transport....but right now....the only really goos DACs are in pre pros that are quite pricey....

....but your point is made.....

[Bam!]

chrisg...I hear your points.....a couple of questions for you...

Do you listen to music in 2 channel or multi channel ?

Do you listen through a 2 channel integrated or seperates....or so you use a Prepro that can be used for both.....if so...which one ?

[Khorn]

I think that you either accept the premise "all equipment sounds the same if it measures the same" or you don't.

In the Audiophile world many believe (I being one of them) that measurements don't tell the whole story. I have heard equipment that measures fantastically but doesn't sound good and produces other artifacts such as "Listener Fatigue" that prevents listening for any length of time.

Numbers and scientific evaluation don't always tell the answer probably because there are factors that we are unaware of and don't/can't account for. If we were aware of all parameters maybe we could draw more accurate conclusions through measuring but, anyone who thinks we know everything and are able to measure everything is a bit presumptuous to say the least, and that's being kind.

Audio is subjective. You make judgements by using your ears and listening. If something measures fantastically on the test bench but, doesn't sound good to you then that's all that matters. It also works the other way around. Something may measure sub par on the bench but, if you love the sound that's all that matters.

Don't let anybody come on to you saying "measurements say its no good " or worse "prove it to me". You don't have to prove anything to anybody. Its about you and what you yourself like.

When considering the purchase of any audio component try and audition it first hand preferably in your own system, failing that ask about it in groups like this one and try to gain some consensus of opinion.

Measurements in and of themselves can be a good indication of competent engineering but are far from being the whole answer. Don't forget Audio designers often "voice" their equipment to sound a certain way so they and many others like the way it sounds.

Listen, ask opinions then buy what sounds good to you and don't give a flyin' fidoo if others tell you that you are wrong. In those cases it sure as heck ain't you that is.

Listen.....Listen.....Listen.....that's what its all about.

The above is all IMHO

[chrisg]

The question is irrelevent. I'd answer just as confidently if I had never even SEEN a CD player, just read the specs. I speak from my engineering experience. I know how a CD player works and in fact have worked on CD player firmware and hardware way back when. Every CD player at any price point is capable of faithfully transmitting the bit stream encoded on the disk out of its digital outputs, and the circuitry sitting at the other end of that bitstream doesn't know whether your CD player cost $40 or $2000. Anyone with even a little digital circuit experience care to object to that?


I don't know how much the analog outputs of these players differ. I'm a little skeptical on that front as well, since none of the makers of these expensive players are chip manufacturers. Perhaps they are able to deliver better pre-amplification performance, or they use their own custom DSP programs
to deliver a little sweeter oversampling than that which you get with the $10 high quality audio DACs or to intentionally color the original sound.

chrisg...I hear your points.....a couple of questions for you...

Do you listen to music in 2 channel or multi channel ?

Do you listen through a 2 channel integrated or seperates....or so you use a Prepro that can be used for both.....if so...which one ?

[brucek]

No. Where in the system is this jitter and how is its time variance high enough to cause audible differences (and why don't the PLLs and latches eliminate it)?

Chrisg, you seem to have already made up your mind, but as you say, jitter is a time based error. It occurs between the clock we use to get the data off the disk in a CD transport and the clock used in the DAC system.

In the simple CD 'player' we use the identical master clock for these two functions and so in this 'synchronous system' jitter isn't a concern. The master clock that is in charge of getting the data off the disk is also used by the CD players internal DAC...... This is the best possible situation, and in that regard, if the DAC and analog output circuitry of the player are well made (and there's the rub), then this situation will arguably beat the transport/DAC situation, although it seems a few people here have had great success and would argue that the Benchmark DAC1 takes the transport / DAC combination to a new level. I have to accept that they're experienced listeners, and know what they're talking about. Never say never when it comes to audio.

In the transport / DAC situation that exists when we use the digital output of a CD player, the responsibility for clocking the digital data from the CD player (whether PCM or AC-3 or DTS) is that of the SPDIF transmission format. The SPDIF format combines the data from the disk and the CD players clock using a method called biphase-mark encoding. The clock is then recovered by the sampling and DAC circuitry in the external DAC (generally using a PLL (phase locked loop).

This recovered clock is then used to clock the DAC. Unfortunately, since the timing of the bits for DAC clocking is determined by the zero-crossing point of the signal, then any distortions can introduce jitter. It's a very real problem - not to be underestimated. No amount of buffering and reclocking will completely solve the problem that the recovered clock has jitter and is 'asynchronous' with respect to the transports master clock. There will always be some jitter irregardless of the jitter reducers used..

