or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › Should We All Hold Off on Buying CD Players?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should We All Hold Off on Buying CD Players? - Page 3

post #61 of 128
I see where both of you are going with your comments, I think -- thanks!
post #62 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrb View Post

The selection of music available on CD is staggering.

of course, that's because all music recordings are released on CD. Only now we have an assortment of various CD music formats (ie. SACD, DVD-A, Dual-Disc, etc.,...), that's all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrb View Post

I could never understand the concept of a universal player. None of them do a great job on Redbook CD's yet that's where the vast majority of music exists.

what's so hard to understand? It's either a good player or not (CD, or any other format). Have you listened to all of them?
post #63 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

of course, that's because all music recordings are released on CD. Only now we have an assortment of various CD music formats (ie. SACD, DVD-A, Dual-Disc, etc.,...), that's all.

what's so hard to understand? It's either a good player or not (CD, or any other format). Have you listened to all of them?


You don't get it!!!. There are any number of dedicated CD only players that would absolutely kick your Denon's ass on Redbook Audio for far less money. I've heard CD players that sound better than the 3930 does on SA-CD or DVD-A.
post #64 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

It also has a "Pure Direct" mode which disables all video circuitry for audio optimization (found on many receivers)

That feature is on some of the older Denon DVD players too, but the only noticeable effect is that the LED light on the front of the unit goes on when you press it.

Try and see if you hear a difference. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts...

Scott
post #65 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrb View Post

You don't get it!!!. There are any number of dedicated CD only players that would absolutely kick your Denon's ass on Redbook Audio for far less money. I've heard CD players that sound better than the 3930 does on SA-CD or DVD-A.

no, you're not getting it!!!!

I was close to purchasing a dedicated CD player by NAD or Krell. Then the sales rep had me compare the same CD source on, both, a Denon DVD-2930CI and 3930CI, and I really could'nt hear any difference. All these units were connected to the same NAD M25 amp using new B&W CM7 speakers. They all sounded very nice.
post #66 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

That feature is on some of the older Denon DVD players too, but the only noticeable effect is that the LED light on the front of the unit goes on when you press it....

well, there's more than just the lights going out- all video-related ciruitry is disabled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

Try and see if you hear a difference. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts...

to be honest I can't really discern any [audible] difference.
post #67 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

well, there's more than just the lights going out- all video-related ciruitry is disabled.

to be honest I can't really discern any [audible] difference.

Yeah, I know what it's doing (or supposed to be doing), but I'm with you...I'll be damned if I can hear a difference.

Scott
post #68 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

no, you're not getting it!!!!

I was close to purchasing a dedicated CD player by NAD or Krell. Then the sales rep had me compare the same CD source on, both, a Denon DVD-2930CI and 3930CI, and I really could'nt hear any difference. All these units were connected to the same NAD M25 amp using new B&W CM7 speakers. They all sounded very nice.

Were the connections made using the player's dacs or used as transports?
post #69 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

Were the connections made using the player's dacs or used as transports?

the players were interfaced to an NAD M15/M25 combo, I believe using the players DAC's.

I also listened to Denon DVD-3930CI and a Musical Fidelity A5 player through a Musical Fidelity A5 integrated amp using B&W CM7 speakers. Both players sounded very sweet, did'nt notice any [obvious] differences.
post #70 of 128
[quote=WestCoastD]the players were interfaced to an NAD M15/M25 combo, I believe using the players DAC's.

The main difference between players comes when listening through their dacs. when using cd players as transports differences are much less revealed.

I agree with only one thing though, listen for yourself, then buy what you think is right for you. No one can tell you what sounds best for your taste other than yourself. What sounds sweet for me, may be doll for you, or vice-versa.
post #71 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

Yeah, I know what it's doing (or supposed to be doing), but I'm with you...I'll be damned if I can hear a difference.

