Which CD player to buy? - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 366 Old 04-03-2007, 11:06 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Oh, I see. I also will make an on line diagnosis who has that schizophrenia. That is your lesson.

......thanks for for even more teachings oh wise one........
classic77 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 05:17 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 Nuthed View Post

Pulliam can you clear something up for me?

Your $100 Onkyo is your reference CDP, right?

Your B&W 705s are your reference speakers, right?

Both of these statements are true only because you refuse to audition better.

The Onkyo (MSRP $220, not $100 by the way) cannot be my reference CD player because I do not believe in the existence of a "reference" CD player. Except for their ability to deal with flawed discs, differences between CDPs (if any) are well below the threshold of audibility.
The 705s are my reference speakers, and could serve as reference speakers for anyone. They are easily among the best speakers in the world, regardless of size or price. I have heard many, many speakers (including quite a few that were far more expensive than the 705s), and the only ones that are at all better are the 800 series. Even there, the differences are only evident at much higher volumes than I listen at.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #183 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 06:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 449
classic77 said...

Quote:


(1) You might not have, but it's all over the net....are you blind? Different CD players measure different levels of jitter. The efeects of jitter are audible.

But you have no idea whatsoever what levels and under what conditions jitter is audible. The vast majority of players, and that includes the rather inexpensive ones including many portables have jitter levels below the threshold of audibility. For example, see the long since discontinued, Panasonic SL-S250 over at http://www.pcavtech.com/play-rec/Pan_SL-S250/index.htm. Regarding the audibility of jitter, I direct you to AES Preprint 4826, Theoretical and Audible Effects of Jitter on Digital Audio Quality by Benjamin & Gannon. If you need a copy, drop me a PM.

Quote:


(4) Trying to add additional information is not the purpose, you just don't get it. Upsampling is done so that digital filtering can occur out of audible band. Theoretically this improves S/N ratios and dynamic range. It's simply your opinion that it's simply a marketing or conspiracy theory. In my previous message, i did note state whether upsampling improves or degrades sound quality, just that they can make a CD player sound different. Refer to http://www.thetadigital.com/upsampling.htm which is basically negative about upsampling. Some stuff about jitter there as well if you would like to read it.

Well, you need to distinguish between upsampling and oversampling. However, you're right that it allows people to implement digital filtering which is more predictable, has better phase characteristics and far cheaper to implement than doing it analog. Bear in mind though, that whatever dynamic range your player may have, it's limited to whatever it was mastered from. So, if it was a master tape, your dynamic range will be on the order of 85 dB or less.

Quote:


Another factor which some believe is the most important part of a CD players performance is power supply and power regulation.

Well, you don't want to get excessive bleeding to make its way back into the audio signal, but that's usually not much of a problem.

Quote:


I have read that cheap DVD players (like yours PULL) can typically measure 500-1000 picoseconds of jitter. Some CD players have 200 or less.

This may be irrelevent and the statement as written is pure speculation since you've not provided any documented references. Since it is not documented by you, it is merely an attemp to besmirch and poo-poo PULLIAM's choice. However, look at the review of the Zanden unit which as a whole, lists for $43,040. The jitter in that unit bordered on 5 ns, yet the reviewer didn't seem to pick up on it. Now, there's no good reason why a player that costs what a very nice car does should perform so abysmally in virtually all measured respects.

Quote:


What about responding to my quote that DAC's have measurable differences? Did you forget?

I'll respond for PULLIAM. So f***ing what? DAC's are manufactured for different purposes. Measureable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences.

Quote:


No he wouldn't because all CD players sound the same, remember?

Some day you may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparisons. Perhaps then, you may find that these differences ain't all that different. That should cause you to reevaluate some of the reviews and marketing double-speak that infects this industry.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #184 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 11:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Party's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 1,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Great post, Chu. In a forum where people come to learn and exchange ideas (amongst other things), you continue to provide meaningful information.
Ron Party is offline  
post #185 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 11:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Party's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 1,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

You may be interested in:

Benjamin, Eric and Gannon, Benjamin ' Theoretical and Audible Effects of Jitter on Digital Audio Quality,' 105th AES Convention, 1998, Print 4826.

Or not.

I'm quite familiar with your cite. Chu cited it as well. I posted I agreed with Chu. For someone who obviously has a lot of knowledge, you can't read. Perhaps you ought to take lessons in courtesy. You also would do well to leave your condescening, self-righteous attitude at the door.

"Or not."
Ron Party is offline  
post #186 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 12:14 PM
 
Nuthed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rockford,Illinois
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Is that in fact his quote or out of context phrasing?
Besides, are you implying that He was never wrong?

I believe he was quoting Einstein.

The "He" you refer to? Einstein?

How could a quote that verifiably implies exactly what it says be wrong?
Nuthed is offline  
post #187 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 12:22 PM
 
Nuthed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rockford,Illinois
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post






However, look at the review of the Zanden unit which as a whole, lists for $43,040. The jitter in that unit bordered on 5 ns, yet the reviewer didn't seem to pick up on it. Now, there's no good reason why a player that costs what a very nice car does should perform so abysmally in virtually all measured respects.

Remember the Einstein quote.

Are you now saying there is no difference in the sound of CDPs?
Nuthed is offline  
post #188 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 12:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 449
That particular CD, if you look over at StereoPhile, was an abysmal turd of a unit plagued by poor measurements, poor design, poor quality control, use of substandard parts, and you name it.

I remember the quote although I don't know if it's Einstein's. I am not saying that all CD players sound the same. In fact, I can think of any number of reasons why there might be audible differences. What I am saying is that if you really want to establish if there's an audible difference, then it's going to take more than casual listening under non-level matched sighted conditions. Even Albert wouldn't conduct an experiment as sloppy as most 'audiophiles' do. Bear in mind he also said, "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #189 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 05:35 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

classic77 said...


But you have no idea whatsoever what levels and under what conditions jitter is audible. The vast majority of players, and that includes the rather inexpensive ones including many portables have jitter levels below the threshold of audibility. For example, see the long since discontinued, Panasonic SL-S250 over at http://www.pcavtech.com/play-rec/Pan_SL-S250/index.htm. Regarding the audibility of jitter, I direct you to AES Preprint 4826, Theoretical and Audible Effects of Jitter on Digital Audio Quality by Benjamin & Gannon. If you need a copy, drop me a PM.



Well, you need to distinguish between upsampling and oversampling. However, you're right that it allows people to implement digital filtering which is more predictable, has better phase characteristics and far cheaper to implement than doing it analog. Bear in mind though, that whatever dynamic range your player may have, it's limited to whatever it was mastered from. So, if it was a master tape, your dynamic range will be on the order of 85 dB or less.

Well, you don't want to get excessive bleeding to make its way back into the audio signal, but that's usually not much of a problem.

This may be irrelevent and the statement as written is pure speculation since you've not provided any documented references. Since it is not documented by you, it is merely an attemp to besmirch and poo-poo PULLIAM's choice. However, look at the review of the Zanden unit which as a whole, lists for $43,040. The jitter in that unit bordered on 5 ns, yet the reviewer didn't seem to pick up on it. Now, there's no good reason why a player that costs what a very nice car does should perform so abysmally in virtually all measured respects.


I'll respond for PULLIAM. So f***ing what? DAC's are manufactured for different purposes. Measureable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences.

Some day you may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparisons. Perhaps then, you may find that these differences ain't all that different. That should cause you to reevaluate some of the reviews and marketing double-speak that infects this industry.

We can argue about all of these technical points Chu until the cows come home....But why bother....it's been done hundreds of times before....It's probably being done on another forum as we speak! Some of your post clearly opinion based but you have written it as if it's factual. Comments like...."but that's usually not much of a problem."

By the way I clearly stated upsampling not oversampling.

Measurable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences....That's right Chu but it also does not mean that they don't. Lets not rule out the possibility that unmeasurable differences don't influence sound as well. The Einstein quote has been used here already.

Some day I may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparison. Perhaps then, I may find that these differences ain't as different as I think. But then again I might actually find the differences are actually larger than I already think now. Just for interest sake have you taken such a test?

All of my posts have been in response to comments that there is no difference at all in CD players. I think and many others here do not believe from actually listening experience and think that it is technically not possible that there is absolutely NO and I mean NO, NONE, ZILCH, ZIPPO difference in sound between CD sources. I have never stated how big these differences are and if you look back at one of my previous posts i clearly state that improving your speakers will yield a much larger return in sound quality. I think you have clearly overestimated how much I think they differ. By the way there's no need to swear. This hobby is suppose to be fun so lets keep it that way.
classic77 is offline  
post #190 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 05:46 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post


I'll respond for PULLIAM. So f***ing what? DAC's are manufactured for different purposes. Measureable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences.