This time-base error is up for debate whether it's audible or not though. Can you hear the effects of jitter - maybe. Personally, I think so, and there's lots of anecdotal data to support it.

Either way, if you have a well constructed CD player and use the analog outputs, or if you use a high quality external DAC system, you will not be able to take advantage of this pristine signal without a true bypass on your receiver or with an analog preamp.

brucek

[ThomasW]

although it seems a few people here have had great success and would argue that the Benchmark DAC1 takes the transport / DAC combination to a new level. I have to accept that they're experienced listeners, and know what they're talking about.

Listening tests aside, here's why we like the DAC -1

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/appnotes-d/whyultralock.asp

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/appnotes-d/jitterimmunity.asp

[purplepeople]

Hi chrisg,

I've noticed that it really turns off many newsgroupies when someone positions themselves as an engineer with knowledge of the basic science. The end result is that one only positions themself as an engineer with knowledge of the "basic" science. The fact is that the really skilled digital gurus at TI and National are also very skilled at linear electronics and vice versa. Instead of comparing what happens at the low vs high ends of consumer/audiophile equipment, take a look at the professional equipment used in the recording studios. This is not for the enjoyment of the studio technicians, but for making ROI. If bigger profits could be made with less expensive CD players, I'm sure they would be in use.

So when we take a careful look at this equipment, we find some consistent characteristics...

1) Reliable lasers sub-assemblies for minimizing lost bits and the chance of failure during a write.
2) Fast seek times for picking out tracks and creating loops.
3) Good error correction
4) Resistance to physical shock
5) Good mechanical parts to minimize extraneous noise, such as choosing bearings instead of bushings.
6) Extremely accurate clocks to minimize jitter.
7) Very good filters for smoothing the output of the onboard DACs
8) Very high signal to noise ratio on the analog outputs

More than a number of people have had to replace their inexpensive CDPs because it is cheaper than getting them cleaned. Better equipment will continue to read/write through dust and smoke. Sure this can be done with a CD-ROM but there are reason not to run at 12X speeds in order to correct for errors (see #5). Good clocks prevent the need for using the error correction. Every little circuit creates noise... use less of them and make less noise. Noise is the thing we are trying to minimize.. all of it, shot, pink, what have you. The point of using good equipment is to make it disappear, electronically and more importantly, sonically.

So keep using your cheap noisy player and feed your $2000 processor with it. Maybe your amps make enough noise to mask what's coming from the source. But if you've ever (not) heard a Bryston or any other good amp, then you know that these can reveal the flaws of just about any source component.

Everyone gets what they pay for. Even though I cannot afford the best equipment, you'll never see me buy a bottom rung unit.

ensen.

PS: Here's a test. Unplug everything but the speakers from your pre/pro/amp or receiver. Then flip the volume all the way to max and put your ear to the speakers. You shouldn't hear anything. Nada. Not even a 26dB hiss. That's a good noise floor and if you amps can do that, then everything else needs to be just as quiet. Try listening to your CDP while the volume is off... can you hear the motors or the servos? There are people who can... they help make the content you listen to. They can tell you what weird things were struck to make the foley sounds in Star Wars. They have something to teach, if we listen quietly.

[DrBoom]

Please show me 1 digital processor that has NO hiss what so ever when you crank up the volume to maximum, with no source playing.
I can already rule out the Parasound C2 and the Rotel 1098 (the latter is very quiet in bypass mode, but still has a noise floor, but it doesn't increase with volume)
If there is one of those out there, I'd love to hear it because that's what I'm looking for, one that has no hiss at any volume.
Power amps aren't really prone to hissing problems, it's more a pre-amp and source problem.

[Bam!]

Please show me 1 digital processor that has NO hiss what so ever when you crank up the volume to maximum, with no source playing.
I can already rule out the Parasound C2 and the Rotel 1098 (the latter is very quiet in bypass mode, but still has a noise floor, but it doesn't increase with volume)
If there is one of those out there, I'd love to hear it because that's what I'm looking for, one that has no hiss at any volume.
Power amps aren't really prone to hissing problems, it's more a pre-amp and source problem.

well that's why I spoke about Bryston SP 1.7 and Anthem D1....I've never had the opportunity to hear those....maybe.....just maybe they don't hiss....

However I am still waiting for a response from Chris on what pre pro he uses....

[Shane Martin]

The Old dead horse audiophile argument.

Personally I'm on the same boat as Bam is.

Honestly if the "no you don't hear a difference, its in your head etc" type arguments keep going, this thread will probably end up like the rest of them. A 100 page flame fest that solves nothing.

