2. digital
  3. 149933-115766

What Sonically is the Difference between a $1,500 CD Player and a $10K-$25K One?

I realize opinions may vary, but if I could give an example of two CD players perhaps someone can give me their thoughts on the cost benefits of either one? What would be the difference in your opinion between say a Cambridge Audio Azur 851C CD Player and the Gryphon Scorpio S CD Player? And are the difference truly audible or more technical and rather indiscernible through human hearing?

In general, what makes a CD player (other than build components) 10x more costly than a decently built one other than features?
mrc4u

Showing 6 responses by roxy54

roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 
"All CD players throughout history have been plagued by fatal problems. While it may be true that some advances have been made in CD playback nobody has solved the problems of scattered laser light, seismic vibration, and the various vibrations produced by both the CD player and the CD itself. If you don’t mind the missing information, the crappy bass performance and the compressed sound, more power to you. Yes, I know what you’re thinking, “What missing information, crappy bass performance and compressed sound? My system sounds fabulous!” 🤗"

Sure geoffkait, they all sound like garbage except yours. 
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 
surferandy,
What do you mean when you say that CDs don't last? I have destroyed many for sure by abusing them in cars in the past (no more), but if you take care of them, there is no reason they shouldn't last. I've had many since the beginning that are still going strong.
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 
geoffkait said::
My $5 Sony Walkman CD player outperforms any $10,000 CD player. You just have to know what you’re doing, that’s all. It’s not rocket science. 🚀

Then why don’t you sell them and get rich?
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 

8th-note,

Thanks for your input. I found it informative. 

roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 
Thanks Liz.
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
8,148 posts
 

geoffkait,

I actually enjoy reading posts like yours. It is true of course that digital was pretty terrible for the first number of years, but now that I have been living with a competent transport and non-oversampling DAC for years, I enjoy the great sound (perfect...? NO) and grin at all of the outdated criticisms of digital's deficiencies.

I recently watched a factual piece on youtube about the deficiencies of analog (what?) that was complete with simple enlarged line drawings, some animated of the gross mistracking that cartidges make in record grooves no matter what the cost of the cartridge, because it is simply unavoidable. Yet we continue to talk about the losses in digital transcription caused by sampling rates and jitter.

It is really just choosing what type of losses/distortions that you can live with and find acceptable. I just find it laughable that those with even the finest vinyl rigs think that they are so far above those using digital mediums as a source.

I realize Geoff that you weren't supporting analog per se, but you were singing the same old "digital sucks" song, and that is getting stale.

John 

More to discover