The difference between mainstream HIFI, budget seperates, midrange and high end?

CDP has moving parts with a moving laser reading tiny pits on a moving disc.
Tuner is a static PCB in a box, as is the amplifier usually.

So the CDP might well be influenced by external vibration.
However, we expect the CDP to be influence and the tuner not to be and that of course doesn't mean that they conform to this in reality. Probably getting a bit deep for this thread

 

Not amazing at all, I find people's delusions very consistent!

 

Good! Glad I might be normal ;-)

Regarding expectations with sound differences with CDPs, I honestly can't say if I read JV's thoughts on eye pattern quality and excessive servo overtime bogging down the CDS mk 1's power rails prior to my trying the assorted pucks or afterwards. I suppose I'm doomed now regardless since I can identify the pucks consistently. FWIW, I hear no difference with my CDS2's pucks so there could be hope;-)

 

Nice theories there from JV. It isn't difficult to prove absolutely conclusively either way with a null test. I'm sure that even you would accept that if the output of a CD player taken with the different pucks gives a perfect null there is nothing to hear. I note that Naim never mentioned any such testing and simply put out an explanation based on theory.

 

I'm not qualified to comment on the absolute accuracy of a null test or not TBH. (For example, is it possible the difference signal could be below the threshold of noise for the measuring equipment yet still audible (and ultimately measurable with better gear?)

It's a shame we can't invite engineers from firms like this for in-depth discussions. I think we'd all gain from the experience.

 

On the first point, no, but you could always test yourself to be sure.

On the second point, there is a reason why engineers avoid audio forums.......

 

Engineers sometimes avoid also having discussions between themselves when it comes to interpretating measurements and especially when it comes to discuss implications on human sound perception. Of course those who have the same opinion they discuss quite well together.
The behaviour of engineers is not better than the behaviour of normal forum members.

 

Very true but many forums aren't particularly rooted in science and are actually hostile hostile environments for engineers.

 

I am not a scientist; I have, however, blown a few bit of kit up.

This is an interesting instance. There are many players out there (such as the infamous marantz cd63) for which these servos run off the unregulated rails. In the case of the 63, interposing about 25pence-worth of regulators without changing anything else makes these machines sound much, much better, when the data is entirely the same (i.e.- the cd was easily read before, as well as after).

I have a couple of suggestions as to why but would rather observe that all Naim's CD players have separate regulation for things as lowly as the servos and their controllers... suggesting, inter alia, the pucks matter rather less than they might have done when the first players were being breadboarded and studied in depth.

 

Never knew that about the Marantz 63 Martin.

I would add that my point re null tests relates to the analogue output if we are investigating PSU effects.

Dave, do people really still demo different pucks?

 

I'm not sure if they ever did (demo pucks)

I discovered the difference by accident when I tried the double o-ring thinking it would improve tracking (and maybe sound) with a regular disk since it helped tracking with problematic disks. It sounded slightly worse though.

 

The fact being of course that it can be measured. We can measure pretty much anything there is to measure with respect to the performance of audio equipment. The issue however, isn't whether we can measure it, but:

a) how we measure, and under what conditions.
b) what those measurements mean relative to human perception.
c) individual perception of what constitutes "good" sound.

The technicalities of audio reproduction are relatively well understood. How humans perceive such reproduction is not.

 

With respect to Microphony.

Most electronic components are susceptable to microphony to some degree. The issues are to what degree, the level of exposure to vibration and the relative levels of the microphonicly induced signal and the audio signal within the said component.

 

True, but you have to adopt a common sense approach to these things, particularly when differences are of tiny magnitude.

It would be a bit like choosing magnolia colour to paint the room, taking the colour sample to the paint shop and insisting that you try every can of paint labelled magnolia from the same paint manufacturer. Not every can of paint is going to be absolutely identical. Would it matter - no.

 

LOL...I agree regarding paint (worked in the industry for 25 years.) Matter of fact, the same paint out of the same can won't match precisely after 24 hours even with the same applicator, application tool, mil thickness, humidity and temperature. You may not see it but we had instruments that will measure the difference. And it just goes downhill from there;-)

As you've mentioned, color names are picked almost by throwing darts. There is no industry standard for typical homeowner colors with a few exceptions. Even then, tolerances are all over the place and a color match of Brand A's "Magnolia" by Brand B in their paint is a crap-shoot at best since the only true reference is locked away in Brand A's lab never to see the light of day.

Now, regarding some CD players, I must disagree. My CDS mk 1 made any turntable I've ever worked with sound completely immune to its supporting structure by comparison. You could place the transport/DAC unit on an SO table it would sound much like any other mediocre cd player. Move it directly to a carpeted floor or to a handful of other stands and you hear where your money went.

 

Hardly a valid comparison, Rob.

I deliberately played down my response to microphony experiments.

Frankly i've been astonished at the sonic gains I've been able to generate.

So, "tiny magnitude"?

NO, not at all.

I can only assume Rob's kit is of heavier build than mine is, which can influence the potential. I experimented a bit with my brother's Musical Fidelity stuff one year. Some gains but not as dramatic as with my Arcam A5 (modded).

Dare I suggest you might consider "tweaking" (if thats what it is) to be a little bit .......beneath you..... Rob??

 

Yes I would hope its built into mine also.

I do try to use the term IME to reinforce this.

Maybe I should use IMO just to be doubly clear.


(I would have thoiught the first line written below covers most eventualities. )

 

Been there, done it and tried it David - like you really wouldn't believe.

The free stuff is fine if usually of little or no worth, most of the stuff that commands a price tag is a con.

No, it just works properly.

 

I prefer that my stuff sounds better than work properly and be absolutely technically perfect.

 

Those things aren't mutually exclusive.