[David Meek]

Nah, it won't wind up a flame-fest Shane. I PROMISE.

If it stays polite and non-confrontational, I'll let it go until it's as big as a TTP thread - okay, maybe not. . . . :

Seriously though, as someone that leans toward the "if I can hear it" camp but has strong logical/engineering tendencies (boy, do I stay confused) it's interesting to read the various arguments and reasoning from both camps.

[Bam!]

....what sucks is this thread could have been about the sound that is developed by certain manufacturers....instead of it being a debate that all players sound the same....

I could care less if the pope told me an arcam will sound the same as a phillips because it is the same transport....

I'd rather hear....I heard a more defined soundstage on a creek cd43 vs an Arcam cd73

That would be cool to hear!

[purplepeople]

Seriously though, as someone that leans toward the "if I can hear it" camp but has strong logical/engineering tendencies (boy, do I stay confused) it's interesting to read the various arguments and reasoning from both camps.

When redbook first came out, I was young and firmly in the science only camp. It was a reasoning based on growing up with a plastic Apple II+ in my mouth. Digital was the wave of the future and it would replace everything. I didn't yet understand that our sensors could only receive analog.

Then one day, my Dad took me shopping for Mom's first CD player. We looked at a Sony 670 model and a more expensive brass coloured Teac Z-series that the salesman said was a Tascam in hiding. I didn't really know what it all meant, but you could clearly hear the difference between the two units. The Teac was definitely smoother and more natural sounding.

Good thing Dad couldn't afford it as my sister and I proceeded to abuse that stereo to no end. We found out later that the dealer had sold the exact same Teac players to the biggest (at the time) FM station in town. It was my first introduction to equipment used in a professional setting and why I always include "pro" gear in any of my shopping comparisons.

ensen

[chrisg]

I think you are estimating the amount of customization that is available and cost-effectively in manufacturing a CD player. Anyone care to open a recent super high end CD player and see if the transport mechanism is anything different than you'd see elsewhere?


I did some research on the web sites of the various manufacturers of boutique cd players and outboard dacs. The jitter theory seems to be that
some players through allowing leakage of low frequency noise into their digital outputs, can cause noise in the audible frequencies by causing the zero crossing point in their output to drift, with this drift happening at frequencies either low enough to be audible, or to beat with the 44.1khz sampling rate, producing audible frequencies.

Ok, this is possible. If so, it can be fixed by buffering the received data
and reclocking it, if the buffer size is larger than the period of the noise you are trying to supress. Presumably that is what the high end dacs do. I don't know if the typical ht receiver does this or not. The material cost of doing this would be zero for some buffer size, assuming there is already a dsp present and that its on chip ram is of a decent size. It is a shame that the SPDIF interface wasn't done in a more asynchronous manner so that this would be simpler.



What I did notice checking these sites out was an absence of any real-world
examples showing examples of any cd players actually leaking enough noise at the appropriate frequencies - for instance, the article for the outboard dac mentioned showed how effective it was at eliminating jitter - but that jitter was artifically injected into the system. Of course it goes without saying that double blind tests to see if people could tell the difference were not present :-(.

Hi chrisg,

I've noticed that it really turns off many newsgroupies when someone positions themselves as an engineer with knowledge of the basic science. The end result is that one only positions themself as an engineer with knowledge of the "basic" science. The fact is that the really skilled digital gurus at TI and National are also very skilled at linear electronics and vice versa. Instead of comparing what happens at the low vs high ends of consumer/audiophile equipment, take a look at the professional equipment used in the recording studios. This is not for the enjoyment of the studio technicians, but for making ROI. If bigger profits could be made with less expensive CD players, I'm sure they would be in use.

So when we take a careful look at this equipment, we find some consistent characteristics...

1) Reliable lasers sub-assemblies for minimizing lost bits and the chance of failure during a write.
2) Fast seek times for picking out tracks and creating loops.
3) Good error correction
4) Resistance to physical shock
5) Good mechanical parts to minimize extraneous noise, such as choosing bearings instead of bushings.
6) Extremely accurate clocks to minimize jitter.
7) Very good filters for smoothing the output of the onboard DACs
8) Very high signal to noise ratio on the analog outputs

More than a number of people have had to replace their inexpensive CDPs because it is cheaper than getting them cleaned. Better equipment will continue to read/write through dust and smoke. Sure this can be done with a CD-ROM but there are reason not to run at 12X speeds in order to correct for errors (see #5). Good clocks prevent the need for using the error correction. Every little circuit creates noise... use less of them and make less noise. Noise is the thing we are trying to minimize.. all of it, shot, pink, what have you. The point of using good equipment is to make it disappear, electronically and more importantly, sonically.

