best cd player under $3000? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 156 Old 06-01-2008, 06:50 PM
Member
 
badgerdms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 View Post

Stuff like this don't sounds true at all. Mostly the difference is very little and NOT night and day.

What can I say, I think you are wrong. The two CD players sounded nothing alike. No hyperbole at all. The DCS ring dacs sound much different to me they your typical Burr Brown or Wolfson implementations. It's like pulling the transformers off of tube amps--it just sounds different.

Can you make the case that to you the sound difference doens't mean much to you and you wouldn't spend the money? Sure. That's why there are products in all kinds of price ranges for all kinds of tastes. The entire "all digital sounds the same school is just not true". Does the law of diminishing returns come into play after a point? Again, yes but who am I to tell someone not to spend $20K on a CD player if they can afford it and it matters to them?
badgerdms is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 156 Old 06-01-2008, 07:00 PM
Member
 
lacrossebowe8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
These are the best arguments. Ones no one can win. In an A/B test, could a listener identify the better player each time? Could he separate the two players? Maybe, maybe not. I have listened to many CD players and can tell that there are sonic differences between them. Are any better than others? Yes but my better may not be yours. In fact, on some material I would prefer a "worse" player that I did not purchase.

I would recommend both rega players, some of the upper end arcam players, and possibly some of the audio note players if you would like to escape the typical cd player sound. The audio notes to me are somewhat rolled off in the bass, but have other good attributes.
lacrossebowe8 is offline  
post #93 of 156 Old 06-01-2008, 11:27 PM
Newbie
 
winesnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Napa CA
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just heard a Sony Blu-ray BDP-S2000ES in my audio system. It resolved more details on CD than my $3000+ player. Is it better? More listening time will determine that for me.
For $1300 it is quite good and it is a great video unit. IMHO digital improves every 4-5 years and players have gotten much better. The CD is now 27 years old, but will be with us for some time. When you have invested in hundreds or thousands of CDs buying a better player every 6-7 years is worth it.
winesnob is offline  
post #94 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 02:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NIN74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Skoghall, va, Sweden
Posts: 3,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by badgerdms View Post

What can I say, I think you are wrong. The two CD players sounded nothing alike. No hyperbole at all. The DCS ring dacs sound much different to me they your typical Burr Brown or Wolfson implementations. It's like pulling the transformers off of tube amps--it just sounds different.

Can you make the case that to you the sound difference doens't mean much to you and you wouldn't spend the money? Sure. That's why there are products in all kinds of price ranges for all kinds of tastes. The entire "all digital sounds the same school is just not true". Does the law of diminishing returns come into play after a point? Again, yes but who am I to tell someone not to spend $20K on a CD player if they can afford it and it matters to them?


Money is not an issue (as most, I hope, know is that the price don't say ANYTHING about the soudquality). I will say it again, DBT at least 18/20 and levelmatched to 0,1 dB.

Sound and video is not magic, it is pure physics. Physics that can be magical
NIN74 is offline  
post #95 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 02:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NIN74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Skoghall, va, Sweden
Posts: 3,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76 View Post

Hello "kitsum".

Yes, I did utilize the remote. Just to give you an idea of the techniques used when comparing..... Let's say I'm listening to Basia's "Waters on March" on the Cambridge 640 CDP. During the playback, I would start with the digital connection. 30 seconds in, I would switch to analog using the A/D function on the remote. The second method was using CD's I have in duplicate. Such as Sade's "Lover's Rock", or Puff Johnson's "Miracle". I forgot to include this title in the previous post. I would play both CD's simultaneously in different players, such as the Yamaha and the Denon. Using the remote, to start one Player and manually push play on the other, both cued at the same track.
Using the remote, I would switch from one player to the other, listening for differences, along with switching from analog to digital numerous times.
Total time invested into this experiment: 4 1/2 hours. I'm not kidding!
But it was worth it, and I learn a lot about my system's CD playback capability and confirmed that at least with the products I've chosen, DAC's can make a difference.

