[ProzacMessiah]

I recently found myself in the market for a new CD player. I'd been using my Xbox, connected via the optical out to an Onkyo TX-SR604 (or whatever last year's iteration of it was). The Xbox has been a bit fussy about some games and DVDs lately, not audio CDs, but I thought I'd get a dedicated CD player to take that load off of the Xbox. It probably just needs to be cleaned/realigned. Also, I wanted a changer, the ability to play SACDs, and some of the features that one takes for granted in a dedicated CD player that are either absent from or awkward in a gaming console.

I read some reviews here and elsewhere before settling on the Sony CE595, which arrived last week. I hooked it up to the receiver using standard analog cables. I ordered a handful of SACDs at the same time, but they're backordered, so I tested it using a couple of classical CDs. I put the same CD in the Xbox and the Sony, played about 10 - 20 seconds or so, paused the one and then listened to the same selection on the other. This was done in stereo through a pair of Polk Monitor 70s. As I understand it, the signal processing for the Xbox selection was being done by the Onkyo receiver since I was using a digital connection, and on board the CE595 for the Sony, since that was hooked up via analog. Anyways, the long and short of it was that I heard no difference whatsoever between the two, and this was while concentrating fully on the music. A couple of friends I subjected to a blind test using the same methods were likewise unable to detect a difference.

The reviews of the CE595's Redbook performance were nearly all positive, and full of the evocative prose about a unit's sound characteristics that I'm accustomed to seeing in audio reviews. I don't dispute the conclusion or any particular detail, but reviewers also had firm opinions about how it differed from the sound of their previous CD decks, while I've noticed none. I expected at least some audible difference given the amount of ink I've seen spilled on the topic of CD players.

I was considering buying the ES version of this player, mainly for direct track access via remote and better expected durability due to its beefier components, but I would no longer have any expectation of better quality sound. When building my current rig, I auditioned a number of speakers and receivers. There was a world of difference between different speakers especially, but also noticeable differences between receivers. The CD player, contrarily, has always struck me as a pretty humble piece of equipment, and I'm especially baffled by the existence of $1,000+ models. I hadn't been aware that such high-priced models existed until I started looking for a new one. I'm sorely tempted to repeat the above test between the Sony and my 1990 vintage single-disc Pioneer player* that I have connected to 'Frankenstereo' elsewhere in the house. I'd expect an audible difference there, simply from the general electronic advances over a 15 year period.

I'm not at all dissatisfied with the quality of sound that I'm getting. I guess I'm just looking to get some general commentary. What's different, without being superfluous, in a top shelf CD player that should result in better sound? I'm not noticing the difference between humbler players that some others clearly do. Anyone else have the same experience? Does Onkyo just happen to use esepecially solid DACs in their receivers?

* Which has direct track access, both via remote and the faceplate. Way to take a step backwards, Sony.

 

[hciman77]

So far in my searching I have only found one instance of a blind ABX test that conclusively (67% detected a difference) showed a pereceptible difference between CD players. This was between a 1996 $1400 Sony (nothing held back) CD player and a first gen 14bit Marantz Cd player even then it was only 67%. A follow-up test between the Sony and a 1bit Pansonic SL7200 PCDP showed no difference. So I am not surprised that you found no difference.

I have done extensive AB testing (sadly non blind) on my own CD players using a switch box and have been unable to reliably find a difference between them. This could be a limit of my critical abilities of course.

 

[lipidicman]

My step up was from a CD63 to the CD63KI and the difference was a revelation. I would not have wanted to use the vanilla 63 with my 650's that is for sure. I still wish I had snapped up a meridian that passed through the shop I worked in!

Using it as a transport is another matter, but I would advise a good cdplayer with a dac and an analogue connection. No SPDIF and I suspect a better DAC in the CDP if you get a good machine. Analogue and digital dont go well together, especially when the analogue is running through a power amplifier. Much better to mix the digital with the line-level analogue in the CDP

 

[Garbz]

The use of ABX is questionable at times. Often some elementry items such as cdplayers or amplifiers (tube vs solid state) have failed ABX tests even though there are clearly audible and measurable differences.

