Every video on this channel feels like yet another relaxed afternoon with a good friend talking about the subjects I most enjoy. Keep up the good work!
I appreciate the detailed and thoughtful work you're doing in this comparo. These are questions that a lot of us have had for decades and they can only be answered to a good level of satisfaction after a considerable investment in time and equipment. So, thank you!
Valuable test; I’m glad one of the reviewers stuck with the Phillips unit until the end, I feel sure the engineers put a great deal of effort into it. I appreciate the fact your friend loaned it for the exercise.
I've watched this video while having breakfast this morning. The coffee went cold. I was at the edge of my seat. It was really helpful, especially to streamline my future equipment investments: 1> immediately upgrade my coaxial cable || 2> separate pre-amplifier || 3> A better DAC, in the long-term, I just got a new one a few months back. Thanks so much for this. Your take and approach has been superb in all the videos of your channel. I've learned so much. Thanks.
I remember the old argument of single beam laser pickup vs 3 beam laser pickup, when in reality it was just a mirror splitting the single into 3 beams anyway. Good video. I think you are right. Most any CD player collects the same high quality digital signal from the disc. The DAC is where the sound difference comes in.
I'm still listening to my Harman/Kardon HD760. It was built at the end of the nineties and costed originally 1300DM. Nowadays around 1000€. I bought it from eBay five years ago for about 100€. It always sounded good, but after connecting it to a real NF-cable (Transparent Music Link Plus) it started singing. What a glory! And I prefer the sound of the DAC inside the Harman over the DAC-sound of my Cambridge Audio 851n azur streamer/network player/ DAC. That's why I still listen to the analogue output stage of the Harman. ;-) Best regards from Germany and thank very much!
As expected. If using a digital out (coaxial/optical/HDMI) and the player is providing an uncorrupted data stream; use whatever you want. No point wasting cash any anything special, as the DAC/Amp/AVR will do the heavy lifting. So get a DAC/Amp/AVR that you like the sound profile of. Awesome test and looking forward to part 3. Jordan
Have to agree with CG below, 2 great videos and very much looking forward to the third. Great that you included what happens when external dac is used and glad with the conclusions of your panel. Thank you Harley for making and sharing these very insightful videos with us. Much appreciated.
Hi Con, the pleasure is all mine! So pleased you enjoy our videos. Of course, I only do the research and the talking, my colleague Ajay does the back room editing stuff! 😉
Yet another interesting video. Thank you, Harley! My take on modern DAC - two main areas on where it really matters 1. the quality of the power supply to the various stages 2. the 'sound' of the output/gain/buffer stage. Opamps or discrete parts add a lot of flavours to the eventual sound, more than the different DAC used
The last thing you want is something adding flavour. All you want is high fidelity, no noise and distortion. Otherwise it's being added to all the music.
@@r423fplip Apparently, some audiophiles like to have a bit of hiss and some other forms of distortion and noise, as you get from tubes and phono cartridges. Exact replication of digital masters is not favored by all.
@@PearlAcoustics perhaps you can consider updating the philips by changing out the opamps (5532?) and put into sockets so you can use some newer opamps such as opa16xx etc. You'll probably feel a veil lifted initially but can be a bit too clinical for some. Still, you can easily reinstate the original opamps with the sockets
A rigorous and excellent comparative review - and one that should set the standard for others. I often ask audiophiles about why they prefer one component over another, and ask them if they have ever blind switch tested them. They never have....
I remember a few years ago when wine was blind tested, and the result was anything but expected! Many of the newer wine producing countries were preferred over the older European producers, much to their chagrin! Of course, it is very subjective, and I suppose ultimately it is what the market prefers which could well be influenced by price not only taste, that is most important if you want to sell a lot of it!. I know myself that I have purchased expensive wine on occasion and not always really impressed by its flavour and quite frankly could have picked the local Sainsbury's plonk in a blind test. You may realise that I am no oenophile! Could this also be true of the audiophile who is used to listening to music that sounds characteristic of the types of players they themselves have bought?
@@georgedyson9754 I would probably guess so. In their defence, however, a blind switch sort of test like the one in this video can be difficult to replicate. Still, ime, even a quick and dirty blind test with some missing steps can still be very revealing.
These videos are fascinating. I can Philips as a customer and was allowed to buy stuff at the staff shop. I was surprised that you didn’t mention the Laserdisc because I always thought that the CD was a spinoff. I bought a Marantz CD player just before moving to the USA in 1985. It wasn’t very reliable and I bought the first Discman as a backup. I am pleased that the CD is making a comeback. Fortunately, I haven’t thrown my 1,200 CDs away. I grew up in Worthing down the street from B&W. The coils were wound by the housewives in our street.
Thanks! Indeed, I think you’re right that the video disc came first and cd for audio was not taken seriously in the beginning. Hence, only Sony took up the challenge at first.
I live in Worthing now, and have a couple of pairs B&W, I should pop by the factory I think they have a mini museum. I kept my CDs too thankfully, and have a Quad 66, I must try the coax into my DAC, hadn't thought of that.
This was very worthwhile, Harley! I've found that each of the 4 or 5 disc spinners I've owned each had a distinct personality & their distinctive sound took at least a few days to reveal itself. Most were enjoyable, especially my '90's vintage Harman/Kardon which sounded a lot like the reviewer in Stereophile wrote (impressive bass extension). I kept the H/K over 12 years, but I recall that the new $150USD Sony SACD player that replaced "Lady H/K" sounded a bit thin when I bought it. A year & a half later, it still sounded fairly anemic on CD or SACD, so I was glad to be rid of that one.
I have a Philips cd 850 mk Ii cd player which I bought a couple of years ago second hand after my much newer NAD player decided to quit. The 850 mk Ii uses a bitstream dac and sounds very smooth, silky and atmospheric. Although more than 30 years old it blew the NAD out of the water.
Good lord, I love everything about this video. I've on occasion dreamt f setting up similar such comparisons myself -- but never quite managed to go through with it. And wouldn't have been able to, at this level.
Thank you. That’s very kind. I have to tell you it was quite some work, it took way more time and effort than I intended. So comments like yours make it all worthwhile. 🙏
Many Thanks, I didn't realize it till you mentioned but I've alawys wondered about the relationship between analog and digital converters with different setups. Delightful Insights 🔥
Very interesting test! I came to the same conclusion a few years ago after buying a very expensive T+A SACD player and couldn't hear any difference to my 1988 Technics CD player. Thank you for this professional review.
Foolish. Your statement wasn't acceptable for 2024. Over time, what happened? What happened in the 1st hour? What happened in the 5th hour? What happened in the 8th hour of use? I think you're full of lies.
I've heard about 3 different cd players in my time. A NAD 542, a 515 bee and a Philips CD160. You can definately tell between the 542 and 515 bee (which I didn't like and ended up selling). My favourite is the NAD 542 .The CD 160 is my second favourite. I bought Beresford DAC as I wanted to play USB from my PC into my amp, it also has Coax digital inputs and so as a matter of interest I connected the Philips CD160 to the DAC to see the "benefits" of 40 years of Digital improvements. Or so I thought, or if you believe the marketing hype. I struggled to tell a difference between the Beresford DAC and the 40 year old built in DAC from the CD160. The DAC may have been slightly cleaner, but it was almost impossible to tell much difference. When I connected the NAD 542 to the Beresford, I couldn't tell any difference. Regarding your listening tests, it would have been an interesting exercise to repeat the test after an hour or so and see if people marked the results the same. I bet they wouldn't have marked them the same. A final note, when we bough the NAD 542 from the dealer, we took along the CD160 to play it through the shop's stereo system to see if it was worth buying a new CD or not. It was played through a top of the line Amp and LInn speakers. We could definately tell a difference there. So, differences between CD players become more apparent on the the quality of the amp and speakers.
Hi, thanks for your comment. You raise some very good points here, especially on listening fatigue and subjectivity. It is possible we could have had different results, although Pierre-Nicolas and Maarten have very discerning hearing - it’s their job. And the were both very consistent throughout. I even double blinded Pierre-Nicolas and he immediately said “I think you’ve switched them, this is CD4, not 3!” And he was absolutely right. Indeed, the differences are easier to discern with high quality equipment
My 1st cd player was one of the earlyish Yamaha "natural sound " models. It was paired with a Nad 3020 amplifier & B&W stand mount speakers It was very musical 🎶 👍 🇬🇧
Thank you Harley, another superb presentation & always enjoy your warm friendly personality. As a dedicated analog guy I recently decided to upgrade my digital gear. As it turns out we had a bit of a shootout of our own which was truly eye opening. People can talk all the technical specs they want but even though Peter at Audio Note sticks to rebook, the sound is simply so natural, so you are there. Everyone of us preferred the Audio Note system to a full boat DCS system that on paper you wouldn't think possible. And I completely agree with your view, more attention to the DAC is money better spent.
Another Great installment. Really glad you did the comparison on the digital outs too & as you said it seems that the way forward is definitely to utilise an older or cheaper CD player as transport & Spend the money on the DAC. Would be very interested to see how some of the really high end DACs from the 90's 2000's compare to the more modern ones. I recently added a Cambridge audio DACMagic to my setup from which I also feed a old Studio DAC from the late 90's & I was really surprised to find I much preferred the order dac. It seemed to have a much flatter response across the spectrum while the newer DAC while probably more lively was also tiring to listen to in comparison. Looking forward to part 3
Thanks Chris! I think you have an important point here. A modern, highly revealing and ‘fast’ Dac, is not necessarily the most pleasant to listen to music on! The original engineers, had vinyl as their reference, and I think that impacted the outcome in the fine tuning.