Scott

Well that's one less feature that won't be necessary then, that's good news.
post #72 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrb View Post

You don't get it!!!. There are any number of dedicated CD only players that would absolutely kick your Denon's ass on Redbook Audio for far less money. I've heard CD players that sound better than the 3930 does on SA-CD or DVD-A.

This claim is as ridiculous as the claim that a good upscaling DVD player is as good with video as a high definition player (Blue ray of HD). No CD player can use a regular CD and re-create the amount of information that is on a SACD - and that is a fact. SACD and DVD-Audio contain better quality recordings because they can encode more information, period.

And Denon 3930 sounds excellent with SACD. I would like to hear from you the specific models of CD players under $1500 that would "kick Denon 3930 ass" on redbook CD. I bet you would not be able to tell the difference in a simple blind test (and I doubt you did do any blind testing)
post #73 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

The main difference between players comes when listening through their dacs. when using cd players as transports differences are much less revealed.

how do you assure you are connected via-player's DAC's? by using analog interconnects?
post #74 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

how do you assure you are connected via-player's DAC's? by using analog interconnects?

You use analog interconnects and use an analog bypass on your processor. For most processors, 5.1 analog input provides analog bypass and you would be using your player's DAC's
post #75 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by VladP View Post

You use analog interconnects and use an analog bypass on your processor. For most processors, 5.1 analog input provides analog bypass and you would be using your player's DAC's

yeah, was'nt sure whether regular analog (CD) inputs are by-passing (Yamaha) receivers DAC's or not (I thought they do?).
post #76 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

yeah, was'nt sure whether regular analog (CD) inputs are by-passing (Yamaha) receivers DAC's or not (I thought they do?).

If you use regular CD inputs, you have to make sure that your receiver allows analog bypass. On the other hand, almost any receiver has 5.1 analog inputs so you can use those (for both stereo and multichannel) to insure you are using your player's DAC's
post #77 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by VladP View Post

If you use regular CD inputs, you have to make sure that your receiver allows analog bypass. On the other hand, almost any receiver has 5.1 analog inputs so you can use those (for both stereo and multichannel) to insure you are using your player's DAC's

yeah, I always use "PURE DIRECT" mode (on my Yamaha receiver) when playing any audio disc's, I believe this does complete analog by-pass (including tone and EQ functions, as well as disables video circuitry).

However, the Denon DVD-3930CI provides, both, discrete 5.1ch [and] 2.0ch analog outputs. I have 5.1ch output's going to Yamaha 5.1 multi-channel inputs, and 2.0ch output's going to Yamaha stereo (analog) "CD" inputs. When I play hi-resolution sources (SACD and DVD-A) I switch Yamaha to "MULTI-CHANNEL" input mode, with "PURE DIRECT" enabled. For regular (RedBook) CD's I switch Yamaha to "CD" input, with "PURE DIRECT" enabled. I believe both modes are playing through Denon DVD player DAC's. I've experimented playing the same (Redbook) CD source through, both, 5.1 and 2.0 analog inputs and I can't discern the difference- they both sound good!
post #78 of 128
Quote:


No CD player can use a regular CD and re-create the amount of information that is on a SACD - and that is a fact.

So?
Quote:


SACD and DVD-Audio contain better quality recordings because they can encode more information, period.

So the mastering wasn't better because there was less compression and gain riding? Maybe they have better quality recordings because simply, the recordings were better and weren't made with the purpose of being played on radio stations in your car or MTV. Britney Spears, Fergie, and a host of other recordings would likely sound as abysmal on hi-rez as on CD. I still do though, enjoy the trashniness of Ms. Spears. It appeals to my prurient side
post #79 of 128
[quote=VladP]This claim is as ridiculous as the claim that a good upscaling DVD player is as good with video as a high definition player (Blue ray of HD). No CD player can use a regular CD and re-create the amount of information that is on a SACD - and that is a fact. SACD and DVD-Audio contain better quality recordings because they can encode more information, period.

