[Duncan]

lol Jodiuh!

It seems to be a case of going back to the age old question... modern day convienience, or classic age sound... hmm... I think I know where my priorities stand right now...

...There is something distinctly analogue about the sound of this thing... hard to pinpoint / convey right now, but with extended listening i'm pretty sure i'll be able to pick up what it is

The most surprising factor, from an old school player is that I was expecting it to be bright... ear singingly so, but its not... not at all ~ it has one of the most (if not THE most) relaxing treble tones that i've ever heard

 

[Bill Ward]

Quote:

The most surprising factor, from an old school player is that I was expecting it to be bright... ear singingly so, but its not... not at all ~ it has one of the most (if not THE most) relaxing treble tones that i've ever heard

Duncan, I have the same experience with a Luxman DZ112, circa 1988. Feeding a JMT PPA and the Senn HD650's, the sound's really melodious. And it has enought front panel controls to run the starship Enterprise.

Somewhere I saw a discussion of CD development that blamed the brightness of early disks on their conversion from masters that were originally tweaked for vinyl. Wonder if the reputation of early CD players suffered because of the recordings they were fed? Anyway, sounds like you've got yourself a keeper. If there is such a thing on Head-Fi.

BW

 

[Bill Ward]

.

 

[Jodiuh]

Even if the d-25s sounded like poo, it's soo sexy lookin' eh? Those sleek metal lines, that beautiful amber glow...

 

[Duncan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Ward Duncan, I have the same experience with a Luxman DZ112, circa 1988. Feeding a JMT PPA and the Senn HD650's, the sound's really melodious. And it has enought front panel controls to run the starship Enterprise.

lol Bill... I know what you mean about the button count... you feel like you're in mission control with this thing

Jodiuh...

I'll agree that from a style point of view the D25S is pretty classy too... why is nothing made these days with the same skill / quality of old school gear?

lol... how many of todays CD players will themselves, still be seeing active service in 10-15 years time... not many i'd assume

 

[Duncan]

Definetly, with extended listening, the best factor of this player is how easily it reveals (seemingly hidden on other players) even the smallest details...

...It doesn't present this in a warts and all attitude, not at all... its making my RS1s sing along nicely... its a total steal for what I paid for it...

Better still, I am seriously considering getting it clocked by Trichord... get the clock 4 for £150, and maybe one of the dedicated PSUs... sure, it'd cost me an extra £300 on what I paid, but if I can also get a new laser (for longevity purposes) I'm sure this player could easily, and happily carry me for a fair few years down the digital line...

Consider me a very happy owner of this old school unit

 

[Hajime]

Duncan,

Hello there. I would recommend against that. For £300 you can get a very nice entry level player. As I said, I have opened up the CD player (granted not the same model, but similiar and using the same technology) and it is not built very well. The NAD players are less expensive and have much better build quality. A used Sony SCD-222ES or 333ES would also be an option.

I think you are hearing the start of what a good source can do. A portable CD player can only go so far...

 

[pbirkett]

I'd try a Rotel RCD-971...... hot rodded

This little beast is said to give some pretty fancy machines a run for its money and hot rodded it may equal far more expensive players IMO. The RCD-971 is more lively than the 991, and also sounds better than the 965BX. Either that or an RCD-02, is also a very nice player.

 

[Duncan]

Hajime...

I haven't just been living in the portable realm, I've also had for the length of my time here at head-fi (and considerable length of time before) my Marantz CD63SE, and have also had the Sony XE570 player for about a year now... both pale in comparison to this thing... it really does appear to be from a bygone age...

Looking at the differences between yours and mine, yours is a multi-disc player, this is single disc, and original retail (going by the classic technics website) - in 1990, the PS70 cost $450, with yours costing $180 in 1994 (iirc)...

No, this isn't me saying 'mine is better than yours'... this is just me hoping that this thing, having 8 DACs on board, and being from a time when manufacturers really cared about their machines, that this is a cut or two above your own... I will have to audition a more recent player from the Technics stable to find out for myself

I really hope i'm not coming across as trying to be elitist... afterall, this player is probably nothing ultimately special in the big scheme of things, but I do have to advise that this compared to the Marantz CD63SE (which was a multi award winner in 1995) is a complete no brainer, in favour of the Technics IMHO