@@PearlAcoustics Hi Harvey,znot sure if you'll see this but you've sent me down the rabbit hole so to speak. I've been doing some "Critical Listening" over the past week and have come to an interesting conclusion perhaps one for you to contemplate also. The older DAC I have is a Swissonic AD96 (considered highly in it's day next to the apogee Rosetta's) I've found that the preferable DAC in terms of listener experience depends largely on the age of recordings e.g. I have found recordings made in the era of my DAC (late 90's) sound better through a 90's dac ( for example Michael shrieve's Two Doors) however more modern recordings sound better through the more modern DAC so it seems there is a difference in the EQ/presentation for each DAC but more interestingly is that the engineers seem to have accounted for this & to me at least the best playback seems to be through a DAC commensurate with the era. An interesting one for you to explore should you desire.
@@chriswraith9988 Hi Chris. I’ve read it. Thanks very much for your comment. A very interesting approach. I wonder if anyone else has experienced a similar outcome? I have never thought of it this way. I will re-listen beating the age of the recording in mind.
I shall do a similar test too. Between the modified and all stock player and also, test same albums from different studios using two same machines. Results are always fun and eye opening for sure
One finds that the admirable aspect of the compact disc lies in its ability to deliver rather splendid audio quality at a modest price point. Indeed, even a humble £15 CD player acquired from Argos has provided me with a most delightful listening experience. Granted, it is by no means akin to a £20,000 CD transport with a high-caliber DAC and cinema-grade speakers, but it has rendered sound that is truly enjoyable. Naturally, one's choice of headphones or speakers plays a significant role in the overall experience, as the CD format requires no intricate preamp setup, unlike vinyl. Moreover, the unfortunate proliferation of portable turntables-devices notorious for damaging records while delivering subpar sound quality-is a concern for the discerning listener, particularly as some of these contraptions are priced at over £100. While vinyl does, indeed, triumph in the realm of cover art, which I must say holds a unique appeal, the compact disc remains, in my view, most comfortably poised to claim the crown, as it were, as a distinguished format for audio enjoyment.
Thank you for that very interesting pair of videos. This confirms all my own less formal experiments! I, too, came to the conclusion that you could take a ‘cheap’ cd mechanism as input to a decent DAC stage and get surprisingly good results. But not all, ‘cheap’ cd mechanisms will have the appropriate outputs for you to achieve this easily. My own dvd/blue ray player only has one output designed for a TV. But I’ve had great success improving the sound of Denon and Technics CD players by feeding them into better DACS. IT’s a cheap and satisfying way to improve your system.
Anyone reading this that is on a budget and needs a newer model: I can recommend the Onkyo C-7030, which has a Wolfson DAC, remote and digital line out. It's beautiful to look at, very minimalist layout, built-in headphone amp and has amazing sound. I have other players but always come back to it.
I know they are not terribly expensive but I have found the Ifi Zen 2 the most incredible sounding dac in my experience fed directly into active studio monitors . I have tended to use Spotify and TH-cam recently as sources which I know are not state of the art but you do get tremendous choices of material . You could actually listen to different stuff forever without ever repeating any tracks which is quite mind blowing ! I would be interested if you evaluated some of the Ifi products yourself. Thanx again mate .
I just got an Onkyo DX-C390 6 disc cd changer with vector linear shaping circuitry and direct digital path open box from Best Buy for $100. Got the 4 year warranty for $20. It’s normally $350. It most definitely sounds better than my old player. The difference is night and day paired with my Yamaha A-S801
Excellent video, I have just 3 weeks ago bought a Rega Elex 4 and wanted a CD player also, we tried a few players and they were quite good but then decided to try the Audiolab CDT 9000 transport through the Elex 4 internal DAC, it was a huge improvement that I wasn't expecting, so much so I had to take one home and am extremely happy with the sound of the combination. My system is complete for now with my P6 turntable also. Looking forwards to part 3.
Aren't higher priced CD players priced higher because of the superiority of the DAC inside? IOW, how much difference can the transport section actually make? I suspect not much.
Long long ago we listened to that Quad in the shop ......it sounded quite good but when we hooked it directly to the power amplifier ( The Quicksilver mono 8417 ) and the big Spendor .something happend ............we were in the music with a roof above us and surrounded by it .........a wonderfull e"xperience but not practical because we couldn't adjust and lower the soundlevel because that would have harmed the magic..hahaha Even with Frankie goes to Hollywood ....we were in th e DOME ....... The big Philips left us with a great souvenir ..........it played MUSIC ..........and propably it still does ...
This brings me to another place. I had a 5 cd carousel player, a sony with the dsp. I wish I had not given it away. It had thousands of hours of great listening to it.
What an awesome series! I did hear a noticable difference when I put my Audiolab ctd6000 on sorbothane spheres - particularly with grip in the bass. I was using these as a bit of 'good housekeeping' and was not actually expecting to hear a difference at all. Viva CDs!!
@@r423fplip Interesting! I've got the Wiim mini & a Qobuz subscription. I can confirm that it sounds fantastic! I was shortly going to replace my Marantz CD5005 (being used as a transport) for either the CDT6000 or the CDT9000. You've made me wonder if it's worth the bother! 🤔
@@martinclift3843 don't bother with the cd transport, I have 3 gathering dust. I plugged my IPhone into my dac, even that is better than the cd. Wiim mini is better by a long way.
I have had lots of cd players over the years, most sound similar enough that choosing between them is an exercise of futility, particularly when put up against comparing cartridges where difference is usually obvious. These days my hearing is a bit wrecked from playing in bands so wouldn't bother experimenting with different players. However, I bought a second hand Phillips back when these things had only been around a couple of years and it was bonkers compared with some of the others I heard. It was exhausting, the sound was so realistic and compelling that it wasn't much use for listening casually. I suppose it could be described as cold and brutal 😅 These days I have a s/h Marantz something or other with basic dac, its OK but I wish I still had the Phillips to have the occasional brain destruction session. Enjoying the vids. Thanks.
Thank you for your kind words and also for your interesting contribution to the topic. I must admit that, if finances allow, keeping pieces of equipment when ‘upgrading’ can be very rewarding later on. It can increase the fun of the hobby and remind us that every choice is some kind of compromise. Enjoy the music
As a Belgian computer guy, it was always my thought that the CD player is there to extract data and has CRC, so as long as it has a stable transport and jitter is well in control, the sound signature would be related only to the DAC section and further elements down the chain. Thanks for the efforts you put in setting-up this test and help us (re)discover those iconic CD players... I have difficulties discussing with audiophiles who pretend to have bionic ears and hear day and night differences between things that are undistinguishable to me (like the difference between a 100€ and a 5000€ coax cable ;-) So I appreciate your humble, pragmatic and unbiased approach. I hope you will someday have series about FLAC, MQA (pretty much dead now), DSD, etc... I can easily smell a low bitrate MP3 but I feel like it will be very so hard to compare a 16bit 44.1Khz FLAC with higher-res music. I'm not sure I hear a difference due to a different (re)mastering, sometimes not sure I hear a difference at all, or is my mind tricking me ? I would be curious to hear your thoughts on all this...
Hi Sebastian thank you very much for your kind comment and interesting suggestion. Indeed, in a lot of cases (assuming the mastering is identical) telling apart some different file types would be very difficult. But sometimes it’s just easier to know you are listening in high res so you know you’re getting the best quality possible. But a track with distortion on it from the original recording is always going to have it.
As a Danish computer guy, I can relate to a lot of that. I have come to know a couple of audiophiles who spend staggering amounts of money on equipment, and while their setups do sound really good, I have come to the conclusion that they are the wrong people to ask why. For them it is all "black boxes" that presumably do magic stuff better than some other black boxes. One does not have to understand something in depth in order to enjoy it though, however when they talk about their network setup, a subject which I do know about, it becomes apparent that there is at least some degree of beliefs over facts. I know other people who are into HiFi, who have setups that to me sound just as good, but without the voodoo. Btw, audio CDs (red book) do have pretty basic error correction, which is much less than data CDs, so I can imagine that not all manufacturers spend the same amount of effort prevent, detect and mitigate errors.
hyggelig å høre fra en dansk data ekspert! Danskene har alltid laget meget bra lydprodukter! Problemet idag er at de fleste hifi kritikere er umusikalske og tonedøve!det siste jeg har lest, er at man trenger en egen strømrenser til ti tusen kroner for å få god lyd!
So, my takeaway is any CD Transports that are doing their job correctly will sound the same. Analog outputs on CD Players can and will sound different, because they have different DACs and different analog output stages. Glad to have some evidence for the logic.
I enjoy part 2 much as part 1 because you have the Philips cd880 standing there like a brick. For me one of the most beautiful vintage CD Player. That's why I love my vintage Philips cd850, over 32 years old and plays almost every day what i want to hear in a for me great way. Sorry, I'm a vintage Philips hifi Lover 😊.
Again, wonderfully interesting - as you rightly point out, the DAC is one of the most important, if not THE most important thing in the whole chain. I also try to use (with little success apart from fun) a home recording studio and have found exactly the same position with the DAC.