Regards.


I'm not saying you are wrong, but I find big problems in the test that you did it openly and it "proved" that the DAC you have is better.

Sound and video is not magic, it is pure physics. Physics that can be magical
NIN74 is offline  
post #96 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 05:51 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

if someone here wants to spend $3,000 on a cd player because they feel it's worth it, I think that person, in this case the op should be respected.

I find it difficult to respect people who throw money away on things that cannot possibly make a difference. Doing that out of ignorance is one thing, but doing that after learning the fact that it is a waste is pretty hard to comprehend.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #97 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 06:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ldgibson76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 View Post

I'm not saying you are wrong, but I find big problems in the test that you did it openly and it "proved" that the DAC you have is better.

Can you or someone please clarify this statement?! What problems did you have with the comparison? I do believe I stated that the DAC's did make a difference. Even the Marantz's DAC's proved to be better in some cases. I don't understand your observation.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind. "Louis Pasteur"

ldgibson76
 
The Setup
ldgibson76 is offline  
post #98 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 07:27 AM
Member
 
badgerdms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76 View Post

Can you or someone please clarify this statement?! What problems did you have with the comparison? I do believe I stated that the DAC's did make a difference. Even the Marantz's DAC's proved to be better in some cases. I don't understand your observation.

He's an audio "objectivist" who thinks that nothing is valid without a double-blind test to back it up--kind of like we are rolling out new drugs for Merck and curing cancer.

I think a single-blind test is fine in comparing a couple of audio pieces, and I would argue that being able to A/B quickly (ideally level matched) is more valuable than relying on "audio memory" which is a really difficult thing. The critics can yell placebo effect all they want and tell me I wasting my money, but really why should they care?

I think people lose sight that this is a hobby and is supposed to be enjoyable (and that not everyone enjoys that same things). I hope you enjoy your setup, and more impotantly the music and movies that you love that probably brought you to this in the first place.
badgerdms is offline  
post #99 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 07:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssteel01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston Area, MA
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76 View Post

Can you or someone please clarify this statement?! What problems did you have with the comparison? I do believe I stated that the DAC's did make a difference. Even the Marantz's DAC's proved to be better in some cases. I don't understand your observation.

Did you level match everything before you started doing the testing? Many people would tell you that unless you did, you've not really done a fair comparison. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for sharing your impressions, but it's just not really an "informative" evaluation.


Scott
ssteel01 is offline  
post #100 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 07:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

I find it difficult to respect people who throw money away on things that cannot possibly make a difference. Doing that out of ignorance is one thing, but doing that after learning the fact that it is a waste is pretty hard to comprehend.

You seem to be pretty sure there is no difference in SQ between a $500.00 CD player and a $3000.00 CD player if I read your posts correctly. I am curious as to what highend CD players you have compared to the less expensive players that you say sound the same. I would hope you have listened to and done comparisons of these players. If you have not then your thoughts are without merit IMO.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #101 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 08:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ldgibson76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

Did you level match everything before you started doing the testing? Many people would tell you that unless you did, you've not really done a fair comparison. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for sharing your impressions, but it's just not really an "informative" evaluation.


Scott

Thank you for your response and the sound inquiry regarding level matching.
I want to make sure that I understand what you mean by level matching.
Before I start to actually listen to a track on the CD for comparison, I would listen to the track for maybe 20-30 seconds to determine the appropriate output level. I did that by utilizing the CD recorder's L&R level LED meter on it's panel display, then I would activate the "Monitor out" mode to measure output from the players being tested. I adjusted accordingly using the recording level dial of the CDR to make sure the output was as close to even as possible. I also have a DVD Recorder with the same feature (LED meter display to monitor the output and recording levels).
If this does not qualify as level matching, then I'm guilty.
Let me give you another example. When I tested the Yamaha CDC685 Changer, comparing it's DAC to the Marantz's, the difference in dynamic range increase in digital mode. In analog, the Yamaha's sound output lowered slightly. The music lost some ambiance. The sound stage wasn't as expansive. When I switched back to the digital setting, the Marantz's DAC's created a much more engaging sound. Imaging was better, the mids really enhanced and the highs where less strained or more detailed.
Granted, I'm not a professional reviewer, and my equipment is nowhere near audiophile quality. and I also realize this is very subjective. But if anyone was able to come and listen, you would hear the differences in the CDP's DAC's.

