I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BUYING A CD PLAYER AND I DONT KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO.WITH SO MANY TO CHOOSE FROM I WANT TO PURCHASE SOMETHING GOOD BUT I DONT WANT TO SPEND 10,000 EITHER.
Bigpond, plenty of 24bit software out there, for years. Just look at acousticsounds.com you'll find DVD 24/96, HDAD 24/96 and 24/192. Couple of hundred titles. It's a niche format like DSD/SACD, but nothing 32bit out there yet.
The Raysonic 168 is upsamples to 24/192 has VARIABLE balanced tube output stage, allowing you to eliminate a preamp, unless you have other input needs. A mere $2549. It is beautifully built, handsome and sonically compares to... well, read 6moons review to see what he says it compares to
Magfan - I don't know how they could pass 20kHz with -3dB and 21kHz with -96dB using linear phase filters (Bessel) to avoid problems in passband. Bessel filters have poor rejection at up to 2x -3dB frequency no matter how many poles. Brick-wall filters not only create uneven delay for different frequencies (wrong summing of harmonics) but also have uneven (ripple) amplitude in the passband. Master tape is down-converted to 44.1kHz from 192kHz but I don't know details. It seems impossible to limit bandwidth to exactly 20kHz with brick-wall filter. Recording engineers - are you there?....
One other CD question. If the CD is properly encoded, how could there EVER be any frequency above about 20khz?
There isn't. However, jitter and other issues can produce out of band noise which can get aliased in. Upsampling will try to push the noise way up in frequency where it can be aggressively filtered and removed. A delta sigma converter works this way and is beautifully linear as well as cheap.
Kijanki Yes, I am familiar w/aliasing. My first CD player was a FD1000 by Philips, sold here as Magnavox. It was a 4x OS player of 14bit resolution. If I could find parts for it I'd get it fixed. I'm curious about how it would sound in a totally modern system. The claim for 4x oversample was, as I recall, to move the 'turnover' frequency so far out of band that A gentler, non 'brick wall' type filter could be used and there would be fewer phase problems, while still putting everything above 20khz to the inaudible end. ....Do I remember correctly? Also, Nyquist frequency is 1/2 sampling frequency?
One other CD question. If the CD is properly encoded, how could there EVER be any frequency above about 20khz?
Muralman - I read Kusunoki's article and have few problems with it.
I don't understand it either. He is mixed up in my way of thinking. He forgets that we use dither to get a lot more out of LSB's (to remove quantization errors). His assumption that the LSB is the error margin in what we hear is completely fallacious. This article seems to go against conventional engineering wisdom. It is either a mishmash of rather odd assumptions or I just can't follow it.
Magfan - I forgot to answer aliasing. In sampling theory, input signal frequencies that exceed the Nyquist frequency are "aliased." That is, they are "folded back" or replicated at other positions in the spectrum above and below the Nyquist frequency. In case of DAC it is easy to see what happens when you make drawing of a few cycles of sine-wave on the paper. Now imagine that you the frequency of the output samples is less than 2x signal frequency (period longer than 1/2 of the signal period). Lets take period of 3/4. Placing first point at zero we'll get second point at 3/4 (-1) next at next 3/4 (0) then +1 etc. When you connect all the points you will get sine-wave with +/-1 amplitude and frequency of 0.33 of the original signal frequency.
Let take signal of 33kHz and DAC update frequency of 44kHz (1.33x). In result DAC will output (instead of 33kHz) 11kHz (0.33x) at full amplitude (33kHz - 44kHz/2). Nyquist says that in order to preserve frequency information we have to either output them at >2x their frequency or to not have them at all (filter them out) otherwise they will fold starting from 0Hz (DAC will output 22.05kHz as 0Hz and 22.1kHz as 50 Hz, 22.2kHz as 150Hz etc.
Magfan - As they say "The beauty is in the eye of beerholder" - some people like NOS players while others like me like a lot of oversampling. I have test disk (Sheffield Lab Test CD) where they imitate NOS an OS with the sound of a drum. I thing that OS sounds better but it is strange to present only a drum.
Another interesting test is music recorded with different amount of THD. I cannot tell 0.03% from 0.1% but between 0.1% and 0.3% something strange happens. Both of them are very clean (very clean recording to start with) but 0.1% sounds a little lifeless compare to 0.3%. Now I can imagine why a little bit of THD or other crap might improve sound.
Kijanki, you are, of course referring to 'aliasing'? Can these frequencies be interpreted as harmonics? If so, than I can see where they'd be bad juju.
Muralman - I read Kusunoki's article and have few problems with it. First is that he suddenly jumps to single picoseconds from 173ps by increasing number of bits to 20 and claims that it is not possible. we are not reading 20-bit from CD but 16. With 8x oversampling clock has to be 21.6ps accurate - quite possible. Next he assumes that FIR filters produce different delays for different frequencies - not true since they have even group delays. They delay sound constantly by the same amount of time (think of them as FIFO buffers) - no effect on sound. And most of digital filters have enough bits to avoid errors at 16-bit. He also claims that violating Nyquist causes inaudible upper frequncy repeats - it will cause foldback to low (audible) frequencies. If you output 40kHz signal with 44.1kHz clock you'll get 100Hz differential at full amplitude. In similar fashion 25kHz signal will produce 15kHz ghost at the same amplitude. There is not a lot of amplitude above 20kHz so folded frequencies are not a big problem but still sound is not as clean as it could be.
The Cambridge Audio 840C is the best CD Player I have heard for $1500. I have compared it to Rega Apollo, NAD Master Series M5, Primare 30, Naim CD5i, Linn Genki and a Sony SACD player (forgotten the model number, but around $1000 price)
Just visited Xindak showroom (Lotus Audio Import)in RMAF-2008. There, Xindak Muse Deluxe 1.0 CDP/DAC-8 combo looked and sounded wonderful. To my years, however, the CDP alone sounded as detailed, open, and transparent as the combo, and at 50% the $$$. By the way, it gets you tube output as well as solid-state. Built like a tank.
Audio Research DAC 1. Far better than Rega. One of the very best ever. The DAC1 is very revealing and detailed without the slightly unatural sounding, brighter tone of the Regas. Instruments with the DAC1 sound as they should and just float about in space. Incredible soundstage. Can be had for around $750 to $850.
I realize this is heresy, but to answer the implied question that prompted this thread, "THE BEST CD PLAYER FOR THE MONEY"...
imho, the best CDP for the money goes as follows:
MacMini
(in additon to playing music from the HD or showing movies from the disc drive or directly on line, you can wirelessly connect to Rhapsody or Pandora or iTunes)
into a HQ USB cable (Ridge Street Audio or Synergistic Research)
into an Ultra Fi iRoc DAC (or other asynch DAC)
single ended IC into your preamp or integrated amp...
and wa-lah you have the best CD player and more for the money (imho)
You probably won't miss SACD. You'll begin to wonder about your TT and vinyl collection.
You'll rip your Redbook CDs into lossless format, and (wow) they will sound better than played on your CDP.
It's pretty cool, imho, and if you get an excellent USB cable, the audio quality is absolutely stunning regardless of $ (which was the original question).
FYI, I have a Cary 303/300... that should set a perspective on the MacMini USB DAC points I'm making.
Yeah, the Cary is very, very good but... I'm really wondering about how good by comparison, and when you consider its limited functionality... it plays CDs... that's it. And it has a much bigger footprint than the above.
The MacMini combo does a whole lot more... and you don't even have to have a screen... you can use an iTouch or iPhone to control your play list and Pandora, etc. with the proper Apple software.
I just wanted to mention that I got about 60% of the same improvement that I got on my pre/dac(Oritek) when using the Lessloss power cable on my APL Denon 3910 that I use as my transport. I just mention this to show that power cables can have an impact on perceptions of cd players.
Muralman1, thank you for posting this interesting link. It was written in the mid 1990s and is somewhat outdated vs current transport & DAC designs. Nonetheless, the conclusion that bigger bit rates and higher sampling frequencies lead to better sound, as I indicated above, does not necessarily lead to better sound.
Muralman1, what do you mean by oversampling? its 24/128 means oversampling?
Mtkhl567, i have few DSD that sound good but some worse. i might be the same case with redbook. as come recording company make better recording than other.
Milen007, DSD is a fundamentally different way of reading the bits of a disc than PCM. The laser is thinner and the bits are smaller so hence can read more data. XRCD is a recording process, I think owned by JVC, that optimizes the recording and transfer via supreme wordclocking tools. Its a bit technical here, but it fundamentally increases the timing accuracy, which benefits soundstage clarity, micro resolution, tonal definition, providing a more analog listening experience. Diana Krall's Look Of Love is a good example, I have RBCD, SACD and XRCD and the XRCD sounds the most analog of them all, and most satisfying.
I agree with Muralman on the fact that its not really the format, but the recording and transfer process that defines how good it sounds. If both come together than DSD well recorded can sound out of this world, for example the Blue Coast Records ESE sessions is an excellent DSD recording.
The problem with SACD is that your choice of machines is limited. None are non-oversampling, and if you want to hear it all (believe me, there is a whole lot more contained in 16 bit than most people know), try a really good non-oversampler.
mtkh, I think I start to agree w you. When my system getting better and more revealing. I start to find that the DSD or XRCD format getting less natural. Its sound fake compare to the normal cd. Though I think some redbook do sound bad. But with the good company production, it sound way more natural than highly 'markup' cd format. Are DSD or XRCD are markup' version?
Milen007, that's because the world today generally is not interested in higher quality sound but more interested in a downloadable, compressed, portable, convenient way to enjoy music. So all these higher quality formats only find their way to hardcore audiophiles. Btw many RBCDs sound as good or better than high-rez recordings out there, it all depends on the label and their recording process. Anyway, all media will be available for a long time to come, however high rez music server systems are the way of the future for the audiophile. But here is just an idea about the quality gap that exists expressed in bits (8 zero's or one's) processed per second:
Downloads = typically 128 or 192 kbps RBCD 16/44.1 = 1411 kbps High rez CD 24/96 = 4608 kbps SACD 1/2822 = 2822 kbps SACD 1/5644 = 5644 kbps LP = higher than SACD
HDCD and XRCD are based on 16/44.1, but with greatly improved ording techniques that make them sound better than most standard RBCDs. SACD would be considered the next real step up, but the marketing strategy failed and the world was going to less vs higher resolution...
Redbook - in audio - is the name of the digital standard that was set when the CD first came out in 1980 as an invention of Philips, a Dutch company. The resolution is 16 bit with a 44.1Hz sample rate, so equivalent to 1411 kbps.
If you want to know more here is a wikipedia link:
10 pages and not one mention of the Musical Fidelity A5 which is a bargain at twice the price. I have the MF TriVista SACD player and the redbook CD is amazing at $6500 new (used $3000). But the A5 I auditioned might have been better on Redbook.
Mrtennis made a VERY good point but people can give recommendations then you have to choose based on your taste and several other factors that are important to you.
Raysonic Marantz Denon Onkyo Rega
just to name a few that I have experience with, are priced right, and sound good to me. research first though
there is no best cd player for the money because there is no best cd player. this maxim applies to all components.
the designation "best", encompasses many variables. the variables and the priority attached to each is a subjective judgement.
without absolute standards/criteria, there is no best anything.
it would be better to use the words "preferred" or "favorite".
i think people looking for guidance should be very careful about following pronouncements as to the "best" anything.
I'm now seeing the Toshiba SD9200 available at $200. Combined with an MIT AC noise reducing power cord for another few hundred, and some type of economical isolation device which you should have anyway, you will have surprisingly decent sound. (My MIT/Spectral system is very revealing). Cheers.
I've just clocked in 300 Hrs on a Marantz SA11s2. Was able to pick one up for $2200 new with 3 year warranty. Be patient with break in. I'm plugged into a passive preamp with good results, but plugged into a tub preamp is...heaven.
Thank you for offering a locale, that is very nice of you. I live in the US, on the west coast! Too bad, I am sure it would have been a very interesting event to participate in. Hopefully you will let us know the results if this shootout does occur in the EU.
Mtkhl567 - I have an NWO-3.0-GO and might be interested in participating in the shootout you suggest. It would depend on where and when the shootout will occur, of course.
I am using my Denon 3910 as a transport. I would like to find out, myself, how it compares to state-of-the-art. I want to know its shortcomings, and get an idea of how much more I would need to spend to achieve state-of-the-art. I have a hunch, but I also think it may have the owner of a state-of-the-art player questioning price/performance ratio. Remember, simplicity can beat complexity a lot. We could use the transport of the state-of-the-art player. He could use his state-of-the-art preamp or volume control. I could bring my 3910. I'm not saying, that since I own the Oritek, that it must be the best out there. It is a revelation, though.
Mmakshak, what would you used as a transport? The Oritek is a $1175 pre/dac, not sure how that could be on the same level as todays state-of-the-art...
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