Why would I be talking about DAC's for different purposes? This is a CD player forum and that's the topic here. I'm not talking about Video DAC's etc. Of course I'm talking about audio DAC's. There are measurable differences in audio DAC's. What.....You don't believe me?
classic77 is offline  
post #191 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 06:04 PM
 
Nuthed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rockford,Illinois
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

What I am saying is that if you really want to establish if there's an audible difference, then it's going to take more than casual listening under non-level matched sighted conditions. Even Albert wouldn't conduct an experiment as sloppy as most 'audiophiles' do. Bear in mind he also said, "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."

My response to the first statement is: It does not take anything more. For example, if someone hears a difference, then there is, to that person.
And nothing, not even the level matched blind tests, that will convince that person to have that component in his system.

If some test proved to me that a particular component measured better, but still, to me sounded worse, why would I want it?

I know you will say that I just don't get. I get it. I just put a lot more stock in the way something sounds. And maybe, just maybe, a level matched, double blind test would prove me wrong. But why go to the trouble? If someone is able to audition a component or 2, and feels happier with one, why does someone feel the need to point out the inferiority of it?

To the other Einstein quote: it sounds a lot like the "only thing that matters is specs" crowd.
Nuthed is offline  
post #192 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 08:16 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

What I am saying is that if you really want to establish if there's an audible difference, then it's going to take more than casual listening under non-level matched sighted conditions.

Again that's totally your opinion. There are plenty of non casual listeners here (myself included) with what we believe is valuable experience is choosing CD players on a given budget.
classic77 is offline  
post #193 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 08:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Party View Post

I'm quite familiar with your cite. Chu cited it as well. I posted I agreed with Chu. For someone who obviously has a lot of knowledge, you can't read. Perhaps you ought to take lessons in courtesy. You also would do well to leave your condescening, self-righteous attitude at the door.

"Or not."


Which post number of his? I didn't see his post on it here. Is that acceptable by you?
CharlesJ is offline  
post #194 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:06 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post


Bear in mind though, that whatever dynamic range your player may have, it's limited to whatever it was mastered from. So, if it was a master tape, your dynamic range will be on the order of 85 dB or less.

I will keep that in mind Chu.....Thanks!
classic77 is offline  
post #195 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuthed View Post

I believe he was quoting Einstein.

The "He" you refer to? Einstein?

How could a quote that verifiably implies exactly what it says be wrong?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondmanp
I believe it was Einstein who said (I am not quoting exactly): "Not everything that can be measured counts, and not everything that counts can be measured." And Einstein wasn't even an Audiophile!!! :-D


Well, if you read his post, he is not sure whose quote it is and is not an exact quote by his post. So, it is rather simple to have it wrong, have it out of context, etc.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #196 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuthed View Post

Remember the Einstein quote.

Are you now saying there is no difference in the sound of CDPs?


Before you go there, be sure that quote is from Einstein and in context what he was discussing at the time.
Besides, are you implying he knew everything and is infallible, especially regarding that quote, whoever that belongs to?
CharlesJ is offline  
post #197 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 94
[quote=classic77]
By the way I clearly stated upsampling not oversampling. [/Q!UOTE]

Do some reading beyond your usual:

http://www.simaudio.com/upsampling.htm

http://www.mlssa.com/pdf/Upsampling-theory-rev-2.pdf

http://www.thetadigital.com/upsampling.htm

Marketing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by classic77 View Post

Measurable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences....That's right Chu but it also does not mean that they don't. Lets not rule out the possibility that unmeasurable differences don't influence sound as well. The Einstein quote has been used here already.

So what, if that was by him which is in doubt right now.
Does that make him right? By his authority that he was an experimental physicist? and some Nobel to his name?
WRONG!!!
Bring on the evidence, that you can hear what is not measurable in audio.
I bet you would believe a difference between the same player presented twice, in a blind test. LOL A very high % of people do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by classic77 View Post

Some day I may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparison. Perhaps then, I may find that these differences ain't as different as I think. But then again I might actually find the differences are actually larger than I already think now.

And, someday, this will be over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by classic77 View Post

All of my posts have been in response to comments that there is no difference at all in CD players. .


Try to read what is posted. Don't imagine what you want it to have said.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #198 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuthed View Post

My response to the first statement is: It does not take anything more. For example, if someone hears a difference, then there is, to that person.
.


Yes, perception is interesting. So is imagination. A singular reality is just that, singular, nothing more.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #199 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 09:58 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=CharlesJ]
Quote:
Originally Posted by classic77 View Post

By the way I clearly stated upsampling not oversampling. [/Q!UOTE]

Do some reading beyond your usual:

http://www.simaudio.com/upsampling.htm

http://www.mlssa.com/pdf/Upsampling-theory-rev-2.pdf

http://www.thetadigital.com/upsampling.htm

Marketing!



So what, if that was by him which is in doubt right now.
Does that make him right? By his authority that he was an experimental physicist? and some Nobel to his name?
WRONG!!!
Bring on the evidence, that you can hear what is not measurable in audio.
I bet you would believe a difference between the same player presented twice, in a blind test. LOL A very high % of people do that.



And, someday, this will be over.




Try to read what is posted. Don't imagine what you want it to have said.

Hehe....Don't try and back out of it now Kiddo....In plain english many times you have said that there is no difference between players
classic77 is offline  
post #200 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 10:00 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Party View Post

Great post, Chu. In a forum where people come to learn and exchange ideas (amongst other things), you continue to provide meaningful information.

I don't agree.
classic77 is offline  
post #201 of 366 Old 04-04-2007, 10:12 PM
Senior Member
 
classic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=CharlesJ]
Bring on the evidence, that you can hear what is not measurable in audio.
I bet you would believe a difference between the same player presented twice, in a blind test. LOL A very high % of people do that.
[/Q!UOTE]

Well if it's unmeasurable, then there is no measurable evidence by nature. It's simply a fact that many believe that they hear differences in CD sources. Take improvements in rhythm and timing in CD players for example, many people hear this. Naim has an enviable reputation for making the players with some of the best if not the best PRAT (Pace Rhythm and Timing) in the business. PRAT as far as I believe is not measurable. I won't comment personally as I've never heard one.

Anyway you still make me chuckle kid everytime I read one of your posts because you have no experience in better players, but you'd just about swear your mothers life away that they are all the same.
classic77 is offline  
post #202 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 05:19 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 classic77 View Post

Well if it's unmeasurable, then there is no measurable evidence by nature. It's simply a fact that many believe that they hear differences in CD sources.

The key word here, obviously, is "believe". Believing one hears a difference doesn't prove that it exists, and such a belief can be caused by many factors. In particular, many people, if they know the prices, will tend to hear a more expensive (or better looking, or more familiar brand, etc.) CD player as "better".
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #203 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 05:28 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 449
Quote:


We can argue about all of these technical points Chu until the cows come home....But why bother....it's been done hundreds of times before....It's probably being done on another forum as we speak! Some of your post clearly opinion based but you have written it as if it's factual. Comments like...."but that's usually not much of a problem."

That's right. It's not usually much of a problem. In fact, it's so exceedingly rare that it belongs on the endangered species list! Find me several units, regardless of price, where the AC harmonics, (multiples of 60 Hz) are not only present, but rise to the level of audibility. Even in the POS 5 figure Zanden unit the AC harmonics, while present are pretty far down in signal strength. Look at the following graph and note the two circled pairs at the center-bottom.



If we're arguing, it's because you can't provide any damned information to corroborate your statement making it at best a conspiracy theory.

Quote:


By the way I clearly stated upsampling not oversampling.

Upsampling merely resamples the signal at a rate higher than it's currently at. Nothing more. Resampling can't and doesn't improve the resolution of a signal. Whatever the dynamic range of the signal is, is it. You can't go beyond it. Maybe you're talking about something else?

Quote:


Measurable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences....That's right Chu but it also does not mean that they don't. Lets not rule out the possibility that unmeasurable differences don't influence sound as well. The Einstein quote has been used here already.

I haven't. You need a credible test to do this and anecdotal evidence is hardly credible.

Quote:


Some day I may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparison. Perhaps then, I may find that these differences ain't as different as I think. But then again I might actually find the differences are actually larger than I already think now. Just for interest sake have you taken such a test?

Yes, and so have others. You need to find a way to bring normalize the player's outputs. What you could do though, in the meantime, is simply obtain a multimeter and some test tones. Let's say the tones are at 100, 1000 and 10000 Hz. Get some players in, hook them up to your system, measure and record the voltages at the speaker terminals. I don't know if it was in this thread or another, a member noted they'd done this using a RS SPL meter and found differences at the listening position. Once they made adjustments to bring them into line, the two CD players kinda started to sound the same. Now, the SPL meter is very crude. I recommend the multimeter because it's more accurate and frankly simpler. Just see what you get. AFAIK, the main reason why voltages can and do vary so much is simply because the CD spec is 2 volts rather than something like 2.00 or 2.000. It gives manufacturers greater leeway and cuts down costs.

Quote:


All of my posts have been in response to comments that there is no difference at all in CD players. I think and many others here do not believe from actually listening experience and think that it is technically not possible that there is absolutely NO and I mean NO, NONE, ZILCH, ZIPPO difference in sound between CD sources.