Yes, that is my conclusion also that any transport sounds the same when we take digital out and it is the same output from the transport regardless of what transport it is coming from. I made that finding when trying to compare streaming vs CD. I afterwards figured out that I actually tested the CD player built in DAC against the DAC that the streaming were using. I redo the testing and took the digital out from the CD player and feed the same external DAC that the streaming were using. Now with the same DAC i could not tell a difference between CD or streaming (for that song that I had choose anyway). Now I use a old OPPO that can play anything optical media. And take the digital out. So CD, DVD-Audio, SACD, HDCD, BD-Audio and so on .. So the tip is get a player that can play as many formats as possible then use the digital out and use your preferred DAC and you can play any optical format that comes your way and have a excellent sound. 🎉 So my personal conclusions were if I can't hear a difference between a astonishingly good CD (actually it was a HDCD that had very good dynamic range when testing the same track but on several different releases. Tested with dynamic range testing software and this one stood out a little bit better than the other releases) and the streaming service. Then the streaming service is good enough for me.. And I am a happy camper. 😅
Yup, l went through a similar journey and basically found the same as yourself. Digital out to a DAC ... Hard to hear a real difference on a USD 40k rig. Streaming from a NAS also surprised me. Great video btw
What an extremely refined, elegant, empirical, observation of CD playback. I do so enjoy the Canadian kit version of the English AudioNote DAC to play through. The Resistor/Transformer/Resistor, I/V conversion, sans any op amp implementation and the R2R architecture, non-oversampling, method for reconstruction, what was recorded vs the computational algorithm guessing at what was laid down, via the Delta Sigma methodology, for me, yield a more enjoyable performance.
In 1989 I became the last among my peers to purchase a CD player. Unlike them, I chose a CD player as a complimentary source to my turntable & LP's rather than as a replacement. I chose the Philips CD960, which had already been around a while by 1989. I keep the CD960 in my "vintage system". Ironically, my primary system is also fairly old these days. The CD player in this system is a Naim CD5 / Naim Flatcap combo which I've owned for almost 20 years. I've had to replace the belts in the CD960 a couple of times while the CD5 has needed nothing thus far. When I find gear that I truly enjoy I tend to hang on to it.
Something should have corroded by now. When are you going to do some maintenance on it? Something has to have failed on it by now. Some component must have gone outside its parameters.
A buddy and I did a blind comparison of 3 or 4 players many years ago and we both easily picked out the most expensive and best sounding player. As an electronics engineer, I have no doubt the D-A conversion and, probably most importantly, the analog filtering made the biggest difference.
@@PearlAcoustics Yes, it was. Didn't mean to suggest otherwise, sorry. It was the same brand (Sony) as two (?) of the group we tested, and I remember the same-brand differences being surprising. I also remember the first time I realized how big the differences could be. It was when I compared a portable Sony player to a Rotel. It was like day and night, almost like a cheap cassette compared to good vinyl.
This is exactly what one would expect and what digital audio engineers have been explaining forever. Any transport that gets an error free bitstream to the DAC sounds exactly like any other transport that does that. Now a really interesting test would compare the pricy separate DACs to those in decent receivers, using the same blind approach.
I think that most of us would agree that more variation can be expected amongst CD-players than amongst transports (connected to the same DAC). The human mind is easily influenced/deceived if differences are suddenly smaller in a test setting. I think that if one wants to test if transports sound the same or not, one should compare transports proper - and not after first comparing CD-players. Also a CD player with a digital out isn't exactly the same concept (from a designers perspective) as a dedicated transport. I am not saying that I think that transports matter all that much, just that I think that the conclusion cuts the corner a bit too much.
@@alphaniner3770 Any transport that can deliver the samples with all errors corrected to the DAC will sound exactly the same. What possible explanation could there be for any difference? If the disc itself has uncorrectable errors due to damage, no transport will change that.
I was present at the AES meeting at the IEEE when the very first CD was played in the UK. It was compared to its master tape on a revox played through Spendor BC1's. The AB test was conducted by Angus McKenzie. The room full of professional audio enginers and HiFi company MDs almost all prefered the Revox tape, as did I. I could explain why the tape was superior. What I cant explain is why DtoA chips sound different. The process is entirely mathematical. Can anyone explain?
Hi thanks for your question. I have covered this topic in some detail in my Dac series. But in short, I honestly think the differences are not so much in the conversion itself but in the filtering/processing before the conversion and in the preamplifier section at the output stage of every DAC/ CD player, even the slightest change there can have a big impact.
thanks for sharing I use my Oppo UDP 203 as a transport. I rotate between an Arcam irDac with a Booster power supply and a Denafrips Ares II. In my own testing I preferred the sound of the external Dac's to what's in the Oppo 203
Interesting, as that Oppo is reputed to have an excellent DAC and output stage. I have been keen to get one for playing surround sound music and 4k Blurays in my multichannel system, but they still command very high prices on the second-hand market. Unfortunately, no one seems to make as good players these days.
@@jimfarrell4635 I was lucky in purchasing my unit. When Oppo got out of the UDP business I called the company and asked if any were left I was told no. I gave them my phone number just in case they found one. A few days later I received a call saying they found a few units so I purchased one. I can’t believe what these units command in the used market
Fantastic research Harley - many thanks. Why not do a part 4 and compare CD via DAC with streaming via same DAC at CD quality say from Tidal or Qobuz using the same people and method?
Thanks for your appreciation. Good idea… I have noticed a difference doing just that (but only on my own). There did seem to be some differences, I even tried playing the CD of the streamed piece too, also through the same DAC. My gut feeling is that the difference could be down to some kind of compression or delivery from the streaming companies. For example ‘Tidal’ didn’t sound as good to me as ‘Qobuz’ on some tracks. But don’t take this too literally at this stage, I do need to do more research. For example, how do we know that each streaming company is playing the exact same source material? It could be mastered differently?
@@PearlAcoustics Hmmmmm 🤔- sounds like an interesting bit of follow up research. I have Tidal streaming through a Naim Uniti Atom and it sounds pretty amazing. I've not tried any comparisons with CD as yet, partly due to the faff of level matching it exactly, and partly as you say, are you listening to the same master? It would certainly be good to find out what your panel conclude about the comparisons though. Thanks again Harley for the brilliant content on your channel - I get giddy every time there's a new episode. 🤣
I hunted for a Cd player many years ago and fell for the Meridian 508.24. But I couldn’t afford it! So I went from dealer to dealer to dealer and listened end listened most intently. I used the same music each time. I always was easily able to pick out the Meridian every time. I finally found a nice used one on eBay. It was the priciest gear I’d ever bought with the exception if my Quad Esl-63 electrostatic speakers. It sounded even better in my system. I nearly cried when the transport failed and I learned no more transports were available. I finally bought a Triode TRV CD5SE with tube supplement.
Harley, excellent work. I have often considered replacing my Rotel RCD2, which is 24 years old because newer technology should be better. For awhile now, I have been using it as a transport connected to a Denafrips dac and it sounds very good. You have validated my own experience. Thank you.
I miss my Rotel CD player. It lasted almost 20 years and the first 10 of these it was playing almost all the time when I was at home (no TV, no internet, only CDs). It 'died' a few years ago. Honestly I think that Rotel deserves a place on part 1 of this series - Rotel managed to make really good and relatively affordable players. When I started looking for a new transport my main consideration was not sound quality, but how long I wanted it to last. I have many CDs and still like to spin them. The market of players and transports is shrinking - many of the best drive mechanisms (Philips or Sony, your Rotel has a Sony IIRC) aren't produced anymore - and as long as stocks last some new old stock drives are put into a new chassis (like the Denafrips Avatar). After that there will be only really cheap drives or really exotic and expensive ones that are not necessarily going to last very long. I went for a Jays Audio transport - a nice virtually indestructive Philips drive in it, and easy to service (if ever needed). I do think that it sounds better too - it was a bonus that I didn't expect - but saying that here will unfortunately get some people here all worked up.
Man, it's about the music. I grew up on vinyl, had a huge collection, did not try CDs till 1992, compared vinyl recording to the CD, and really could not hear that much of a difference except on dynamics, and the CD was better, Long story short sold my vinyl collection that year, never looked back, the only thing I miss on vinyl is the large covers, the rest is the myth of vinyl being superior is just that what arm, cartridge, support table, cables is TT in the room as speakers if so you get feedback, each changes the sound of the given LP played and sometimes from warm to thin and poor arm and cartridge setup all bets are off, but then that buying would not know. Compared today to the golden ERA of vinyl they nowhere have the equipment and expertise as a whole as back then when they used scopes to adjust all key needs of good vinyl playback. I had my TT playing an LP but the source playing was a CD, my audiophile friend said Man that vinyl sounds so much better than CD. I said you're so right and we listened more, and he kept raving, I then said Man it's the CD player playing, his jaw dropped, and he got upset because his myth was broken, and showed how much we influence ourselves by our own prejudice. Mastering any format is key, the formats are all so far from the master tape or what was heard in the studio when they recorded that's why, today's music recordings suck, no need t even have anyone in the same studio, all play their parts then the producers put it all together as he sees fit, add compression to it all due to 99% of listeners using phones and earbuds so they make music sound good on such devices. Sony's pro-Walkman was so good that I had a cello player from the Cleveland Orch pick up their Walkman and check it see set it up and bright in her Cello, she played it for a minute or so and then played it back with her headphones and just smiled and set it sound great, I then asked to listen having just heard it live, and I was so impressed on how much it sounded like I just heard LIVE! case closed to me that digital sucks, so it gives you what you send it, unlike vinyl that is colored throughout its playback, and I still love it but I have not purchased vinyl in 30 years now.
Thank you for confirming my views on CD players. I still use a Rega Planet player bought new by myself in about 1994. I've listened to many newer players and could hear no reason to "upgrade".
But the audiophile would say "you need better resolving speakers to hear the difference when just using them as a transport!". And you need to get those cables off the floor.. and shave and colour that CD as well. May as well sacrifice a small chicken because that might do something. Thanks for the great video. Was debating on getting a transport but now I am keeping my player with the separate great DAC and putting in a 2 channel amp just for the CDs instead of going to my home theatre amp. That saved my a good thousand bucks. I sure can spend that on some great music instead.
