Well generally true in a way. I got my Denafrips items directly from Vinshineaudio.
Other stuff (speakers, amp, ...) I got to listen at my B&M dealer first, and also bought it there.
With HiFi being so room- and taste-dependant - buying a new mobile, fridge or notebook by checking online tests is easy; but finding the HiFi components that really make you happy is way trickier IMHO.
It would be very sad if there were no B&M HiFi dealers any more - no way to easily cross-check different brands, have a nice chat, get a little less-biased opinion... I mean, would direct-sellers like Vinshine/Denafrips, PS Audio and the likes really advise potential customers to look elsewhere if they can hear from a customers whish list that their own produts wouldn't really fit? With a B&M dealer there's at least a decent amount of alternative products at hand, lots of differents makes/brands.
I mean, would direct-sellers like Vinshine/Denafrips, PS Audio and the likes really advise potential customers to look elsewhere if they can hear from a customers whish list that their own produts wouldn't really fit?
Yes, they would, if they have a good return policy. If they do, and it's very easy for the customer to return the product, the manufacturer is still best off giving the best advise to the customer, as they otherwise risk a return. Selling world wide, this can be quite expensive, so it's actually better to give honest feedback to the customer, than risking a return.
That being said, I enjoy B&M shops too, and I think there is a space for them, but they need to have a good online shop as well. Otherwise, ai think they will have issues in the long rum, IMO.
I used to buy at a local B&M store and it was run mainly by one person I know well. He really gave me the best advice that formed my journey. It's like the stuff you don't learn in school kind of wisdom and experience. The kind that leads you in the right direction and saves you from bad decisions. Also service and maintenance. That can be a lot of work. I bet a direct seller can never provide the same amount of time to each customer. Or bring-in service. Or setup service for a turntable for instance.
I think one of the main problems is: who owns the actual bricks. The rent on real estate in a city centre or mall and gigantic. It's banks, corporations and hedge funds that milk store owners for everything they've got. And rents NEVER go down because that means real estate investments would lose its asset value, collateral. So they rather have their properties vacant than rented out at a lower price. When I walk through our centre that was once bustling with small shops, franchises and customers, now 1 third is empty or filled with temporary fillers or tattoo shops and massage parlours. Straight under our 11th century roman-gothic church in the Bible Belt. Mainly since 2008. And it's definitely not caused by internet shops. And my town has a population of 100k so it's not small (we still define cities as having city rights from feudal middle ages).
So that's also one more reason cheap cd drives are consumables and a proper cd-player is more of a purchase that lasts a long time and can be repaired. People don't know how to fix things anymore and don't know the value of quality. Or what defines quality.
I finally got around to hitting up a local thrift shop again, and spotted an ancient Pioneer DV-333 DVD/CD player.
Works like a champ. Fired right up when I loaded a CD in the tray, and the output sounds great through either digital coax (to my DAC) or RCA audio (directly to my amp) out. In fact the built-in DAC is pretty solid - maybe a bit thinner and less impactful presentation than my SMSL DO200, but it's close TBH.
Dedicated CD Transport for fifteen bucks? Done.
You know how I can tell the thrift store people didn't even test this unit at all before putting it out for sale? A DVD belonging to the previous owner was still in the tray:
Or maybe the thrift store is missing their test dvd? When I did that we used worthless DVD's like this to test if it's working. At least we always test it before selling it. No worse PR than selling untested broken gear.
I'm glad your satisfied. But don't fool people, it is NOT a dedicated CD transport. It's a DVD-Player that can play cd's as well. Also, I wouldn't call it ancient. Just old. It sounds like a five year old who is telling about 'the old days'.
But if it works without skipping, even burned cd's, and if it plays gapless (DVD or BD players usually don't play gapless) then just enjoy.
Ancient enough to have a dedicated LED display panel (rather than relying on a connected TV display). Ancient enough to lack HDMI. Not quite as ancient as me (my first CD player was a TEAC unit bought in the late-80s) but ancient enough to stand out from all the other simply "old" crap lining the shelves at the thrift store.
Burned discs are irrelevant to me - I'm just happy to have access to my old (dare I say ancient?) CD collection. And there's no problem with gapless play.
Let's not quibble over semantics but ancient usually applies to things millennia old. I understand in America they don't really have that. If you want to use hyperbole, that's fine. Yet it still isn't a 'dedicated' transport. Just staying to the matter of fact is more helpful if you want to be taken serious and helpfull for others.
I also really understand what it's like to not have a large budget. I I'm really good at putting an audio setup together that sounds good on the most minimalist budget. But I like to keep it real. You're not going to buy a Ferrari for $600.
Most used optical players are either defective, have reading problems, especially obvious when trying to read the TOC of a burned disc, or do not play gapless (2s break between tracks with clicks and chugging). Or will display problems sooner than later. Unless...unless it has a really high end transport inside like cdm4 or 19 or some TEAC.
Another problem with old players is jitter. A problem that is only recently being tackled properly.