Any cd version sounds better on the Marantz sa-11 than the sacd version on the Denon 2900. I own both, and didn't need to do any critical listening, the test was over in 5 minutes. "MY WIFE NOTICED"
post #80 of 128
[quote=WestCoastD]yeah, I always use "PURE DIRECT" mode (on my Yamaha receiver) when playing any audio disc's, I believe this does complete analog by-pass (including tone and EQ functions, as well as disables video circuitry).

"PURE DIRECT" does not mean "Analog Bypass". I have an older Marantz receiver (18Ex) and you can hear it in the pure direct mode while using a digital connection.
post #81 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by VladP View Post

This claim is as ridiculous as the claim that a good upscaling DVD player is as good with video as a high definition player (Blue ray of HD). No CD player can use a regular CD and re-create the amount of information that is on a SACD - and that is a fact. SACD and DVD-Audio contain better quality recordings because they can encode more information, period.

And Denon 3930 sounds excellent with SACD. I would like to hear from you the specific models of CD players under $1500 that would "kick Denon 3930 ass" on redbook CD. I bet you would not be able to tell the difference in a simple blind test (and I doubt you did do any blind testing)

How many examples do you need??
1. Rega - Apollo
2. Cambridge Audio - 840C

If you think that SA-CD or DVD-A from the 3930 is as good as it gets you need to get out more. Visit a high end audio shop and demo some CD players.

If someone's is happy a with player like the 3930 that's awsome, just don't spread the illusion that it sounds as good as a CD only player valued at the same amount of money on CD playback. You may want to reread the first post in this thread
post #82 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrb View Post

How many examples do you need??
1. Rega - Apollo
2. Cambridge Audio - 840C

If you think that SA-CD or DVD-A from the 3930 is as good as it gets you need to get out more. Visit a high end audio shop and demo some CD players.

If someone's is happy a with player like the 3930 that's awsome, just don't spread the illusion that it sounds as good as a CD only player valued at the same amount of money on CD playback. You may want to reread the first post in this thread

First, I did not say that SACD from 3930 is the best there is. There are certainly players that do a better job at SACD and CD.

Second, I said that SA-CD is by definition better than CD, assuming they use quality recording. Obviously if you take a crappy recording, better format would not help. However, a high quality recording will ALWAYS sound better on SACD than on CD.

Third, I did hear Cambridge Audio 840C and it is not better than 3930 with SACD (to me). Actually, I am not even sure it is better with redbook CD.

I also asked if you did a double blind test with these players. If not, you should not make such black-and-white statement.

Solid dvd players are often as good as solid cd players at the same price point. While 3930 is not the best of the bunch (5910 and even 5900 are better with both CD and SACD) it is a very good CD player as well. Like I mentioned before, Esoteric and Linn also make excellent sounding DVD player but may be you did not audition any of them?

Below is a quote from Smarthouse (Australian review magazine) about denon 3930:

"In its optimum configuration, using the higher quality dedicated stereo outputs with CD, the Denon is a powerful player, with the kind of open, tactile sound you can almost reach out and touch. Coming from a DVD-compatible player this is rare indeed - it's good enough to give some well-reputed dedicated CD players a run for their money and will not be disgraced in any company. The same comments apply with all audio sources tried, including DVD-Audio and SACD.

Particularly impressive is the performance of the player with SACD in stereo. With lesser players, SACD can sound a little too smoothly rounded, lacking in grip if you prefer, and unable to articulate the raw edge that some recordings call for. This one does so, while retaining the elegant qualities that this format brings to the party. There is no obvious trade-off - the sound is very open and pure, subtle and organic, with tremendous clout when that's what the music calls for."

Oh, but these reviewers should probably visit more high-end audio shops.

For the record: I do not own 3930; I own denon 5910 and onkyo sp1000
post #83 of 128
[quote=VladP]First, I did not say that SACD from 3930 is the best there is. There are certainly players that do a better job at SACD and CD.

Obviously if you take a crappy recording, better format would not help. However, a high quality recording will ALWAYS sound better on SACD than on CD.