Interesting to see such thorough, objective, scientific analysis of a HiFi topic, an area which is so often very subjective, thank-you. I have been an audiophile for over 50 years now and I am gratified to find your conclusion matches my own. I would only add that a DAC with a separate power supply will improve with a better supply: I am electronic engineer and build some of my own kit. When I built a linear shunt-regulated supply for my DAC, the improvement was quite obvious. As with everything to do with HiFi, your mileage may vary. 😀
Thank you for your very welcome comment. I am very glad you appreciated it. Thanks too for your interesting contribution to the discussion. Enjoy the music.
I've really enjoyed this series so far. It seems to have fairly convincingly challenged the idea that CD transports make a big difference to the sound, something that many of us suspected. The methodology seems pretty sound (small pun intended), and I appreciate the care taken. So your next task is to bump up the sensitivity of your excellent speakers so I can power them with the 12.5 Watts my 300b amp puts out. 😉
Hi Jim. Thanks for your kind comment! It’s much appreciated. Now increasing the efficiency of the Sibelius loudspeaker is going to be a massive challenge! 😉. If you have a true 12,5watts per channel with both channels driven, you will have about 100db into your room. For me that’s more than enough 😂. Enjoy the music. Best wishes, Harley
Sorry to say my transport only has transformed my system . I was already using a very good universal blu Ray player to the same dac . Its only better organisation of sound but amounts to a transformed sound with detail being affected in a positive way . Texture too is better but clarity is about the same .
The last part was the most important: The DAC is what makes the difference, but not the transport. L-O-V-E it! As with integrated amps, paying for a built-in DAC is a bad choice. Rather get a dedicated external DAC, and when DAC technology moves ahead, just change the DAC. FWIW, I use a Holoaudio May DAC L2 (R2R) and like it quite a bit. Have not heard any Danafrips, so can't compare. Thanks as always for all the excellent service you do for the community!
I fully agree that built-in DACs are to be avoided if (financially) possible. Also DACs probably matter more than transports. But as I wrote elsewhere here, this test was not suitable to test differences amongst transports. Humans hear differences, and when these differences suddenly get smaller or other differences appear, you will have a very hard time noticing. If you want to know if transports differ, test transports, and transports only. With a Holo Audio May I would certainly test out different transports if you play CDs. Spoiler: I have a Jays Audio transport, and even though the main reason I bought it was that I wanted a device that would last 25+ years, it actually gives a noticeable better sound (IMO) than any other digital source have connected to my DAC so far.
@@alphaniner3770 Testing transports is what the second part of this test did, and the golden eared young musician/engineers could not hear any differences, which is exactly what someone who understands how this stuff works would expect.
fantastic video,can't wait for part 3,i have cd player philips cd670 and my opinion about good sounding of philips players is,they have very good cdm 4/19 transports,also good 1541 dac in all sorts of variants..can't wait for third part video...i wish you all the best..
Thanks for doing this, I have heard small differences with transports, I ended up some time ago just using an old Rega planet, with a good Burson dac 160, not the best but great analogue out.
I have a large CD collection and a large vinyl collection - I kept every LP I ever purchased so have quite a few! Pretty much every record I own that was recorded in the 60's through the 80's is duplicated in CD and generally the records sound better than the CDs, which are often rather harsh. That is the case with classical pieces as well as pop/rock. I have the first all-digital set of Beethoven's 9 symphonies on CD I have to EQ them to make them sound decent. I'd say roughly beginning in the late 80's the engineers figured out how to record with digital and from then the CDs sound great - although I have some records where the dynamic range is wider on the record than on the CD! Go figure... Sadly, I mostly listen to music nowadays via my iPhone through a bluetooth adapter connected to my sound system. I have multiple preamps/amps/speaker combinations, both solid state and vacuum tube from my avid audiophile days. The gear is dramatic overkill for streaming via bluetooth but convenience/laziness has come to greatly outweigh sound quality. The turntable and CD player are exercised occasionally to keep them "working," as are the two 1/4" tape machines.
Thanks very much for your insightful comment. It’s weird isn’t it, just how badly many CD’s of earlier recordings for vinyl were mastered (if they were mastered at all)!
Thanks for video! Suspicions confirmed: cd transports, so long as they're mechanically sound, have no bearing on the sound. It's all about the DAC. Edit: of course a solidly engineered and built transport will last years longer and for that reason it might be worth getting such a one. But sound is all about the DAC.
You’re very welcome. You’re absolutely right, but I think the biggest difference is found in the analogue circuit, immediately after the DAC itself. But in essence one can call it ‘the Dac’
My transport has elevated my system for sure . Was already using the transport from my good quality universal blu Ray to the same dac . This new transport brings easier on the ear more organised sound and longer listening session. Gotta trust your ears man
I have had the Creek Destiny CD player for 10 years : a great player indeed; i now have the NORMA Audio (cdp-1br), and, wow, this is a big improvment. Yes, not cheap, but the money worth ! you hear the sound from CDs you think you already know. Firstly, the typical harshness of digital sound are missing, but at the same time you can find much more information and a lot more dynamics. All this happens without listening fatigue, but rather with a sense of neutrality and a surprising lack of artificiality. But perhaps even more spectacular is the reproduction of the soundstage.
Very interesting and informative. Since I am older and have had CD players since the mid 80's (my first was a Philips) I have always told others that older CD players can sound just as good as modern players. I love that one of your listeners liked the vintage Philips the best. I am keeping my now older McIntosh MCD500 as it sounds great.
Thank you Harley, this sounded like such a fun thing to be apart off. You made it very clear (to me) regarding the cd transport into a modern Dac. This has always been a question of mine, is there a difference in transports? Glad there isn't a big difference. I can leave my Cyrus 6s (second hand) alone.
I don’t quite agree with you on your outcome. On my TH-cam channel I tested out two different transports with the exact same coaxial cable an Illuminati from Kimber Kable, and a Conrad Johnson Premier 9 DAC. One transport was a DR 1 from Conrad Johnson. The other transport was an MCT 500 from McIntosh, the transports made everything sound completely different and it was not the DAC that change the sound. It was the transport that had more of an impact on sound quality. I could not believe that a transport would make that much of a difference, but it did.
Hi, thanks for your comment. To be correct it was not my outcome but that of my panel. It would be very interesting to see your video on the topic. Feel free to send me a link via our website.
Nice to see a "no bull" and unpretentious review done in a completely logical fashion for once. The eventual conclusion about the DAC being the part that influences the sound makes perfect sense. After all the transport only has to turn at the correct speed and collect all the information available. I've often wondered why people will spend many thousands on a transport alone and this rather backs up the point that it's not necessary, except _perhaps_ from the point of view of longevity.
Thanks for your kind remarks. Exactly, a transport has a job to do, to pick up all the 1’s and 0’s and feed them to the Dac… the Dac can then process them accordingly… and I believe the sound differences are mostly in the amplification component at the backend of the Dac, when the now analogue signal is amplified enough to be passed down the interconnect cable to the amplifier
Harley, that's excellent work. I did the same thing about ten years ago when my NAD CD player started to fail. I had several DVD players, that no longer played DVDs due to weak lasers, three Sonys & a Panasonic. When compared at the analog outputs, the Panasonic DVD-A110 (with DVD Audio DACs) was the only one that matched the sound quality of the NAD. I still use it daily, it only plays pressed discs, so I have a Sony BDP-S3700 & Schiit Modi DAC for all other discs/formats. I'm not sure why but the 3700 plays scratched discs better than any of my other players!
Thank you Harley. I am a delighted to hear the results of your evaluations with friends and colleagues - not only because it was revealing, but also because it will likely save me a bunch of money. My CD section comes from an old OPPO BDP-83SE, which was released in 2009, but was used only a few times before I purchased it about a year ago. This is used Digital Out (bypassing the DAC) to the Digital In on a Devialet Expert 120 amplifier, which had a great DAC in its day. What your research tells me is that I would have to spend a lot to improve on what I have (which I would not like to do as I love being married more than owning hifi!). Regards from Perth, Australia. Derek
Hi Derek. I use exactly the same Oppo player as a transport with a slight wrinkle. I purchased a little Chinese box for about £50 which strips the audio stream from the hdmi out and converts it to I2S via hdmi, which then plugs into my Denafrips Terminator Plus dac. The sound is great, and the bonus is that it allows me to output the DSD stream to the dac and play SACDs via the DACs' superior processing. I just checked, and it also has optical and coaxial outs, though I'm not sure if it will output DSD via coaxial. Don't see why not, though. That Oppo is a lovely player. Real shame they got out of the Bluray business.
@@jimfarrell4635 Hi Jim. This is wonderful information! I've been looking for a way to play SACDs. The problem is that there is no input to use on the Devialet. What I have as a link is a Cambridge Audio CXN 2 streamer/DAC. What is the name of the "little Chinese box" and do you have any links or advice on how to connect this? Many thanks. Regards from Perth, Derek
@Derek Cohen Hi Derek. I had a look for the name on it and couldn't find it. I will check ebay. So does that mean you are effectively using the DAC in the Cambridge ? If so you would need to check if it can handle DSD via the digital inputs. I will get back shortly with the name of the wee black box.
@@jimfarrell4635 Jim, the OPPO is connected to the Devialet, but only plays CD not SACD. How do I get SACD to the Devialet? Neither the Devialet nor Cambridge have HDMI, only Toslink and Coaxial. Regards from Perth, Derek
Thank you for Part 2. I compared a Marantz CD 42 via koax-digital Out to a modern Audiolab6000cdt (also via coax). I connect both to an Audiolab6000A (intern DAC). They sound very similar. The more i hear Musik (and not compare) the more i like the the Marantz CD 42 …it is a little more detailed in the upper Midrange - this gets more and more important because this makes the Music more Driven by the Rhythm.