That's not my position but when you start to exert more control over how you listen...truly listen with your ears and not your eyes too...you might find that output level and expectation account for an enormous amount of the purported differences. That doesn't mean you should buy the cheapest player out there. There are other factors just as there are other factors in why you buy a watch. What it does mean though is that it's entirely reasonable and believable that a person, on an incredibly tight budget can buy a damned inexpensive player, be it a CDP, multiformat, or DVD and have full confidence that the audio quality is indistinguishable from a Meridian or an Ayre. Spec's aren't as good. Remote 'might' be cheesier. Might be a little slower with track changing. Won't be exlusive. Might even say Samsung. But...

On a side note, I take it you're familiar with the work on audible differences done over at matrix hi-fi?

Quote:


I have never stated how big these differences are and if you look back at one of my previous posts i clearly state that improving your speakers will yield a much larger return in sound quality. I think you have clearly overestimated how much I think they differ. By the way there's no need to swear. This hobby is suppose to be fun so lets keep it that way.

Fair enough. Consider for a moment though, is it fun for the people selling these things or are they in this to make a buck? They're telling you not to sweat it. It's a hobby. Don't subject it to scientific scrutiny. Why should they get off the hook not telling you all there is to know?

Quote:


Why would I be talking about DAC's for different purposes? This is a CD player forum and that's the topic here. I'm not talking about Video DAC's etc. Of course I'm talking about audio DAC's. There are measurable differences in audio DAC's. What.....You don't believe me?

There are audio DAC's designed to go into portables, set top boxes, sound cards. There are DACs that also incorporate additional features such as attenuation, muting, ability to trim both channels. Some do. Some don't. Some play other formates like CDR's. Some do other things. That is what I meant by different purposes. If you look at the manufacturer's data sheets you'll find suggestions for some of their intended use. Yes, they have different measurements but so what? It's nice to have things like dual differential DACs that push the limit. Really, that's impressive to me and I like to see things get technically better. OTOH, it's nice to know that a player that doesn't represent the current state of the art can be its indistinguishable audible equal. Maybe not. It's gonna take some work to find out. That is, if you care.

Would you like a copy of the article I referenced classic77? Drop me a PM.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #204 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 05:35 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
I forgot to mention: Of all the various imaginary differences that people cite between CDPs, "rhythm and timing" is by far the least plausible. If such a difference existed, it would have to be caused by the clock. It has already been established, however, that a deficient clock causes jitter, not rhythm/timing innacuracies.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #205 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 07:12 AM
Newbie
 
matilda1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
which universal player would you suggest for great sound reproduction?
price range 3000 usd.
matilda1997 is offline  
post #206 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 07:17 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 matilda1997 View Post

which universal player would you suggest for great sound reproduction?
price range 3000 usd.

I would not suggest any such thing! That is way too much money for a universal player. Oppo makes one under $200 that is all you need.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #207 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 07:59 AM
Senior Member
 
allsop4now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 354
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

I would not suggest any such thing! That is way too much money for a universal player. Oppo makes one under $200 that is all you need.

If you must use the players analoge output for SACD/DVDA playback, then the more expensive units may have better bass management, time delay and speaker level adjusts.
allsop4now is offline  
post #208 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 08:07 AM
Newbie
 
matilda1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
which model would you suggest?
matilda1997 is offline  
post #209 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 09:48 AM
Senior Member
 
allsop4now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 354
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by matilda1997 View Post

which model would you suggest?

I would not suggest any model to you, but I do recommend you to download the user manuals of any model you are considering.

User manuals give much more information on the feature set of the (universal) player that just specifications in an advertisement, as well as how easy it is to operate the unit. If a user manual is not available for download, the player (and brand) is off my buy-list. Incomprehensible or incomplete user manuals does not make for a smooth operation of the unit.

As for feature set in specs: Several so-called universal players says that you can set the time delay for each speaker in a multi-channel setup, but in the manual you will read that for SACD the time-delay range is very limited. I missed that for my current player
allsop4now is offline  
post #210 of 366 Old 04-05-2007, 11:03 AM
Member
 
Forte_II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Eureka, Ca.
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I know enough to know I don't know enough.
But I do understand that a 200 dollar cd player sounds good and a 5000 dollar player doesn't sound that much better. Not enough to justify the price/performance delta. Now a 50,000 dollar CDP is just ludicrous. Just a poor blind mans opinion.

My humble system, Cheap DVD player connected via digital coax. Yamaha V995 reciever and Klipsch Forte II speakers. Klipsch center and surrounds.
Forte_II 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