A high quality recording WILL NOT always sound better on SACD or dvd-A than on a cd player. You have to understand that no matter how great a technology is, if it's not well implemented, the results may not be optimal.

I have many sacd-cd combos, and the cd layer sounds better on my Marantz SA-11 than the sacd layer sounds on my Denon 2900.
post #84 of 128
[quote=luismanrara]
Quote:
Originally Posted by VladP View Post

First, I did not say that SACD from 3930 is the best there is. There are certainly players that do a better job at SACD and CD.

Obviously if you take a crappy recording, better format would not help. However, a high quality recording will ALWAYS sound better on SACD than on CD.

A high quality recording WILL NOT always sound better on SACD or dvd-A than on a cd player. You have to understand that no matter how great a technology is, if it's not well implemented, the results may not be optimal.

I have many sacd-cd combos, and the cd layer sounds better on my Marantz SA-11 than the sacd layer sounds on my Denon 2900.

I may disagree with you on this one. Implementation is definitely important, but well-recorded SACD has information that is simply not present on CD. So even the best CD player is simply filling the gaps that are not on the recording. SACD player simply reads what's present on a SACD. So the amount of detail on SACD should be better (assuming both are based on the same high quality original recording) but I can see how some people would prefer certain qualities of sound not related to the details of the recording.

I also think that bias is a big component here. I know we all want to think we are unbiased and that we hear all differences. But the fact is, that unless you did a double-blind test of these two players, you can't really be sure they sound different.
post #85 of 128
[quote=VladP]
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post


I may disagree with you on this one. Implementation is definitely important, but well-recorded SACD has information that is simply not present on CD. So even the best CD player is simply filling the gaps that are not on the recording. SACD player simply reads what's present on a SACD. So the amount of detail on SACD should be better (assuming both are based on the same high quality original recording) but I can see how some people would prefer certain qualities of sound not related to the details of the recording.

I also think that bias is a big component here. I know we all want to think we are unbiased and that we hear all differences. But the fact is, that unless you did a double-blind test of these two players, you can't really be sure they sound different.

There's much more to music than numbers, that said, there's bias in everything we do in life. I respect your opinion, but apply the bias concept to you as well.
post #86 of 128
It's of particular note, that when Sony introduced SACD they never provided a recording that was mastered identically to allow for critical comparisons.
post #87 of 128
I think we can all agree that SACD and DVD-Audio, theoretically can be better than CD. Whether in real life that's true, is hard to say.

You would first need a better than CD master, say 96/24. Using the same 96/24 audio stream, record it onto CD and DVD-Audio, using proper dithering/noise shaping etc. Then listen to both tracks using an acceptable AB method. In theory, the SACD should sound better.

Anyway, arguing semantics is a waste of time. SACD failed, and DVD-Audio will probably fail.

Why the record companies still make the easily copiable CD, is not clear. Perhaps they have realized that ANY format they come up with will be broken in a short time frame.

So what do the record companies want to do, that's the real question. The question certainly has little to do with what the consumer wants*. I think DVD-Audio DOES stand a chance because it's becoming more common in more players. If it gained critical mass, I think the record companies might jump on that bandwagon even though the wheels (copy protection) have already come off.

* The average consumer wants free music, that much is evidently clear
post #88 of 128
The way copy protection will work will be that legislation will mandate that devices (players, recorders, etc.) will be encoded with the ability to read information on the disc that dictates just what rights you have with respect to copying.
post #89 of 128
* The average consumer wants free music, that much is evidently clear[/quote]

I agree with you 100%. The companies have but themselves to blame about this situation.
Charging $18.00 for a music cd is should be a "crime", specially when you can buy a 2 disc special edition dvd movie for $20.00 or less.
post #90 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

"PURE DIRECT" does not mean "Analog Bypass". I have an older Marantz receiver (18Ex) and you can hear it in the pure direct mode while using a digital connection.

yeah, you're right there. Essentially, you want the DAC output (from the player) to be directly routed through receiver/pre-amp section, then to amplifier.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › Should We All Hold Off on Buying CD Players?