Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Classic CD players???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Classic CD players??? - Page 2

post #16 of 65
Quote:
There is no way in hell a $400.00 player today will even come close to a 3, or 4 year old $4000.00 player
Yes, I too agree. By "classic" I thought we were talking about much older players. I like things that look and feel like they are built well. It's not ultimately as important as sound, but I would tend to buy a couple year old high end player before a new one costing the same amount. I payed $600 for a two year old player that was $1,400 new. I believe I would have a very hard time finding something for $600 new that sounded and felt as good. Several years ago I would have thought that all CDP sounded the same, it's just bits and bites. But I now have heard the difference, and the difference is in the music.
post #17 of 65
I also agree. I havn't heard any new 500.00 players that compete with 3-4 year old players that sold new for 2-3K.(or less) If I had 500.00 to spend on a CDP I would buy a used player with the money over a new 500.00 dollar player.
post #18 of 65
Quote:
There is no way in hell a $400.00 player today will even come close to a 3, or 4 year old $4000.00 player
Well, that's not what I said. I said new $400 CDPs *can rival* "CDPs of yore" to which I was referring to players 2-3 times older than that. I was also careful to make it as clear as I could that I was making *generalizations*, of course there are exceptions. Yes, a CDP is much more than a DAC, but the DAC is by far the crucial piece and most significant determinant of the sound of any CDP. If someone is in the market for a new CDP, in the absence of individual experience with every CDP ever built, I think it's more than reasonable to recommend they look at CDPs that are less than 5 years old. Also, look at audiogon and see that *most* older CDPs do not hold value like older amps, pre-amps and such for example, and there's a reason for that. Cheers.

Mark
post #19 of 65
-ditto-
post #20 of 65
Quote:
Originally posted by markl
Yes, a CDP is much more than a DAC, but the DAC is by far the crucial piece and most significant determinant of the sound of any CDP.

Mark
Sorry, I disagree with this statement. While very important, The DAC section is not as important as the quality of the power supplies and analog section. Ceteris Paribus.

In any given year there are examples of CD players selling for $250 and $2500 that use the same DAC chip. Do they sound the same? No. Then what is the main difference besides features and a nicer chassis? - Primarilly The power supplies and the analog section.

In any given year there are a handfull of different DAC chips that manufacturers use. Do they sound the same? No, but often they are similar and a matter of preferrence when properly implemented. However, when you compare a recent DAC chip to one from the mid-80's, then you are talking some pretty major differences. So Mark, I understand your point and don't completely dissagree when many years between CD players are involved.
post #21 of 65
Well, that doesn't explain why people like to use cheap Pioneer DVD players as transports and hookup a high quality DAC to them...suppost to be better than many CD players costing many times the price of the combination.
post #22 of 65
Thread Starter 
So...........What are the all time classics for stand alone and to use as trasnsports. Also classic DAC's.?????
post #23 of 65
The best classic CD players (classic Sony ES, etc.) used the Burr-Brown PCM55 chip and its related family members. These aren't sigma-delta or single-bit DACs, but the real deal -- huge monolithic DAC chips. (The chips are still available and still very expensive, even though transistor costs have decreased.) Whether these can compete with modern upsamplers and modern multibit sigma-delta converters is hard to say. Trust your ears. Older gear did tend to have better quality power supplies.
post #24 of 65
I'm willing to bet a Meridian 508.20 from 6-7 years ago could rock almost all $2000 (and under) cd players in the last 5 years. Some people prefer it to the newer 508.24.
There are others out there that could do the same. Checkout any Wadia from 5 years ago, they are still Very good. I think the generalization that all new CD's are better then old is a buncha BS. That is unless you only buy brand new equipment.
post #25 of 65
Well, this is good to hear! Now i can get a really awesome cdp for cheap because all of the people who have to have the most recent top of the line stuff are selling their outdated top of the line stuff, which is great news for cheapskates like myself. Perhaps this is why I liked my old Audio-Alchemy DDS-III cdp a lot more than the Denon 370 I had.
post #26 of 65
I am glad many jumped back on the generalization!

It seems to me VERY wrong to assume that the new generation low-cost CDPs with cheap drive / chassis / mechanical and electo-magnetic isolation / leightweight power supply / crappy output stage would bear comparison with a 3-4 year CDP whose been designed for best sound...

I did not look for the threads, but many have argued that the new upsampling technology is often commercial BS and brings no better stuff than 10 year old oversampling technology. Sorry for the 963SA hype, but over in Europe, many who have compared it to $100 philips CDP say it's no better for redbook...

Before all this rage with upsampling, some manufacturers got excellent results with 16/44.1 DAC converters, focusing on other crucial areas mentionned above. Now, since 24/96 DAC are cheap anyway, every body moves on. But, the Meridian 508.20 to .24 is a good example that old CDPs, even of similar price range, can compete or better newer designs.

I think if high-end CDP manufacturers read those threads, they must be laughing outloud (or crying for the community ;o)) when we say that 5 year old machines are garbage stuff compared to the $200 DVD/CPD/MP3 players sold at the circuit-city store nearby (which is almost the case of the 963SA) ;o).

Of course, I am sure most of us keep exagerrating what the previous guy said (me first ;o)). But, it's good that some cool it off once in a while ;o).

Cheers,

Arnaud.
post #27 of 65
Good point, Arnaud!

I think sooner or later, I will buy one of these "outdated" cdps. Most likely one of the following models:

Micromega Stage 2 or 3
Rega Planet
Linn Mimik
Cal Audio Labs DX-1 or DX-2
Cal Audio Labs Icon

I want a cd player which was made to sound good, rather than have a lot of features and play multiple formats. Im sure the 963A is AWESOME for playing DVDs, but that is not what its primary use would be, so why should I be paying so much extra money for DVD playback? Im pretty sure that I could do a lot better for redbook for 400$
post #28 of 65
Quote:
A classic CD player, however, can make an excellent transport.
Oh yes, lets all here a good Hoorraahhh!!! for the Adcom GCD-575.
post #29 of 65
Quote:
It seems to me VERY wrong to assume that the new generation low-cost CDPs with cheap drive / chassis / mechanical and electo-magnetic isolation / leightweight power supply / crappy output stage would bear comparison with a 3-4 year CDP whose been designed for best sound...
I don't think anyone is making the argument you seem to be refuting in terms of players that are only 3-4 years old. I'm not as I've already stated. I'm not sure who you're arguing with, maybe KR? I think he was being slightly facetious or slightly ironic, but I won't speak for him. The thread is about "classic" players which I think we are to interpret that as "vintage", which would make them older than that. Cheers.

Mark
post #30 of 65
Thread Starter 
"Classic "

To me this means the best players from lets say each year.


"O' this will be a classic"

I would like to know which is regarded as the best player that can be bought S/H for about $300 . Is it one of the Marantz series???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Classic CD players???