I put it down to how the brain operates on music. There is only a few seconds memory on exactly what something sounds like, so comparing ABX may not work because of this reason. That said being a musician I know what instruments sound like and rather than ABX and listen for differences, I'd rather spend an hour on one device and listen for its qualities and buy like that.

 

[rock\]

"Audiophiles" always have excuses as to why YOU don't hear a difference.

You heard what you heard, and let that be the end of it.

A Quote from someone I truly respect who is an expert in the audio reproduction industry (SH):

"If the audiophile magazines acknoledged that the electronics were not really a large contributor to the end quality, they wouldn't have much to write about!!! They are trying to make money on what they write, so they will write about as much as they can, even if it is of questionable validity.

A "crappy" reciever or amp is still way higher in transparency than a speaker. It is still capable of passing the differences between turntables. Turntables are electro-mechanical devices and like speakers, are going to have differences in the final sound directly related to their machining, motors, and of course the cartridge, which is converting mechanical vibrations into electrical voltage.

If they did those same comparisons using different CD players, I bet the differences would not be so easy to hear. (but of course those magazines would hear HUGE differences anyway!!!)

I'm afraid that when it comes to some writers in the "audiophile" press, the Emperor is stark naked."

 

[drarthurwells]

There are huge differences between CDPs, amps, headphones, ICs tubes, etc.

To hear these differences you must have a top quality system from one end to the other. Then you sub one component in that system for something else. You will hear a big difference if you know good sound. Sometimes one component is better than the other but different, but sometime they are of the same quality level in spite of being different - but they will be different.

Anchor your system with one quality component, like the AKG K701 headphone or Rega Saturn CDP. Then upgrade one part of your system at a time, and with each upgrade you will take it to a higher quality of sound level - if your upgrades are proper.

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rock\ "Audiophiles" always have excuses as to why YOU don't hear a difference.

Sure, but by the same token, people who have not heard better don't know any better.

I have about had it with people telling me what does and does not make a difference as most of them haven't even heard a nice audio system. That said, I do agree with you that if you don't hear a difference you should save your money. I also, surprisingly enough, agree with Art that if you introduce one great component into a bunch of garbage you can't expect miracles.

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz The use of ABX is questionable at times. Often some elementry items such as cdplayers or amplifiers (tube vs solid state) have failed ABX tests even though there are clearly audible and measurable differences. I put it down to how the brain operates on music. There is only a few seconds memory on exactly what something sounds like, so comparing ABX may not work because of this reason. That said being a musician I know what instruments sound like and rather than ABX and listen for differences, I'd rather spend an hour on one device and listen for its qualities and buy like that.

The only valid test is AB where A is week of listening to a few CDs and B is listening with a changed compnent, again for a week, but with the same CDs.

Has to do with perceptual discrimination - rapid switching between A and B prevents good discrimination except where differences are really obvious. A week of A then a week with B enables disrimination of even subtle differences.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells There are huge differences between CDPs, amps, headphones, ICs tubes, etc. To hear these differences you must have a top quality system from one end to the other. Then you sub one component in that system for something else. You will hear a big difference if you know good sound. Sometimes one component is better than the other but different, but sometime they are of the same quality level in spite of being different - but they will be different.

If the differences are huge then surely any half decent system (transparent) will reveal them i.e my M3 and Sennheiser HD580s should be good enough for me to detect a gross difference, both are recognised as good quality but not really top end. If they cant do this then the difference cannot be huge. If the differences are subtle then it becomes arguable that there are differences at all.

You are right that you must only change one variable at a time oitherwise it is fatally flawed, this of course includes level matching which is sometimes tricky - my digital sources have very different output levels the NAD carries a 2V signal and my Entech a 2.5V signal. In that sense rapid ABing is flawed as I have to adjust the volume.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells The only valid test is AB where A is week of listening to a few CDs and B is listening with a changed compnent, again for a week, but with the same CDs.

Strangely I agree that this would work, but with a slight change. You should have someone blindfold you while you listen so you do not know which component you are listening to for the first and second weeks, thus removing expectancy bias.

 

[Max F]

I've said it before and i will say it again. I own the sony 595 and its OK at redbook, not great. I've since moved on and use it as a transport. My Behringer DEQ2496 was better at redbook especially when using the room correction. My Panny xr55 is better as a DAC than either the 595 or the DEQ and thats what i use now.