The analog output stage is bypassed when using coax out. The output stage is where most of any additional sonic characteristics come from. I have repaired 6000cdt and consider them mediocre in terms of circuit design and parts quality. Also, Marantz CDP's have an amazing ability to oulast most others ... Denon and Marantz just seem to care about their customers more.
Thanks for this great series. I just added the Topping E50 DAC to my headphone stack ..being fed by my decades old Denon 3520 cd 💿 player …and you’re absolutely correct . If the mechanical composure in working order and all the ins and outs are correctly functioning…an outboard DAC is an excellent way to update and upgrade the sound🎉 Thanks once again.
If you believe that any modern DAC (including this E50 that you mention and i have never heard of) could beat the DENON sound, especially 3520 or 3560......man, you are deeply wrong. I have DENON 2560GL and it still sounds better than the newest giga, mega, hyper, super-duper, ultra advanced Saber ESS ES9026PRO which is in Technics SL-G700 M2. The only reason that it sometimes loses in terms of punch, bass and dynamics in some demanding Metallica tracks is that there is not a single electrolyte capacitor alive into the device. Neither in power supply section nor in audio circuit. Simply their lifespan is over. But i remember it when it was new....it was not a DENON, it was real sound DEMON. So go have your capacitors replaced and forget about all the modern stuff. 😉👍
I recently used my old Audiolab 8200CD as transport into my Moon DAC. Just like I bought a new CD player. Don't need a new one anymore. Very interesting video.
As a great CD enthusiast with a very large collection, I am loving this! Very well done, informative and entertaining. I have six CD player (Naim, Rega, Musical Fidelity, Rotel, Sony, Parasound) and a Denafrips Pontus II dac, that has been a really wonderful surprise on soind quality. I am really curious on what would be the outcome if could add one of this recent R2R dacs to that comparison. My Parasound bcd2000 transport and dac1000hd dac combo mentioned above, is more than 20 years old and still is a reference. In my opinion, CD reproduction has been totally satisfying since the late 90’s... at a cost of course. I can’t wait for part 3...and 4 :)
I am so glad you are enjoying our videos. I enjoy making them too, so it’s a win, win. I wonder which player you would keep, if you could only have 1? 😉
That’s my conclusion as well. I’m able to a/b/c test my pioneer elite dvd/sacd/cd player because it has rca analog outs, a coax digital and an optical digital out. Tested the internal player’s dac, a budget external dac (SMSL SU-1) and my pioneer receiver dac (burr brown dac). The player’s internal dac sounded best (punchier, livelier, cleaner) vs the two digital out options. I suspect it’s because the SACD playback capability demanded a better/more expensive dac.
@@nehocm123 Connectors & materials may be better but I doubt whether many if any could identify accurately & repeatably which was the more expensive in a blind test tbh
I've been listening to a vintage marantz SACD for three years. It sounds great. All of a sudden it started scratching my CD'S. I replaced it with a Phillips CDI player made for gaming that I puchased new in the mid 80'S. It still works perfectly and only has analog outputs, so I'm using the build in DAC. I really can't hear any difference in the sound quality from the marantz. I've been shopping around for a new transport, but I'm sure I need one.
In my experience you can't do a fair comparison between two products by switching between them as the song is playing. It would be the same as comparing picture quality from different cameras taken from a moving train. None of the pictures will be of the place in the landscape. It would be very difficult to tell them appart because you are basically comparing apples and oranges
Hi, I get your point. Obviously, in these comparison tests we were very flexible. Allowing the listener to listen to the whole track or sequences of it. I know it’s not perfect, but it was an honest attempt.
What Harley did is the proper way of doing a blind test to assess the sound and that is due to the phenomenon called echoic memory. This particular sensory store is capable of storing large amounts of auditory information that is only retained for a short period of time (3-4 seconds). This echoic sound resonates in the mind and is replayed for this brief amount of time shortly after being heard. If you pause for more than that time your perception is not based on hearing any more.
@@emilspec1227 I don't agree. I my view you can't compare two different elements of a song to each other. I agree more with Harley about his point of letting the listener listen to the whole song on each unit
@@jwester7009 it certainly helps if the two examples are as similar as possible aa another enemy of sound tests is diferent volume of samples but Harley did mention that he did start all of the songs at the same time or as close as possible.
ABSOLUTE RIGHT Mr. Webster ! ................The reason is that brainwaves decoding sound continue for seconds after switchind between components , so A/B testing is false ...........it was even demonstrated that a faulty amplifier passed unnoticed due to this...........one must hold a pause between comparing to let the brain reset ! John Broskie brought this to my attention years ago......since I only look for those systems and or components that connect me to the music without listening fatigue .......not hifi performance and audiophile analyzing , in real life when going to a concert I listen to music and I do not analyze the music as do audiophiles .
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
What an excellent subject matter and presentation. This is the standard for all TH-cam technical audio discussions.
Thank you!
Many presenters fail to live up to the standard.
Every time I want to replace a component, I just turn the volume up a little bit to make it sound better and I'm happy again.
Great comment! 😀
You need something that goes up to 11 then 😉
I like your attitude! You are a healthy person!
At my age the sound need to be up a lot
The audiophile community declares you the winner of the loudness war.
Every video on this channel feels like yet another relaxed afternoon with a good friend talking about the subjects I most enjoy. Keep up the good work!
Thank you 🙏
i feel like i need some Makers and a little bit of jazz in the background.
I appreciate the detailed and thoughtful work you're doing in this comparo. These are questions that a lot of us have had for decades and they can only be answered to a good level of satisfaction after a considerable investment in time and equipment. So, thank you!
Thanks, you’re very kind. I appreciate your comment very much.
Valuable test; I’m glad one of the reviewers stuck with the Phillips unit until the end, I feel sure the engineers put a great deal of effort into it. I appreciate the fact your friend loaned it for the exercise.
🙏 indeed it was great to see the Philips keep up with the new ones, after all these years
Well Mr Calson on TH-cam points out that over time components shift in value and must be maintained every few years.
Fantastic video, especially the findings when using the external DAC. Thank you and looking forward to part 3.
Glad you enjoyed it Dan.
What's really impressive is that that 1989 Philips was fitted with such capable DAC. Kudos to the Dutch!
And the Belgian technical design team 😉
You are so right!
is not surprising when you consider that cd audio system was developed by philips.
@@stephens2984
Israel 🇮🇱
I've watched this video while having breakfast this morning. The coffee went cold. I was at the edge of my seat. It was really helpful, especially to streamline my future equipment investments: 1> immediately upgrade my coaxial cable || 2> separate pre-amplifier || 3> A better DAC, in the long-term, I just got a new one a few months back. Thanks so much for this. Your take and approach has been superb in all the videos of your channel. I've learned so much. Thanks.
Thanks Gabriel, sorry your coffee went cold! 😉 so glad you find them useful
so glad i made it to 73 where everything sounds good
😀
Best comment in Hi-Fi 😊
I had a Kenwood DP 7090 with 8 Burr Brown chips in the DAC. Still one of the best machines I've ever heard
Nice
It is a very good machine!
I remember the old argument of single beam laser pickup vs 3 beam laser pickup, when in reality it was just a mirror splitting the single into 3 beams anyway. Good video. I think you are right. Most any CD player collects the same high quality digital signal from the disc. The DAC is where the sound difference comes in.
Thanks for your appreciation and your comment
I'm still listening to my Harman/Kardon HD760. It was built at the end of the nineties and costed originally 1300DM. Nowadays around 1000€. I bought it from eBay five years ago for about 100€. It always sounded good, but after connecting it to a real NF-cable (Transparent Music Link Plus) it started singing. What a glory! And I prefer the sound of the DAC inside the Harman over the DAC-sound of my Cambridge Audio 851n azur streamer/network player/ DAC. That's why I still listen to the analogue output stage of the Harman. ;-)
Best regards from Germany and thank very much!
got the 710 and I really cannot complain
Thanks Sebastian. Glad you enjoyed it. And thanks too for your contribution to the discussion
@@jdekong3945
Unacceptable comment for 2024 internet era.
Describe what happens over 5 hours.
@@Gma7788 what on earth are you talking about?
As expected. If using a digital out (coaxial/optical/HDMI) and the player is providing an uncorrupted data stream; use whatever you want. No point wasting cash any anything special, as the DAC/Amp/AVR will do the heavy lifting. So get a DAC/Amp/AVR that you like the sound profile of.
Awesome test and looking forward to part 3.
Jordan
Thanks Jordan!
Have to agree with CG below, 2 great videos and very much looking forward to the third.
Great that you included what happens when external dac is used and glad with the conclusions of your panel.
Thank you Harley for making and sharing these very insightful videos with us. Much appreciated.
Hi Con, the pleasure is all mine! So pleased you enjoy our videos. Of course, I only do the research and the talking, my colleague Ajay does the back room editing stuff! 😉
@@PearlAcoustics Do pass on my application to Ajay.
@@conkelleher8454 I certainly will. Thanks!
Yet another interesting video. Thank you, Harley!
My take on modern DAC - two main areas on where it really matters
1. the quality of the power supply to the various stages
2. the 'sound' of the output/gain/buffer stage. Opamps or discrete parts add a lot of flavours to the eventual sound, more than the different DAC used
Thanks. Very interesting comment
The last thing you want is something adding flavour. All you want is high fidelity, no noise and distortion. Otherwise it's being added to all the music.
@@r423fplip Apparently, some audiophiles like to have a bit of hiss and some other forms of distortion and noise, as you get from tubes and phono cartridges. Exact replication of digital masters is not favored by all.
@@PearlAcoustics perhaps you can consider updating the philips by changing out the opamps (5532?) and put into sockets so you can use some newer opamps such as opa16xx etc.
