[taimurmalik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrarroyo The reason I ended up with the Arcam is that I had to send back two NAD C542 (under warranty) due to skipping and funny noises coming from the headphones and the unit. A pity because it sounds great!

How was your experience with NAD in sending the CDPs back? I'm tempted to go for the NAD, but I wouldn't want to be stuck with a skipping player in case it turns out that way.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 Interesting, I have a NAD C542 and a Philips DVP642 and personally I cant really tell much difference between the NAD and the Philips - I really like the NAD incidentally but use the Philips almost exclusively. That makes the Philips more or less as good as the Jolida ? My mantra is listen with your ears and soul and not with your eyes or your wallet

I would agree about listen with your ears. I guess it would be hard to listen with anything else

- I was just trying to direct attention to someone who's heard the Nad. I haven't.

I personally I like the Jolida. It is a true triode output and does tubes about as well as any CD player, except for the expensive stuff. It's midrange is spectacular. BUT the detail is not great, and highs and lows are lacking a bit. The modded units ruin the lush midrange, so you can't keep that beautiful sound and get detail.

So, My Cary 308T gives gobs of detail, lush midrange, and is lacking a bit in the bass. But it's more expensive.

I wish that the cheap stuff was as good as the expensive stuff, but if it was people wouldn't be buying the expensive stuff. Everyone would get the cheap stuff and word would spread. Price isn't irrelevant as much as you'd like to believe that.

 

[Overheat]

Never heard the Lite, but the NAD is a very good buy. Also consider the Cambridge Audio Azur 640C V2 - I'm starting to feel like I work for Cambridge Audio here I'm recommending them so often, but they really are incredibly good for the money.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 I wish that the cheap stuff was as good as the expensive stuff, but if it was people wouldn't be buying the expensive stuff. Everyone would get the cheap stuff and word would spread. Price isn't irrelevant as much as you'd like to believe that.

Having never heard any real high end players I cant comment on them (The Jolida reference was a joke) but my experience with low end kit is that differences (to me) are less dramatic than their price differences would suggest. My contention, if I have one, is that there may not be a linear relationship between price and sound quality, to me my $450 CD player is not 7 times better than my $60 DVD player. Maybe with a lot of listening I could pick out areas where the NAD is superior but to me they are so close as to be pretty hard to differentiate between. Maybe I am deluded but if so I am deluded and have a healthier wallet

 

[jpr703]

There certainly isn't a linear relationship between price and performance--the law of diminishing returns kicks in real fast. One thing I like about the NAD is that, at least to my ears, it seems to be the last step before those diminishing returns kick in hard.

 

[bluemeteor]

I really, really do not think that these OP AMp'd based CD players are going to compete with a non OP AMP'd upsampling AD 1853 CD player.

I really doubt it. It is not in the same league. It is like comparing the NAD Integrated Amplifier to a Marantz 8.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluemeteor I really, really do not think that these OP AMp'd based CD players are going to compete with a non OP AMP'd upsampling AD 1853 CD player. I really doubt it. It is not in the same league. It is like comparing the NAD Integrated Amplifier to a Marantz 8.

Sigh - listen with yor ears not a spec sheet

Also you might want to read "Do all amplifiers sound the same" - a seminal article, in this piece it was demonstrated that even golden eared listeners could not distinguish between expensive and cheap amplifiers if driven below clipping.

 

[bluemeteor]

I listened through the RCA Jacks and to the balanced outputs. Over-all, more detail on the CD 15. Plus, the CD 15 upsamples - so over all grungy CDs sounded smooth.

 

[rodentmacbeastie]

Buy an Oppo universal. $150

http://www.referenceaudiomods.com/Me...oduct_Count=39

 

[$qwuzzy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodentmacbeastie Buy an Oppo universal. $150 http://www.referenceaudiomods.com/Me...oduct_Count=39

hmmmm.....if you're going to buy it from there, then it costs $800+.......

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 Having never heard any real high end players I cant comment on them (The Jolida reference was a joke) but my experience with low end kit is that differences (to me) are less dramatic than their price differences would suggest. My contention, if I have one, is that there may not be a linear relationship between price and sound quality, to me my $450 CD player is not 7 times better than my $60 DVD player. Maybe with a lot of listening I could pick out areas where the NAD is superior but to me they are so close as to be pretty hard to differentiate between. Maybe I am deluded but if so I am deluded and have a healthier wallet

I agree with that. These $400-1000 CD players are a very good value these days. And anything above will just get you minor refinements.