Stick in a good SACD and then you will feel like you made a good purchase! Also, the player did sound better after some playing time - 40 hrs or so.

 

[jpr703]

There are differences and if you demo enough players, you should be able to hear them. That being said, the law of diminishing returns kicks in real fast with CD players. I've got a >$500 NAD player and, from the other units I've demoed in my home with the same additional equipment, you have to get into players costing thousands of dollars to get a substantial improvement.

It's kind of disappointing that sources get so expensive, especially since the CD player is the piece of your system that's likely to last the least amount of time. After all, technology changes fast in that area and those transports and lasers don't last forever.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpr703 It's kind of disappointing that sources get so expensive, especially since the CD player is the piece of your system that's likely to last the least amount of time. After all, technology changes fast in that area and those transports and lasers don't last forever.

If you look on eBay you can still see many "vintage" CD players for sale (Denon, Rotel, Marantz, Phiillips) some are over 20 years old, many have cast iron transports and were built to last, by comparison many modern (non high end) machines are apallingly flimsy.

 

[ProzacMessiah]

Thank you all for your comments.

I don't regret the purchase at all; the primary drivers weren't related to redbook audio quality, which I was already happy with. If there were huge differences between CDPs, I (or my guinea pigs) should have noticed something. In fact, I would think that there shouldn't be huge differences in a mature format like CD. That would seem to indicate either problems with the format itself or widespread incompetence among CDP manufacturers. I'm open to the possibility that some difference between CDPs becomes distinct in a system that is at the very top of the line from end to end, but a quick search on the suggested Rega Saturn CDP put it solidly in the >$2000 range. That's just not an option, particularly since I'd then need to spend several times that amount upgrading other components as well. Even if I had that kind of money I'd have better uses for it, so differences noticeable with such gear will remain hypothetical to me unless I win the lottery.

What I'm using right now might not be the envy of the market, but it's not "a bunch of garbage" either. The kit that Max talks about is more in my range, but since I'm happy with the redbook sound I'm getting from the Sony, and am very interested in checking out SACD, I'll hang onto the 595 rather than risk finding myself in another shoulder-shrugging situation. It looks like CDP ambivalence is not unheard of, and I definitely don't want to change my receiver.

For curiosity's sake, I'll spend a week or two listening to the new Sony regularly before switching back to the Xbox --> Onkyo receiver to see if differences become apparent after extended listening. If they don't, then finding that the signal processing available from my receiver is equally enjoyable to that provided by my CDP is hardly something to complain about.

I'll probably drop a quick line in these forums once the SACDs I ordered arrive. I haven't yet heard music in that format.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Some thoughts:
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be using a "receiver" for music. Just remember that they're pretty compromised in their stereo ability
- You're using the digital "in", meaning that all the Sony and Xbox are doing is acting as transports, whilst the inbuilt DAC in the receiver does the rest of the work. As it's the same DAC, and linking to my point above, I can't say I'm surprised that you can't tell the difference.

With regard to the other comments about "high end CDPs". Some more thoughts:
- Yes, you are correct in stating that the most obvious differences are with a change of speakers. Note my comment about "change", and not necessarily improvement. There are a number of common speaker design types, all of which impart quite different sonic attributes (e.g. sealed box, ported, transmission line, horn, ribbon, electrostatic). None of these are "perfect", they just do things differently and have their own compromises. The important thing for a buyer is choosing the technology they prefer the style of.
- Regardless of what some people might say, CDPs can and do get better. After all, if there were no differences, do you seriously believe that so many people are stupid and gullible enough to blow thousands on expensive electronics? It's easy to say things like "diminishing returns", because it's a good justification for not spending anymore. All I know is that there's some damn good stuff out there, and I can't afford some of it.
- With regard to the improvements from better sources, they really aren't as obvious as with a change of speaker. My own thoughts are that many of these are much more subtle, and likely to not be noticed when comparing 30 seconds of track before switching around. All the subtle nuances and "life" that can and does exist is often missed by cheaper kit and certainly isn't easy or cheap to extract. Having said that, whilst it's not easy to spot instantly, they can make a massive difference to your involvement within the music.

Hope that helps.