You'll probably feel a veil lifted initially but can be a bit too clinical for some.
Still, you can easily reinstate the original opamps with the sockets
@@Unker_Spunkanathan thanks for the suggestion. But it was loaned to me for the test! 😉
A rigorous and excellent comparative review - and one that should set the standard for others. I often ask audiophiles about why they prefer one component over another, and ask them if they have ever blind switch tested them. They never have....
Thank you for your kind appreciation and comment
I remember a few years ago when wine was blind tested, and the result was anything but expected! Many of the newer wine producing countries were preferred over the older European producers, much to their chagrin! Of course, it is very subjective, and I suppose ultimately it is what the market prefers which could well be influenced by price not only taste, that is most important if you want to sell a lot of it!.
I know myself that I have purchased expensive wine on occasion and not always really impressed by its flavour and quite frankly could have picked the local Sainsbury's plonk in a blind test. You may realise that I am no oenophile!
Could this also be true of the audiophile who is used to listening to music that sounds characteristic of the types of players they themselves have bought?
@@georgedyson9754 I would probably guess so. In their defence, however, a blind switch sort of test like the one in this video can be difficult to replicate. Still, ime, even a quick and dirty blind test with some missing steps can still be very revealing.
These videos are fascinating. I can Philips as a customer and was allowed to buy stuff at the staff shop. I was surprised that you didn’t mention the Laserdisc because I always thought that the CD was a spinoff. I bought a Marantz CD player just before moving to the USA in 1985. It wasn’t very reliable and I bought the first Discman as a backup. I am pleased that the CD is making a comeback. Fortunately, I haven’t thrown my 1,200 CDs away. I grew up in Worthing down the street from B&W. The coils were wound by the housewives in our street.
Thanks! Indeed, I think you’re right that the video disc came first and cd for audio was not taken seriously in the beginning. Hence, only Sony took up the challenge at first.
I live in Worthing now, and have a couple of pairs B&W, I should pop by the factory I think they have a mini museum. I kept my CDs too thankfully, and have a Quad 66, I must try the coax into my DAC, hadn't thought of that.
@@DamonGreen You’re welcome. Let me know if VW have a museum, it would be worth a visit. 😉👍
This was very worthwhile, Harley! I've found that each of the 4 or 5 disc spinners I've owned each had a distinct personality & their distinctive sound took at least a few days to reveal itself. Most were enjoyable, especially my '90's vintage Harman/Kardon which sounded a lot like the reviewer in Stereophile wrote (impressive bass extension). I kept the H/K over 12 years, but I recall that the new $150USD Sony SACD player that replaced "Lady H/K" sounded a bit thin when I bought it. A year & a half later, it still sounded fairly anemic on CD or SACD, so I was glad to be rid of that one.
Thanks Pat. We have an H/K in the factory, I always thought it performed extremely well.
I have a Philips cd 850 mk Ii cd player which I bought a couple of years ago second hand after my much newer NAD player decided to quit. The 850 mk Ii uses a bitstream dac and sounds very smooth, silky and atmospheric. Although more than 30 years old it blew the NAD out of the water.
Thanks for your comment
Good lord, I love everything about this video.
I've on occasion dreamt f setting up similar such comparisons myself -- but never quite managed to go through with it. And wouldn't have been able to, at this level.
Thank you. That’s very kind. I have to tell you it was quite some work, it took way more time and effort than I intended. So comments like yours make it all worthwhile. 🙏
I've been eagerly awaiting this video- I like the content and the direction of the channel.
Same here! I'm in the market for a nice transport that isn't overpriced, and not made by slaves.
Thanks Charles!
Ditto 💯 %
Many Thanks, I didn't realize it till you mentioned but I've alawys wondered about the relationship between analog and digital converters with different setups. Delightful Insights 🔥
Thank you. You’re very welcome
Very interesting test! I came to the same conclusion a few years ago after buying a very expensive T+A SACD player and couldn't hear any difference to my 1988 Technics CD player. Thank you for this professional review.
You’re very welcome! Glad you enjoyed it
Foolish.
Your statement wasn't acceptable for 2024.
Over time, what happened?
What happened in the 1st hour?
What happened in the 5th hour?
What happened in the 8th hour of use?
I think you're full of lies.
I've heard about 3 different cd players in my time. A NAD 542, a 515 bee and a Philips CD160. You can definately tell between the 542 and 515 bee (which I didn't like and ended up selling). My favourite is the NAD 542 .The CD 160 is my second favourite. I bought Beresford DAC as I wanted to play USB from my PC into my amp, it also has Coax digital inputs and so as a matter of interest I connected the Philips CD160 to the DAC to see the "benefits" of 40 years of Digital improvements. Or so I thought, or if you believe the marketing hype. I struggled to tell a difference between the Beresford DAC and the 40 year old built in DAC from the CD160. The DAC may have been slightly cleaner, but it was almost impossible to tell much difference. When I connected the NAD 542 to the Beresford, I couldn't tell any difference.
Regarding your listening tests, it would have been an interesting exercise to repeat the test after an hour or so and see if people marked the results the same. I bet they wouldn't have marked them the same.
A final note, when we bough the NAD 542 from the dealer, we took along the CD160 to play it through the shop's stereo system to see if it was worth buying a new CD or not. It was played through a top of the line Amp and LInn speakers. We could definately tell a difference there. So, differences between CD players become more apparent on the the quality of the amp and speakers.
Hi, thanks for your comment. You raise some very good points here, especially on listening fatigue and subjectivity. It is possible we could have had different results, although Pierre-Nicolas and Maarten have very discerning hearing - it’s their job. And the were both very consistent throughout. I even double blinded Pierre-Nicolas and he immediately said “I think you’ve switched them, this is CD4, not 3!” And he was absolutely right. Indeed, the differences are easier to discern with high quality equipment
This is absolutely riveting could not get over how incredible this is Bravo.
Thank you! Very kind
It's good to get some perspective on older equipment and how it compares with later generations. Thanks
Glad you enjoyed it
"There is no conflict" Darth Vader
"There is no comparison" I
Old gear was made by engineers and enthusiasts, the new one by marketing departments.
My 1st cd player was one of the earlyish Yamaha "natural sound " models. It was paired with a Nad 3020 amplifier & B&W stand mount speakers
It was very musical 🎶 👍 🇬🇧
👍
Thank you Harley, another superb presentation & always enjoy your warm friendly personality. As a dedicated analog guy I recently decided to upgrade my digital gear. As it turns out we had a bit of a shootout of our own which was truly eye opening. People can talk all the technical specs they want but even though Peter at Audio Note sticks to rebook, the sound is simply so natural, so you are there. Everyone of us preferred the Audio Note system to a full boat DCS system that on paper you wouldn't think possible. And I completely agree with your view, more attention to the DAC is money better spent.
Thank you Scott, that’s very kind. And thank you too for your very interesting contribution to the topic
Another Great installment. Really glad you did the comparison on the digital outs too & as you said it seems that the way forward is definitely to utilise an older or cheaper CD player as transport & Spend the money on the DAC.
Would be very interested to see how some of the really high end DACs from the 90's 2000's compare to the more modern ones. I recently added a Cambridge audio DACMagic to my setup from which I also feed a old Studio DAC from the late 90's & I was really surprised to find I much preferred the order dac. It seemed to have a much flatter response across the spectrum while the newer DAC while probably more lively was also tiring to listen to in comparison.
Looking forward to part 3
Thanks Chris! I think you have an important point here. A modern, highly revealing and ‘fast’ Dac, is not necessarily the most pleasant to listen to music on! The original engineers, had vinyl as their reference, and I think that impacted the outcome in the fine tuning.
@@PearlAcoustics Hi Harvey,znot sure if you'll see this but you've sent me down the rabbit hole so to speak. I've been doing some "Critical Listening" over the past week and have come to an interesting conclusion perhaps one for you to contemplate also. The older DAC I have is a Swissonic AD96 (considered highly in it's day next to the apogee Rosetta's) I've found that the preferable DAC in terms of listener experience depends largely on the age of recordings e.g. I have found recordings made in the era of my DAC (late 90's) sound better through a 90's dac ( for example Michael shrieve's Two Doors) however more modern recordings sound better through the more modern DAC so it seems there is a difference in the EQ/presentation for each DAC but more interestingly is that the engineers seem to have accounted for this & to me at least the best playback seems to be through a DAC commensurate with the era. An interesting one for you to explore should you desire.
@@chriswraith9988 Hi Chris. I’ve read it. Thanks very much for your comment. A very interesting approach. I wonder if anyone else has experienced a similar outcome? I have never thought of it this way. I will re-listen beating the age of the recording in mind.
👍😄. What a wonderful program! Excellent exposition in every way! Some mysteries were solved for me. Part 3 is very intriguing. - Heather
😀
I shall do a similar test too. Between the modified and all stock player and also, test same albums from different studios using two same machines. Results are always fun and eye opening for sure
Go for it!
for somone who has only 55K subscribers the production quality look rather well done
Thank you! 🙏
This is a very interesting and informative comparison. Thanks!
My pleasure!
One finds that the admirable aspect of the compact disc lies in its ability to deliver rather splendid audio quality at a modest price point. Indeed, even a humble £15 CD player acquired from Argos has provided me with a most delightful listening experience. Granted, it is by no means akin to a £20,000 CD transport with a high-caliber DAC and cinema-grade speakers, but it has rendered sound that is truly enjoyable.
Naturally, one's choice of headphones or speakers plays a significant role in the overall experience, as the CD format requires no intricate preamp setup, unlike vinyl. Moreover, the unfortunate proliferation of portable turntables-devices notorious for damaging records while delivering subpar sound quality-is a concern for the discerning listener, particularly as some of these contraptions are priced at over £100.
While vinyl does, indeed, triumph in the realm of cover art, which I must say holds a unique appeal, the compact disc remains, in my view, most comfortably poised to claim the crown, as it were, as a distinguished format for audio enjoyment.
Absolutely! Thanks for your contribution to the conversation
@@PearlAcoustics no worries
Thank you for that very interesting pair of videos. This confirms all my own less formal experiments! I, too, came to the conclusion that you could take a ‘cheap’ cd mechanism as input to a decent DAC stage and get surprisingly good results. But not all, ‘cheap’ cd mechanisms will have the appropriate outputs for you to achieve this easily. My own dvd/blue ray player only has one output designed for a TV. But I’ve had great success improving the sound of Denon and Technics CD players by feeding them into better DACS.
IT’s a cheap and satisfying way to improve your system.
Thanks Andrew, very kind
Thanks, Harley. very perceptive as always. I'm looking forward to part 3.
You’re very welcome
I found this really interesting, thank you for your time and trouble at doing tests like this.
Thank you Martin, that’s very kind
Anyone reading this that is on a budget and needs a newer model: I can recommend the Onkyo C-7030, which has a Wolfson DAC, remote and digital line out. It's beautiful to look at, very minimalist layout, built-in headphone amp and has amazing sound. I have other players but always come back to it.
Thanks very much for your valuable contribution to the topic.
I’m rehabbing an old Sony CDP -70. If that doesn’t work out my eye is on the Onkyo.
Wonderful video, sir.
@@briancaine9130 thank you! Good luck with you refurb project
Agree - I've an Onkyo C7070 💿
You're videos are really interesting it is not often that film makers actually research really worthwhile subjects . Excellent work Harvey !
Thanks Mark
Praise due Harvey you have taught me a lot xx
I know they are not terribly expensive but I have found the Ifi Zen 2 the most incredible sounding dac in my experience fed directly into active studio monitors . I have tended to use Spotify and TH-cam recently as
sources which I know are not state of the art but you do get tremendous
choices of material . You could actually listen to different stuff forever
without ever repeating any tracks which is quite mind blowing !
I would be interested if you evaluated some of the Ifi products yourself.
Thanx again mate .
Harley!
Looking forward to Part 3
I just got an Onkyo DX-C390 6 disc cd changer with vector linear shaping circuitry and direct digital path open box from Best Buy for $100. Got the 4 year warranty for $20. It’s normally $350. It most definitely sounds better than my old player. The difference is night and day paired with my Yamaha A-S801
Excellent video, I have just 3 weeks ago bought a Rega Elex 4 and wanted a CD player also, we tried a few players and they were quite good but then decided to try the Audiolab CDT 9000 transport through the Elex 4 internal DAC, it was a huge improvement that I wasn't expecting, so much so I had to take one home and am extremely happy with the sound of the combination.
My system is complete for now with my P6 turntable also.
Looking forwards to part 3.
Hi Ian, thanks for your kind words. Isn’t it great when one has a system that one can simply enjoy and relax with?
Aren't higher priced CD players priced higher because of the superiority of the DAC inside? IOW, how much difference can the transport section actually make? I suspect not much.
I am happy with my simple little Panasonic cd micro system.
Truly i am blessed
Absolutely! It’s all about the music first.
You probably bought it second hand as well.
Long long ago we listened to that Quad in the shop ......it sounded quite good but when we hooked it directly to the power amplifier ( The Quicksilver mono 8417 ) and the big Spendor .something happend ............we were in the music with a roof above us and surrounded by it .........a wonderfull e"xperience but not practical because we couldn't adjust and lower the soundlevel because that would have harmed the magic..hahaha
Even with Frankie goes to Hollywood ....we were in th e DOME .......
The big Philips left us with a great souvenir ..........it played MUSIC ..........and propably it still does ...
Thanks for your comment Frank
This brings me to another place. I had a 5 cd carousel player, a sony with the dsp. I wish I had not given it away. It had thousands of hours of great listening to it.
Thanks!
What an awesome series! I did hear a noticable difference when I put my Audiolab ctd6000 on sorbothane spheres - particularly with grip in the bass. I was using these as a bit of 'good housekeeping' and was not actually expecting to hear a difference at all. Viva CDs!!
Thanks
I have the CDT 6000, it's not in my system at the moment. It's been replaced by the wiim mini and qobuz. £89 and bit perfect.
@@r423fplip Interesting! I've got the Wiim mini & a Qobuz subscription. I can confirm that it sounds fantastic!
I was shortly going to replace my Marantz CD5005 (being used as a transport) for either the CDT6000 or the CDT9000.
You've made me wonder if it's worth the bother! 🤔
@@martinclift3843 don't bother with the cd transport, I have 3 gathering dust. I plugged my IPhone into my dac, even that is better than the cd. Wiim mini is better by a long way.
I have had lots of cd players over the years, most sound similar enough that choosing between them is an exercise of futility, particularly when put up against comparing cartridges where difference is usually obvious. These days my hearing is a bit wrecked from playing in bands so wouldn't bother experimenting with different players.
However, I bought a second hand Phillips back when these things had only been around a couple of years and it was bonkers compared with some of the others I heard. It was exhausting, the sound was so realistic and compelling that it wasn't much use for listening casually. I suppose it could be described as cold and brutal 😅
These days I have a s/h Marantz something or other with basic dac, its OK but I wish I still had the Phillips to have the occasional brain destruction session.
Enjoying the vids. Thanks.
Thank you for your kind words and also for your interesting contribution to the topic. I must admit that, if finances allow, keeping pieces of equipment when ‘upgrading’ can be very rewarding later on. It can increase the fun of the hobby and remind us that every choice is some kind of compromise. Enjoy the music
As a Belgian computer guy, it was always my thought that the CD player is there to extract data and has CRC, so as long as it has a stable transport and jitter is well in control, the sound signature would be related only to the DAC section and further elements down the chain.
Thanks for the efforts you put in setting-up this test and help us (re)discover those iconic CD players... I have difficulties discussing with audiophiles who pretend to have bionic ears and hear day and night differences between things that are undistinguishable to me (like the difference between a 100€ and a 5000€ coax cable ;-) So I appreciate your humble, pragmatic and unbiased approach.
I hope you will someday have series about FLAC, MQA (pretty much dead now), DSD, etc... I can easily smell a low bitrate MP3 but I feel like it will be very so hard to compare a 16bit 44.1Khz FLAC with higher-res music. I'm not sure I hear a difference due to a different (re)mastering, sometimes not sure I hear a difference at all, or is my mind tricking me ? I would be curious to hear your thoughts on all this...
Hi Sebastian thank you very much for your kind comment and interesting suggestion. Indeed, in a lot of cases (assuming the mastering is identical) telling apart some different file types would be very difficult. But sometimes it’s just easier to know you are listening in high res so you know you’re getting the best quality possible. But a track with distortion on it from the original recording is always going to have it.
As a Danish computer guy, I can relate to a lot of that. I have come to know a couple of audiophiles who spend staggering amounts of money on equipment, and while their setups do sound really good, I have come to the conclusion that they are the wrong people to ask why. For them it is all "black boxes" that presumably do magic stuff better than some other black boxes. One does not have to understand something in depth in order to enjoy it though, however when they talk about their network setup, a subject which I do know about, it becomes apparent that there is at least some degree of beliefs over facts. I know other people who are into HiFi, who have setups that to me sound just as good, but without the voodoo.
Btw, audio CDs (red book) do have pretty basic error correction, which is much less than data CDs, so I can imagine that not all manufacturers spend the same amount of effort prevent, detect and mitigate errors.
You are so right! You Belgians and dutch invented the cd! The hifi reviewers tend to be tonedeaf and unmusical!
hyggelig å høre fra en dansk data ekspert! Danskene har alltid laget meget bra lydprodukter! Problemet idag er at de fleste hifi kritikere er umusikalske og tonedøve!det siste jeg har lest, er at man trenger en egen strømrenser til ti tusen kroner for å få god lyd!
You are so right!
So, my takeaway is any CD Transports that are doing their job correctly will sound the same. Analog outputs on CD Players can and will sound different, because they have different DACs and different analog output stages. Glad to have some evidence for the logic.
Absolutely. That was my, and my team’s findings.
Superb show, as always. Looking forward to part 3
Thanks 🙏
Excellent work as always. I have the Rega player so looking forward to part 3!
Thanks Don!
Very interesting, looking forward to the sequel !
Greetings from Berlin
Thanks!
Absolutely fascinating results. Can't wait for part 3.
👍
I enjoy part 2 much as part 1 because you have the Philips cd880 standing there like a brick. For me one of the most beautiful vintage CD Player. That's why I love my vintage Philips cd850, over 32 years old and plays almost every day what i want to hear in a for me great way. Sorry, I'm a vintage Philips hifi Lover 😊.
No apology needed! Glad you enjoyed them.
Again, wonderfully interesting - as you rightly point out, the DAC is one of the most important, if not THE most important thing in the whole chain. I also try to use (with little success apart from fun) a home recording studio and have found exactly the same position with the DAC.
Thanks!
Yes, that is my conclusion also that any transport sounds the same when we take digital out and it is the same output from the transport regardless of what transport it is coming from.
I made that finding when trying to compare streaming vs CD.
I afterwards figured out that I actually tested the CD player built in DAC against the DAC that the streaming were using.
I redo the testing and took the digital out from the CD player and feed the same external DAC that the streaming were using.
Now with the same DAC i could not tell a difference between CD or streaming (for that song that I had choose anyway).
