|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I am a speaker builder for 8 years, and spent a lot of time these last months comparing CD-Players and DACs.
Conclusions :
- Differences between speakers, location of speakers, rooms,
and recordings are A LOT BIGGER than between components.
- Small differences of level can biased comparisons. If a
component is listened to at a level 1.5 db higher than another,
it will sound "better".
- Especially with CD-Players, the kind of music can lead to
OPPOSITE conclusions when comparing. Which means that you
could use more than one CD-player, and chose a different one
with differend kind of music. Expensive ? Crazy ? Well, two
$750 CD-Players are, perhaps, a better choice than one at
$1500Yves Simon
Yves, I am a speaker builder at heart, having built, fixed, or modified many. And I will continue to do so - However, I no longer believe that a speakers contribution (unless the speakers are junk) to sound is as important as other components, esp source components.I also believe that the speaker / amp interface is very important, since I have heard perfectly musical speakers sound horrible when used with certain amps - even expensive units.
Obviously, a good set of speakers is a must. But IME once your system has been setup properly and you have achieved a certain amount of transparency and system synergy - only your source components will dictate how high a level of musicality your system may achieve.
Of all the CDP players you heard, (and I agree on many of your comments about them) - i will state that NONE of them IMO are what I would consider highly musical players today - although in their day they may have been excellent.
CDP's have gotten so much better over the last 2 years that I urge you to try a current model, and I believe the next 2 years will bring even better results with cheaper price tags.
Also - I would purchase 1 excellent cdp over 2 good cdp's (at the same price) anytime, since the highest possible fidelity at a certain cost is what most people in this forum are trying to achieve.
TBone
> Obviously, a good set of speakers is a must. But IME once your
> system has been setup properly and you have achieved a certain
> amount of transparency and system synergy - only your source
> components will dictate how high a level of musicality your system > may achieve.
Well, we disagree on this. But evidently every link has an effect on the final result.> Of all the CDP players you heard, (and I agree on many of your
> comments about them) - i will state that NONE of them IMO are what > I would consider highly musical players today - although in their
> day they may have been excellent. CDP's have gotten so much better > over the last 2 years that I urge you to try a current model
Well, you must take into account my limited budget. All these used components were bought (and often sold later) for less than $600.
What do you think about the Arcam Alpha 9, the NAD S-500, and the Rotel RCD-991 ? Your advice would help me a lot.Best regards,
Yves Simon
Hi YvesWhile agreeing that the location of speakers and the room shape/size make enormous differences my experience has been that after those obstacles have been overcome the differences between front end components, with revealing amplification, can be quite large.
I'm also coming to the conclusuion that DACs are the root cause of a lot of bad comment about redbook PCM so I would be interested to know which units you found were relatively superior, particularly if you tried any using upsampling.
Peace at AA
John
Hi John,To be honnest, I am not sure that my opinions are 100% correct. For a part of these listenings, I neglected the "level" factor and corrected approximatively the levels ; it is only this week that I calibrated them precisely. Other problem : my Air Conditioning system, here in Houston, is noisy and has bad effects on the main ; it doesn't simplify listenings of high quality equipment.
* Excellent :
- Muse Model 2 with Bessel Filter and HDCD : "old" 20 Bits DAC
(1995). No obvious flaw, extremely "musical". A desription of
the sound would be a list of superlatives. Highly recommended.
* Very Good :
- Marantz CD-17-II : Bitstream CD-Player. The best Marantz I
listened to. No obvious weakness.
Neutral, dynamic, detailed, soft, etc. But slightly less good
in everything than Muse. Highly recommended.
- CAL Icon mk-II : "old" CD-Player (1992) 18 Bits. Very strong
bass, excellent soundstage. Sometimes, the medium seems to lack
clarity, light ringing ? Recommended with caution.
- MSB Link II : 24 Bits DAC. Very good sound, dynamic, deep bass,
a lot of details. But a little bit "forward" and slightly
agressive (attacks). Amazing result for the price. Cheap parts.
Recommended with caution.
* Good :
- Musical Fidelity E624 / A3CD : 24 Bits CD-Player. Thin sound,
lack of bass with music, but not with test tones (?!?). Average
soundstage. Excellent voices. Probably system sensitive.
- NAD 5100 : "old" 16 Bits CD-Player (1989). I choosed it
11 years ago (better than other NADs, Denon, Onkyo, etc.).
I am amazed how good it still sounds today ! Very neutral,
dynamic sound. Narrow, 2-D soundstage. But beats most CD-Players
sold less than $500 today !!!
- Adcom GDA-700 : 20 Bits HDCD DAC. Very high build quality. Not
very detailed, too much medium. Bof.
* Average :
- Marantz CD-67SE : Bitstream CD-Player. Lack of details, fuzzy
soundstage, lack of deep bass, etc. One quality : good dynamic
("slam" in English slang ?). Disappointing.Sincerely,
Yves Simon
I had an old CAL Audio Labs Iconn MKII. I use Dynamat to damp all interior box and CD drive component plus mouse pad under its feet. It's eliminate all resonances and ringing sound. The high, mid, and bass came out beautiful. especially the mid. The liquid sound of this CAL is enjoyable.
After the damping mod, the unit weight 25lbs. Cost of used unit is now approx. $400Highly recommended
Yours,
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: