expensive Cd Players

Does a very expensive cd player make a difference to the sound quality of a hi fi system ?

If so, how ?

All cd players must conform to red book standard and so that leaves upsampling, jitter, and the analogue stage output as the possible contributory factors in the sound quality.


Let the debate begin !

 

Is this a serious question?
Try this for thoughts.
Lets assume that most people here have a modicum of intelligence. So when they're faced with spending £8k on say a CDS3, or £100 on a cheapo CD player, do you believe that they only do it for willy waving purposes?

 

As ever, a stupid troll like thread from 'Johnny'. His statement is a bit like saying as long as the LP turns at 33.33* RPM, then the sound quality is just down to the cartridge/arm/pre/power/speakers/cables/interconnects/room et al.

 

They make no difference at all .....it was said so on a forum, ...It's actually a conspiracy by the government to see who has loads of cash (and big willies...you make me die Mr_S) so they can collect more TAX.....

 

You missed out what may well be the biggest contributor of all as far as 'digital' CD sound is concerned - the digital filter

 

Well... they could have instead spent £2400 on an Audionet ART V2 and achieved the same result so one has to assume the answer is 'yes'.

Forget £100 CD players though. They all sound rough as a badger's arse.

CD players start to sound good from about £900 upwards (although there are plenty of exceptions - for which read 'overpriced sh!te' - well above that price point).

:duck:

 

I don't think the question is stupid at all, though it could have been stated a little better.
There is an awful lot of expensive crap around and many good affordable players that can sound superb.
As ever it's good design that counts not how much cash you throw around.

 

I heard a second hand £100 cd player (actually I think it was less) yesterday.

Sounded easily good enough, and thats in the context of quite an expensive hifi (4-7k using rrp at a guess).

 

Actually the analogy couldn't have been more different. You're comparing an analogue turntable to a digital device.


why do you use an integrated amplifier for your hi fi ? Don't you realise that two mono blocks are invariably better than one stereo amplifier ?
The trouble with the ruarks is that they are reflex designs and as such, will suffer from a 'boomy' bass around resonance with a sharp drop below. Note that there is also a dip in impedance around resonance.

Technobear, you haven't answered the question. You have stated that the digital filter '' may well be the biggest contributor of all as far as 'digital' CD sound is concerned ''
Now explain why, or retract your statement.

 

:ffrc:

 

Johnny, I'm not sure what it is, but somehow you generate a lot of heat, and little light is shed on what could be interesting question:

"if all CD players must conform to red book standards, what is it that makes the difference between a good and bad CD players in terms of sound quality - and to what extent is cost-difference reflected in price-difference?' - or words to that effect.

I'm sure he can look after himself, but Technobear was not being aggressive - but your reseponse sure is! <perplexed>

 

'cd digital audio' by definition conforms to redbook standard.

I've already mentioned some of the possible contributory factors which affect the sound quality. Jitter is not a factor which is outlined in the redbook standards.

 

Are we bored johnny.......?

if you are, then maybe you would like to answer the questions I previously asked you.

 

Refrain from posting in my thread if you do not have anything relevant to say.

 

"hey, you, get off of my thread"

JOhnny, do you think that CDP manufacturers can eliminate jitter? And how do you think that influences decisions to separate the transport from the dac?

 

I wouldn't jump on Johnny so easily.It wasn't so long ago that a member said his 2k dac was the best in the world,then suddenly a 100 quid squeezebox was as good,and there are plenty of people who think that some DVDs can be modified to sound better.But some HIFI buffs won't admit that some expensive CDPs are a waste of money,so they won't enter the debate,far better to live in blissful ignorance safe in the knowledge that the more you spend the better the sound has become.So why have squeezeboxes and cheapo dacs suddenly started to batter expensive CDPs?

 

Do you even know what jitter is ? Do you know jitter is measured ?

separating the transport from the dac converter has nothing to do with jitter.

 

Thanks for the reply, but what is your considered view on my first question?

btw, I was interested in a two-way discussion, not an interogation.

If you dont believe that there is opportunity for jitter in separate transport + dac systems, then I can understand why you would not bother to answer the second question.

But again, do you think that CDP manufacturers can eliminate jitter?

 

Saab/Dave,

I favour a good dac, and have been delighted with my choice (now a fully balanced, Black Gate Dac Decade), and would be even more delighted if the Squeezebox could see it off, as that would deliver more functionality at better SQ/£.

So your question, given plausibility to the premis, "So why have squeezeboxes and cheapo dacs suddenly started to batter [rival??] expensive CDPs?" is a good one.

 

the reason is because there has been an advance in the manufacture of dac chips.

99 % of companies use chips made by another company.So there is always an inherent limitation.