Regards.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind. "Louis Pasteur"

ldgibson76
 
The Setup
ldgibson76 is offline  
post #102 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ldgibson76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by badgerdms View Post

He's an audio "objectivist" who thinks that nothing is valid without a double-blind test to back it up--kind of like we are rolling out new drugs for Merck and curing cancer.

I think a single-blind test is fine in comparing a couple of audio pieces, and I would argue that being able to A/B quickly (ideally level matched) is more valuable than relying on "audio memory" which is a really difficult thing. The critics can yell placebo effect all they want and tell me I wasting my money, but really why should they care?

I think people lose sight that this is a hobby and is supposed to be enjoyable (and that not everyone enjoys that same things). I hope you enjoy your setup, and more impotantly the music and movies that you love that probably brought you to this in the first place.

Thanks, and I agree with your observation regarding level matching.
I tried to be apply the best methods available to me at the time when conducting this comparison test. What I've learned is that although I never considered the Denon for 2 channel playback, I found that it actually does a fine job. As a matter of fact, it was on par with the Cambridge, proving that because of my ill-conceived perception, I may have been depriving myself of a better listening experience. Source predicated, obviously. Meaning, just because the Cambridge was a dedicated CD player, I thought it would soundly outperform my other players.... On the contrary. If it did outperform any of my other players, it wasn't a night and day difference. Don't get me wrong, there's a difference, but it's not blatant. They all performed well. None were horrible. And when played in digital, it didn't matter anyway, because the Marantz AVR's DAC's towed the line and made them all sound good! I still favor the 640C for critical listening. The Denon is strictly for multi-channel hi-rez playback. The Yamaha changer is for extended listening and the CD recorder is for just that ... recording CD's.

Thanks again.
Regards.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind. "Louis Pasteur"

ldgibson76
 
The Setup
ldgibson76 is offline  
post #103 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssteel01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston Area, MA
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76 View Post

If this does not qualify as level matching, then I'm guilty.

Level matching is a bit more of a precision excercise. There's plenty of threads floating around here describing how one would/should do it. For starters, you'd need a volt meter, some reference tones and a bit of patience. That's really the starting point for an objective comparision, IF you want to do that sort of thing. Not having a full scientific evalution should in no way lessen your listening pleasure, but it will bring about debate from the more objectively minded audio folks here.

It's weird for me to be typing this. I think Chu Gai might have finally got to me...


Scott
ssteel01 is offline  
post #104 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 08:50 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

If you have not then your thoughts are without merit IMO.

Apparently, you haven't caught on yet. I wii spell it out for you: I don't care what you think (or what anyone else thinks.)
I know that I am right, and being "vindicated" by others is irrelevant.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #105 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 09:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Apparently, you haven't caught on yet. I wii spell it out for you: I don't care what you think (or what anyone else thinks.)
I know that I am right, and being "vindicated" by others is irrelevant.

Well from your little outburst , I take it you have not done any comparisons to back up what you think is right. You hide your lack of knowledge and facts behind wonderful posts like the one above. You might not care what anyone else thinks but I would be willing to bet no one here cares about your pompus totally non fact based opinions. Oh while you "spell it out" wii is a video game system, not sure what relevance that has here in this discussion.

Have a great day, Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #106 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 09:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by badgerdms View Post

..... but really why should they care?

Because "truth" matters and is worth seeking and worth debating about, no matter what the subject matter, even if only for it's own sake. And in the particular case of audio products, there is also the significant potential of saving people loads of money and helping them to avoid wasting a lot of their time chasing after upgrade paths for certain types of equipment where it may be unwarranted to do so.

Of course, if the objectivists have it all wrong, then they are merely pestering busybodies. Either way, my original point remains valid, regardless of who's right and who's wrong.

Mourning the disappearing usage of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is offline  
post #107 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 10:49 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I take it you have not done any comparisons to back up what you think is right.

Then you are wrong, simple as that. I don't remember the names of the expensive CDPs I have heard for the simple reason that none of them impressed me enough to be worth remembering.
There are, of course, areas in which CDPs can differ from each other. These include the ability to play flawed discs, longevity, quietness of operation, loading speed, and looks. Notice that sound quality is very definitely not on that list.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #108 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 12:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sivadselim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CO
Posts: 16,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

I find it difficult to respect people who throw money away on things that cannot possibly make a difference. Doing that out of ignorance is one thing, but doing that after learning the fact that it is a waste is pretty hard to comprehend.

aka jealousy

"All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it."
sivadselim is offline  
post #109 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 12:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sivadselim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CO
Posts: 16,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Apparently, you haven't caught on yet. I wii spell it out for you: I don't care what you think (or what anyone else thinks.)

Yeah, well, it cuts both ways. If you have nothing useful to say regarding the OP then STFU already.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

I know that I am right, and being "vindicated" by others is irrelevant.

no sh!t

"All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it."
sivadselim is offline  
post #110 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 12:58 PM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

aka jealousy

You are wrong as always.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #111 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ldgibson76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

Level matching is a bit more of a precision excercise. There's plenty of threads floating around here describing how one would/should do it. For starters, you'd need a volt meter, some reference tones and a bit of patience. That's really the starting point for an objective comparision, IF you want to do that sort of thing. Not having a full scientific evalution should in no way lessen your listening pleasure, but it will bring about debate from the more objectively minded audio folks here.

It's weird for me to be typing this. I think Chu Gai might have finally got to me...


Scott

Hello Scott.

Thank you for your explanation and understanding. I'm not sure what "Chu Gai" did to ya, but your concern is appreciated. I realize that there was nothing precise about my comparison test. As a matter of fact, it was the exact opposite of scientific! But this debate did compel me to gain a better understanding of my components which allows me to have a stronger appreciation for what I currently have.

Regards.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind. "Louis Pasteur"

ldgibson76
 
The Setup
ldgibson76 is offline  
post #112 of 156 Old 06-02-2008, 04:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
luismanrara's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Then you are wrong, simple as that. I don't remember the names of the expensive CDPs I have heard for the simple reason that none of them impressed me enough to be worth remembering.
There are, of course, areas in which CDPs can differ from each other. These include the ability to play flawed discs, longevity, quietness of operation, loading speed, and looks. Notice that sound quality is very definitely not on that list.

My friend, I think your listening abilities are severely limited.

Do not steal, The powers that be do not like the competition.
luismanrara is online now  
post #113 of 156 Old 06-03-2008, 05:33 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

My friend, I think your listening abilities are severely limited.

Nope. I merely recognize the fact that, while other systems might fill a larger room, play louder, or have a wider sweet spot, my $1000 system sounds as good as anything on the market (regardless of price) in my room, in the sweet spot, and at my preferred volume.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #114 of 156 Old 06-03-2008, 11:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sivadselim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CO
Posts: 16,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Nope. I merely recognize the fact that, while other systems might fill a larger room, play louder, or have a wider sweet spot, my $1000 system sounds as good as anything on the market (regardless of price) in my room, in the sweet spot, and at my preferred volume.

That is your opinion, PULLIAMM. You may hold your own opinion in high regard (which is fine) but it is not fact.

"All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it."
sivadselim is offline  
post #115 of 156 Old 06-03-2008, 08:37 PM
Senior Member
 
MoltenLava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In this hobby truth is in the eye, or the ear, of the beholder.