So keep using your cheap noisy player and feed your $2000 processor with it. Maybe your amps make enough noise to mask what's coming from the source. But if you've ever (not) heard a Bryston or any other good amp, then you know that these can reveal the flaws of just about any source component.

Everyone gets what they pay for. Even though I cannot afford the best equipment, you'll never see me buy a bottom rung unit.

ensen.

PS: Here's a test. Unplug everything but the speakers from your pre/pro/amp or receiver. Then flip the volume all the way to max and put your ear to the speakers. You shouldn't hear anything. Nada. Not even a 26dB hiss. That's a good noise floor and if you amps can do that, then everything else needs to be just as quiet. Try listening to your CDP while the volume is off... can you hear the motors or the servos? There are people who can... they help make the content you listen to. They can tell you what weird things were struck to make the foley sounds in Star Wars. They have something to teach, if we listen quietly.

[chrisg]

Things have changed a LOT since redbook came out. Chances are that teac cd player you mentioned sounded better because of having full 16 bit dacs and maybe oversampling. With any technology, there is a sort of natural quality curve that flattens out as it becomes mass-marketed and more and more effort is put into producing it cheaper.More and more of the functionality is integrated into fewer and fewer chips and sub-assemblies, with each generation of these becoming cheaper and higher quality, and parameter values (such as dac width for instance) that used to be only for high end systems migrate to become the new minimums.
Also, actual manufacturing of customized components superior to the mass-marketed ones becomes impractical.

This will probably never be true with some components (amplifiers perhaps, speakers definitely), both because of inherant complexity, and lack of any huge market demand for improvement.

When redbook first came out, I was young and firmly in the science only camp. It was a reasoning based on growing up with a plastic Apple II+ in my mouth. Digital was the wave of the future and it would replace everything. I didn't yet understand that our sensors could only receive analog.

Then one day, my Dad took me shopping for Mom's first CD player. We looked at a Sony 670 model and a more expensive brass coloured Teac Z-series that the salesman said was a Tascam in hiding. I didn't really know what it all meant, but you could clearly hear the difference between the two units. The Teac was definitely smoother and more natural sounding.

Good thing Dad couldn't afford it as my sister and I proceeded to abuse that stereo to no end. We found out later that the dealer had sold the exact same Teac players to the biggest (at the time) FM station in town. It was my first introduction to equipment used in a professional setting and why I always include "pro" gear in any of my shopping comparisons.

ensen

[Bam!]

Chrisg....you sound like someone who would show the world how to build a redbook player....and yet you just read about jitter and just by reading it....you have a solution for it....

Buddy....Jitter is the number 1 problem with redbook players......if you have THE solution.......I'll finance your finished cd player....to become one of the richest men in the world....

The discussion we are trying to have is the sound description of high end cd players....

[Khorn]

As far as silent processing and source equipment goes I've never ever had or experienced anything that approaches the low/audibly absent noise levels of the Sony SCD-1 player that I have now. It's amazing to hear low level detail in recorded material that I didn't know existed before. It's one of the first things I noticed when I got the player. This is both on Redbook and SACD.

[Chris D]

PS: Here's a test. Unplug everything but the speakers from your pre/pro/amp or receiver. Then flip the volume all the way to max and put your ear to the speakers. You shouldn't hear anything.

Hmmm... I haven't done this with my Parasound C1. But that would be quite a task, disconnecting everything that I've got plugged into it! Even worse would be trying to reconnect everything. :P

[purplepeople]

Hmmm... I haven't done this with my Parasound C1. But that would be quite a task, disconnecting everything that I've got plugged into it! Even worse would be trying to reconnect everything. :P

I read somewhere that unplugging and reconnecting everything is a good thing as it can "clean" contacts that have started to corrode. I guess that's for those of use that don't use gold-plated everything. I wonder if there are different karat of gold-plated monsters?

ensen.

[chrispy35]

On the audibility of jitter note, it's hard to argue with the guys at AES. The AES website charges for the paper but one of the original authors has it on his website:

http://www.essex.ac.uk/ese/research/audio_lab/malcolms_publications.html

Check publication C41: IS THE AES/EBU/SPDIF DIGITAL AUDIO INTERFACE FLAWED?

180 ps is audible, most interfaces (at the time, 1992) produce over 1 ns. How much better are things now? It would be nice if the manufacturers spec'd the jitter transfer function of their DACs to provide a meaningful comparison.