"I don't want to quibble about semantics, but there are some very minor discrepancies in the dictionary definitions of the words you've used versus how you've used them, and I'd like to nitpick for a moment..."
If you've not had a recent experience with a current production CD Transport you might never be able to figure out the willingness on the part of some to spend sizable amounts on 1/2 of a CD Player.
In the past 9-mos I have gone down the CD Transport rabbit hole and found it to be a serious product worth spending good money on.
I'm an old boomer so I've had all manner of CD "players." The last player I owned was the Onkyo 7030 which is highly praised as an inexpensive player with some decent quality. I found it pretty lifeless as a player and not much better when used as a transport. Kind of one dimensional sound and after a short listen you get bored and move on.
Then after seeing some forum talk about transports I just happened into a Cambridge Audio CXC transport locally for $275. Might as well give it a try and right away it sounded better than the 7030 player. That initial search lead me to a used Audiolab 6000CDT for $300. that was even better.
What the transports did that the Onkyo 7030 didn't do was better bass, wider separation between instruments and a spread out sound stage. Between the Cambridge Audio and the Audiolab I preferred the overall sound of the Audiolab. But both were really large steps up from the old player.
My next step was kind of stupid... I doubled down and spent $1900 for a Jay's Audio CDT2-MK3. Wow, huge sound from a huge device. It sounded great but really who needs a $2,000 CD transport? So, I sold it on for what I'd paid for it and bought the Shanling ET-3 transport. Mostly I was a sucker for the top loading drive. The Shanling is OK, I wouldn't swear it's better sounding than the Audiolab 6000CDT in sound quality, but I do like the top loader.
Yesterday, just for a sanity check (yeah, too late for that) I plugged in a Sony Bluray Disc player via it's Coax output. And, yeah, any of the transports I've had in my system were vastly better in all areas of subjective listening.
All of these devices were feeding my Chord Hugo TT2 DAC via Coax S/PDIF outputs and none of them sounded exactly the same. Which 50% of you will not believe. So, there's that.
In the past 9-mos I have gone down the CD Transport rabbit hole and found it to be a serious product worth spending good money on.
...
All of these devices were feeding my Chord Hugo TT2 DAC via Coax S/PDIF outputs and none of them sounded exactly the same. Which 50% of you will not believe. So, there's that.
Thx for sharing.
The problem with CD tansports is that the way they send out digital data makes the DAC behind behave better or worse.
So while there for sure will be CD transports that "sound" better these qualities might be more pronounced when feeding a jitter-sensitive DAC.
Other thing to consider is that only with USB there is asynchronous transfer of data.
In case of synchronous transfer (i.e. SPDIF) the transport's clock is the master which might play a big role in overall sound quality.
Thx for sharing.
The problem with CD tansports is that the way they send out digital data makes the DAC behind behave better or worse.
So while there for sure will be CD transports that "sound" better these qualities might be more pronounced when feeding a jitter-sensitive DAC.
Other thing to consider is that only with USB there is asynchronous transfer of data.
In case of synchronous transfer (i.e. SPDIF) the transport's clock is the master which might play a big role in overall sound quality.
I have a Rotel RCD-1072 CD player I purchased in 2004 (it's been packed away a few years so not a huge amount of play time). Anyway, I have it connected to my Denafrips Pontus II 12th-1 DAC via S/PDIF (coaxial) cable (so "transport" mode). The DAC feeds into my Denafrips Artemis headphone amp via balanced XLR cables, and CDs played from the Rotel sounds absolutely wonderful and without any distortion or background noise. I find I much rather listen to the CD vs. my ripped FLAC files from the CD itself.
I also added an premium power cable to the player and things really opened up there - more micro detail, better soundstage, and bass notes. I also use a silver-copper hybrid S/PDIF cable between player and DAC. For a CD player this old, it's certainly holding its own very well.
That said, I do plan on replacing it by Christmas or early next year (as Feb birthday gift to me) with either the Teac VRDS-701T (CD Transport), or the Marantz SACD 30N (though admittedly, the Marantz is a bit over-kill with all its other functions, but I like it supports SACDs, of which I have a few).
PC to Denafrips Iris DDC using a Supra Excalibur USB cable. Iris to DAC using a Supra HDMI (I2S) cable.
...
BTW, the Iris is also feeding the Teac UD-503 DAC/HPA via S/PDIF (coaxial) cable. Meaning the Iris is feeding both my DACs.
Ah... interesting!
In my setup, using a stone-age 1996 Sony as CD Transport either directly into the DAC or via DDC (Gaia) sounded worse compared to playback of ripped FLAC fils via Auralic Streamer --> DDC --> DAC. That's why I was asking.
The old Sony CDP had TOSlink only, though.
I'm sure you tried the Rotel-->Iris-->Pontus route as well?
Cheers!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![]eep](https://cdn.head-fi.org/avatars/m/139/139747.jpg?1273084439){kind=avatar}