Suppose the audiophile next door can discern $100 CD player A and $5000 CD player B. If *I* cannot discern them in my system, I would really not give a squat. On the other hand, just because the deaf guy next door can't distinguish a clock radio and a CD, that doesn't mean I can't either.

What matters is, how much you enjoy listening to music, how much are you willing to spend on this hobby, and how much satisfaction you get out of it. Preaching is for religion. Audio is a hobby. Try to enjoy it. If you are not here to enjoy music, then you are in a wrong forum.
MoltenLava is offline  
post #116 of 156 Old 06-04-2008, 06:13 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoltenLava View Post

Suppose the audiophile next door can discern $100 CD player A and $5000 CD player B. If *I* cannot discern them in my system, I would really not give a squat. On the other hand, just because the deaf guy next door can't distinguish a clock radio and a CD, that doesn't mean I can't either.

Actually, I consider a person to be deaf if they believe the "it costs more, therefore it sounds better" myth. Part of having excellent hearing is trusting what you hear, which is how I know that differences in CDP sound don't actually exist. Otherwise, you are hearing with your wallet instead of your ears.
Also, you are making a very bad analogy. There is no relationship whatsoever between "can't distinguish between a clock radio and a CD" and being able to recognize the level of performance in a budget system beyond which further improvement is unobtainable.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #117 of 156 Old 06-04-2008, 06:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
luismanrara's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Nope. I merely recognize the fact that, while other systems might fill a larger room, play louder, or have a wider sweet spot, my $1000 system sounds as good as anything on the market (regardless of price) in my room, in the sweet spot, and at my preferred volume.

I'm glad you are so happy with your system, at the end what matters is how you feel about it, not what anybody tells you. I also find your statement about your system being equal to anything in the market very naive to say the least.

Do not steal, The powers that be do not like the competition.
luismanrara is online now  
post #118 of 156 Old 06-04-2008, 07:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ldgibson76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

I'm glad you are so happy with your system, at the end what matters is how you feel about it, not what anybody tells you. I also find your statement about your system being equal to anything in the market very naive to say the least.

Guys! Let it go! If "PULLIAMM" believes that his system is the "end all" for CD playback and there's no possibility that he could improve on what he currently owns, well in his world, no matter how big or SMALL, it's the "end all!", and to argue with him is the epitome of an exercise in futility!
If he claims there's no difference, fine! It's his little world and we do not live it!

Remember this post by "PULLIAMM"?!!!!
"Nope. I merely recognize the fact that, while other systems might fill a larger room, play louder, or have a wider sweet spot, my $1000 system sounds as good as anything on the market (regardless of price) in my room, in the sweet spot, and at my preferred volume."

It's all about him and his little world! Let the man be!

"PULLIAMM", please enjoy your entry level CA Azur 340 combo.

Regards.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind. "Louis Pasteur"

ldgibson76
 
The Setup
ldgibson76 is offline  
post #119 of 156 Old 06-04-2008, 07:41 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76 View Post

"PULLIAMM", please enjoy your entry level CA Azur 340 combo.

Regards.

Thank you, I will. Especially since I was listening to the ungodly expensive Classe/B&W "Abbey Road" system the other day, and it does not sound at all better than mine.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #120 of 156 Old 06-04-2008, 10:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
DulcetTones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Thank you, I will. Especially since I was listening to the ungodly expensive Classe/B&W "Abbey Road" system the other day, and it does not sound at all better than mine.

I am amazed you have not purchased a stereo Bose system Pulliamm, seems to fit your profile very well

But on a different note, thanks for saving me thousands of dollars and to not bother testing Focal/B&W/Dynaudio/Wilson/MA/etc, oh yes and all the other well known and respected brands.

What could be interesting though is to check your family tree and see if your related to Oliver Cromwell, he did not like music as well

Ah enough of this fun, enjoy your music this evening all.
Cheers
DT
DulcetTones is offline  
Reply CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off