[Sczervok]

Ok, last I heard... Vintage CD players are older, and the best sounding, even over newer CD players.

I'm sorta confused... cause I assumed, that as technology improved, we would at least be able to keep the sound quality the same... or is there some basic rule that I don't understand?

 

[Canman]

The drive towards lower cost electronics and a priority of battery life over sound quality has caused the PCDP's to sound worse and worse over the years.

You would have thought 10 years ago that they could make a sweet portable these days but it just isn't true.

The capability is well within our realm. You won't find it coming from the design rooms of Sony though.

 

[Sczervok]

Do any CD players manufactured regularly today have sound quality that compares to those of Vintage CD players?

Cause I figure if we got the low quality realm, we might as well have the high quality one as well (without use of a giant 2 x 1 x 0.5 foot box)

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Sadly, even the "giant 2 x 1 x 0.5 foot box" players have suffered from major cost-cutting, as well. Today's lower-priced "giant 2 x 1 x 0.5 foot box" doesn't sound any better than that of 10 years ago. The trend even on that "giant 2 x 1 x 0.5 foot box" is towards shoehorning more and more gee-whiz flashy features and lower costs - and, you know, something had to give.

As a result, the only decent-sounding "giant 2 x 1 x 0.5 foot boxes" cost well over $300 - and often, well over $400.

And those "vintage" portable CD players that we love mostly cost well over $200 when they were new - more expensive than even the most expensive of today's portable CD players.

With all that said and done, the current iRiver SlimX iMP-### series of CD/MP3 players and Sony's current top-of-the-line non-ATRAC3/non-MP3 D-EJ2000 are among the current portable CD players that don't suck as badly as most others. [As long as you don't end up with a European-c(r)apped version of the aforementioned Sony, whose headphone-out can barely drive even the most efficient earbuds on the market!

]

 

[Oddball]

Quote:

Originally posted by Sczervok Do any CD players manufactured regularly today have sound quality that compares to those of Vintage CD players?

Nope. Yeah, we all complain about it daily, but no company in recent memory has put any effort into creating an audiophile quality PCDP. We know they have the technology, but I guess they don't see a market for their efforts. There probably isn't that great of a demand anyways.

 

[warubozu]

It's all about portability and incredible incredible battery life with portables these days. They sacrifice great sound for these features and then try to make it up by adding artificial features such as bass boost.

 

[ch1nkster]

With our economy sucking, people wanting increasingly more portable CD players, and more skip-free technology, companys gear themselves to produce more portable players to fit the lifestyles of today. Technology did not improve in the field of PCDP's (in terms of sound quality) because it costs too much. COmpanies like Sony would much rather spend less bucks and but crappier sounding parts into pcdp's these days. If you want a CD player that sounds good using recent technology, you're going to have to plop down a bundle for a full-sized deck. Vintage pcdp's are so good because you get some portabilty, great sound, and they are less expensive prices than full-sized cd players.

 

[Duncan]

I wonder how much better (if this is so) some of the way cheaper brands are... ignoring Sony, Panasonic et al, how about Gennexa and so forth, they aren't driven by features, or design, so maybe more of their budget is put into the sound quality...

Doubtful, but - The Optimus CD3400 was born that way a few years back - so, we can live in hope

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Well, Duncan, the cheaper brands of PCDPs sound equally as mediocre as the (low-end models of the) big-name brands. Most of those cheaper new models use outdated parts and crappier quality control. Remember, in this particular case, "older" is not "better". IMHO, "louder but very muddy" sound is just as bad as "weak and thin but otherwise clear" sound.