anyone know anything about these late 80's cd players?
Apr 13, 2004 at 2:43 AM Post #16 of 56
Check out the Adcom GCD-575...it's got a nice, detailed sound, but without a lot of the harshness that I associate with earlier CD players. It's also built like a tank, and it's got a headphone out that's about the best I've heard. The pot for the headphone out also controls the level on the variable out (it has two outs - line level and variable). They are still available for around $100, and if nothing else they make GREAT redbook transports.
 
Apr 13, 2004 at 3:03 AM Post #17 of 56
I have a circa 1986 Sony CDP-102. This thing seeks tracks way faster than current CD players. I'm talking about the instant you push the Next track button, it's playing the next track. Amazing. Only problem is that the sound in one channel is dead, and I haven't had time to go find a place to have it looked at and fixed.

Can anyone suggest a reputable and quality shop in the San Francisco Bay Area?
 
Apr 13, 2004 at 6:08 PM Post #18 of 56
find a photo of the Adcom nice retro look.
102182.jpg

and it has a good headout? very interesting
biggrin.gif


there is one at ebay
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3809724021
elrod-tom do you think that its headout can drive low imp cans like Sony7506 or Grado225 nicely?that would be great
wink.gif
 
Apr 14, 2004 at 5:03 AM Post #20 of 56
Quote:

Originally posted by mecano
and the Philips 850
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...&category=3272
Very nice players


Be warned that the 850mkII is a cut down version of the original 850... undoubtedly still good / great but with not as many goodies inside.

Yelbrab, Shh!! You're not supposed to be tempting me to part with more money, especially not the kind of money that you're looking at for equipment like that
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Apr 14, 2004 at 7:12 AM Post #21 of 56
Quote:

Originally posted by Norbert
I am curious about why the decks from the same period are ignored. Something happened in the CD design world that I'm not clued in on. At the expense of highjacking this thread I cannot help but wonder why they can't make a PCDP good enough for home use that can compete with my Denon.


Because there are people who dismiss older DAC designs due to their higher jitter rates and other such things...

Whilst this is true, and they might not be technically perfect compared to todays chips, since when did we at head-fi care about the tech specs? its all in the sound, and a well implemented older design, i'm pretty sure can (and infact does) compete with newer designs...

As to PCDPs? there are just too many restraints in terms of battery power and so forth for that to be truly viable... if you look at the schematics for most CDPs i'm sure you'll find that the DACs / Op-Amps run on 15v rails... how would you get 15v from a couple of AA cells?
 
Apr 14, 2004 at 1:59 PM Post #22 of 56
Here's a fun little read on why older CDPs typically suck:
Quote:

Like other hobbies, home audio has its classics—things such as the Marantz Model 7 preamp, McIntosh MR77 stereo tuner, Quad ESL loudspeaker, and Advent Receiver all fit there, most people would agree. Lesser-known things—the Naim NAP250 amp, Stax F81 speakers, Decca ribbon tweeter, and certain older Garrard turntables—also have their devotees. And now, in this age when rebuilding them has risen to the very heights of craft and commerce, we can allow ourselves to think that some phono cartridges are classics: Koetsus, Kisekis, Fidelity Researches, and so forth.

So there are lots of early amps, early speakers, and early record players that are considered classics. Are there any early CD players that are classics? No, because they all sound like crap.


http://www.stereophile.com/artdudley.../204listening/

In general, DACs have come a LOOOOOOOOONG way since the early CDPs.
 
Apr 14, 2004 at 6:47 PM Post #23 of 56
Markl...

The same could be said for cars, most of the older units were gas guzzlers, ugly, noisy, slow... compare them to cars these days, and they pale into insignificance... that being said, there were some older designs that through whether it be sheer luck, or design had well implemented power plants, and looked good, and ran gracefully / fast (depending on what you want from your car)

As I said up above, the DAC is only one part of the chain... you can have the best DAC out there (ironically, one of them being the Philips TDA1541 S1 Silver Crown from the late '80s) but add it into a poorly implemented board design, and it'll suck... whereas, put a mediocre DAC on a well designed board, and the sum of those parts in the latter implementation will perform the same as, if not better than the former.

Horses for courses... if nothing else, my $75 investment completely slaughters the $200 Sony CDP-XE570 I have, and also sounds a damn-sight clearer than the Marantz CD63SE that I had in operation before that....
 
Apr 14, 2004 at 7:32 PM Post #24 of 56
Hi duncan, I agree there's a LOT more to a CDP than a DAC. But without a good DAC, it doesn't matter what kind of analog section or power supply you've got. It's like, it doesn't matter what kind of kilo-buck headamp you've got, if your source is $90 Radio Shack CDP. The DAC is sort of the "source of the source" so to speak.

I just provided the link as a general answer to this question: Quote:

I am curious about why the decks from the same period are ignored. Something happened in the CD design world that I'm not clued in on.


Yup, it's the DAC!
 
Apr 15, 2004 at 2:35 PM Post #25 of 56
I don t care if older DACs don t measure well as long as they sound good to me.Tube amps measure bad but can sound great.If you don t like older DACs...don t use them.Older players are build like tanks and are great for transports.One can buy an older flagship player re-clock it and use it as a transpost through a newer DAC
wink.gif
 
Apr 15, 2004 at 7:22 PM Post #26 of 56
I've seen some pretty good reviews of late first generation Marantz players which had 14bit DAC's,metal transports and weighed a ton.The reviewer said that it sounded very smooth but lacked detail and would suit someone who doesn't like the 'CD sound' and who would normally prefer vinyl.

I think it was the the CD73

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...category=27784
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 2:28 PM Post #27 of 56
If the choice was between a new budget Sony CDPXE 270 and a similary prized Marantz CD72 in nice condition. What would you guys go for?

After reading this thread I'm tempted at chancing on a CD72.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 10:10 PM Post #28 of 56
of course the Marantz
wink.gif
 
Apr 17, 2004 at 9:16 AM Post #29 of 56
Quote:

Originally posted by mecano
of course the Marantz
wink.gif


I bit the bait and I'm picking it up tomorrow, we'll see.

BTW: I see that a similar machine is already at 75 pounds at ebay.co.uk
eek.gif
 
Apr 17, 2004 at 8:47 PM Post #30 of 56
Quote:

Originally posted by Dane
I bit the bait and I'm picking it up tomorrow, we'll see.

BTW: I see that a similar machine is already at 75 pounds at ebay.co.uk
eek.gif


You did good there Dane...

That is a great price for the CD72 so long as its all in fully working condition... now, the test is for you to get a CDP-XE270 also, and then compare the two side by side... how I've done with the Philips CD850 and the Sony CDP-XE570.. i've not posted the results... but i'm sure you know the outcome already
wink.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top