Now I use a old OPPO that can play anything optical media. And take the digital out. So CD, DVD-Audio, SACD, HDCD, BD-Audio and so on ..
So the tip is get a player that can play as many formats as possible then use the digital out and use your preferred DAC and you can play any optical format that comes your way and have a excellent sound. 🎉
So my personal conclusions were if I can't hear a difference between a astonishingly good CD (actually it was a HDCD that had very good dynamic range when testing the same track but on several different releases. Tested with dynamic range testing software and this one stood out a little bit better than the other releases) and the streaming service. Then the streaming service is good enough for me..
And I am a happy camper. 😅
Very interesting comment. Thanks for your contribution to the discussion. Glad you have a happy conclusion
Yup, l went through a similar journey and basically found the same as yourself. Digital out to a DAC ... Hard to hear a real difference on a USD 40k rig. Streaming from a NAS also surprised me. Great video btw
What an extremely refined, elegant, empirical, observation of CD playback. I do so enjoy the Canadian kit version of the English AudioNote DAC to play through. The Resistor/Transformer/Resistor, I/V conversion, sans any op amp implementation and the R2R architecture, non-oversampling, method for reconstruction, what was recorded vs the computational algorithm guessing at what was laid down, via the Delta Sigma methodology, for me, yield a more enjoyable performance.
Thank you Scott. And thanks too for your comment. It always amazes me how many ways there are of solving a problem
I understand that you are dazed and confused.have you considered snake oil and an expensive gadget that can clean your power supply!!!???
@@GeirRssaak My condolences, having to live a life, sans a cortex.
Dear Scott! I respect your opinions!
Dear Wolf! Thank you for your sympathy!
I love the Philips CD 880 nice warm sound !
THANKS HARLEY 🤗 for doing ALL the hard 😅 work … being as objective as possible 💚💚💚
Thanks, that’s very kind. (I have to admit, the CD series did take quite a bit of preparation and research)!
@@PearlAcoustics YES ,🤗 BUT IT’S WORTH IT …to educate all
@@budgetaudiophilelife-long5461 🙏
In 1989 I became the last among my peers to purchase a CD player. Unlike them, I chose a CD player as a complimentary source to my turntable & LP's rather than as a replacement. I chose the Philips CD960, which had already been around a while by 1989. I keep the CD960 in my "vintage system". Ironically, my primary system is also fairly old these days. The CD player in this system is a Naim CD5 / Naim Flatcap combo which I've owned for almost 20 years. I've had to replace the belts in the CD960 a couple of times while the CD5 has needed nothing thus far. When I find gear that I truly enjoy I tend to hang on to it.
That’s the great thing about our hobby, if we invest in good equipment first time around, it can last decades!
I have a Marantz cd80 and I think it has the same dac as the Philips 880. Bought it new and still sounds wonderful.
Great series
Thanks Anne!
You are so right ,Anne!
Something should have corroded by now.
When are you going to do some maintenance on it?
Something has to have failed on it by now.
Some component must have gone outside its parameters.
@@Gma7788 ofcourse I had it checked out every 10 years. Everything needs maintenance.
A buddy and I did a blind comparison of 3 or 4 players many years ago and we both easily picked out the most expensive and best sounding player. As an electronics engineer, I have no doubt the D-A conversion and, probably most importantly, the analog filtering made the biggest difference.
Thanks for sharing. Quick question: was the most expensive the best sounding? 😉
@@PearlAcoustics Yes, it was. Didn't mean to suggest otherwise, sorry. It was the same brand (Sony) as two (?) of the group we tested, and I remember the same-brand differences being surprising. I also remember the first time I realized how big the differences could be. It was when I compared a portable Sony player to a Rotel. It was like day and night, almost like a cheap cassette compared to good vinyl.
@@rbrown2925 thanks for the additional information. No ’sorry’ needed. Very interesting
This is exactly what one would expect and what digital audio engineers have been explaining forever. Any transport that gets an error free bitstream to the DAC sounds exactly like any other transport that does that. Now a really interesting test would compare the pricy separate DACs to those in decent receivers, using the same blind approach.
Hi Michael, thanks for your comment. Indeed, one could continue down this path for a long time!
I think that most of us would agree that more variation can be expected amongst CD-players than amongst transports (connected to the same DAC). The human mind is easily influenced/deceived if differences are suddenly smaller in a test setting. I think that if one wants to test if transports sound the same or not, one should compare transports proper - and not after first comparing CD-players. Also a CD player with a digital out isn't exactly the same concept (from a designers perspective) as a dedicated transport. I am not saying that I think that transports matter all that much, just that I think that the conclusion cuts the corner a bit too much.
Even a cheap transport in a computer can rip the data from a cd.
try Exact Audio Copy (freeware) - rip a CD, then it gives you the error rate.
@@alphaniner3770 Any transport that can deliver the samples with all errors corrected to the DAC will sound exactly the same. What possible explanation could there be for any difference? If the disc itself has uncorrectable errors due to damage, no transport will change that.
I was present at the AES meeting at the IEEE when the very first CD was played in the UK. It was compared to its master tape on a revox played through Spendor BC1's. The AB test was conducted by Angus McKenzie. The room full of professional audio enginers and HiFi company MDs almost all prefered the Revox tape, as did I. I could explain why the tape was superior. What I cant explain is why DtoA chips sound different. The process is entirely mathematical. Can anyone explain?
Hi thanks for your question. I have covered this topic in some detail in my Dac series. But in short, I honestly think the differences are not so much in the conversion itself but in the filtering/processing before the conversion and in the preamplifier section at the output stage of every DAC/ CD player, even the slightest change there can have a big impact.
thanks for sharing I use my Oppo UDP 203 as a transport. I rotate between an Arcam irDac with a Booster power supply and a Denafrips Ares II. In my own testing I preferred the sound of the external Dac's to what's in the Oppo 203
That’s interesting, I have never heard an Oppo… but they have acquired cult status now it seems?
Interesting, as that Oppo is reputed to have an excellent DAC and output stage. I have been keen to get one for playing surround sound music and 4k Blurays in my multichannel system, but they still command very high prices on the second-hand market. Unfortunately, no one seems to make as good players these days.
@@jimfarrell4635 I was lucky in purchasing my unit. When Oppo got out of the UDP business I called the company and asked if any were left I was told no. I gave them my phone number just in case they found one. A few days later I received a call saying they found a few units so I purchased one. I can’t believe what these units command in the used market
@@PearlAcoustics I’m interested in finding out which CD player you preferred in part 3. I would assume I could rule out the portable CD player….lol
@@cruzingrsx4484 yes indeed! 😀
Absolutely brilliant survey
Such amazing hard work and dedication
Thankyou
Thanks, I am glad you appreciated it. (I must admit it was way much more work than I had originally planned)! 😉
Fantastic research Harley - many thanks. Why not do a part 4 and compare CD via DAC with streaming via same DAC at CD quality say from Tidal or Qobuz using the same people and method?
Thanks for your appreciation. Good idea… I have noticed a difference doing just that (but only on my own). There did seem to be some differences, I even tried playing the CD of the streamed piece too, also through the same DAC. My gut feeling is that the difference could be down to some kind of compression or delivery from the streaming companies. For example ‘Tidal’ didn’t sound as good to me as ‘Qobuz’ on some tracks. But don’t take this too literally at this stage, I do need to do more research. For example, how do we know that each streaming company is playing the exact same source material? It could be mastered differently?
@@PearlAcoustics Hmmmmm 🤔- sounds like an interesting bit of follow up research. I have Tidal streaming through a Naim Uniti Atom and it sounds pretty amazing. I've not tried any comparisons with CD as yet, partly due to the faff of level matching it exactly, and partly as you say, are you listening to the same master? It would certainly be good to find out what your panel conclude about the comparisons though. Thanks again Harley for the brilliant content on your channel - I get giddy every time there's a new episode. 🤣
@@Phil_f8andbethere 😀
I think it is well know by now that CD sounds far more superior than any streaming service.
@@mornecoetzee735 Interesting 🤔
I hunted for a Cd player many years ago and fell for the Meridian 508.24. But I couldn’t afford it! So I went from dealer to dealer to dealer and listened end listened most intently. I used the same music each time. I always was easily able to pick out the Meridian every time. I finally found a nice used one on eBay. It was the priciest gear I’d ever bought with the exception if my Quad Esl-63 electrostatic speakers. It sounded even better in my system. I nearly cried when the transport failed and I learned no more transports were available. I finally bought a Triode TRV CD5SE with tube supplement.
Thanks for your story. Enjoy the music
Harley, excellent work. I have often considered replacing my Rotel RCD2, which is 24 years old because newer technology should be better. For awhile now, I have been using it as a transport connected to a Denafrips dac and it sounds very good. You have validated my own experience. Thank you.
You’re very welcome Dave! Thanks for your kind appreciation
I miss my Rotel CD player. It lasted almost 20 years and the first 10 of these it was playing almost all the time when I was at home (no TV, no internet, only CDs). It 'died' a few years ago. Honestly I think that Rotel deserves a place on part 1 of this series - Rotel managed to make really good and relatively affordable players.
When I started looking for a new transport my main consideration was not sound quality, but how long I wanted it to last. I have many CDs and still like to spin them. The market of players and transports is shrinking - many of the best drive mechanisms (Philips or Sony, your Rotel has a Sony IIRC) aren't produced anymore - and as long as stocks last some new old stock drives are put into a new chassis (like the Denafrips Avatar). After that there will be only really cheap drives or really exotic and expensive ones that are not necessarily going to last very long.
I went for a Jays Audio transport - a nice virtually indestructive Philips drive in it, and easy to service (if ever needed). I do think that it sounds better too - it was a bonus that I didn't expect - but saying that here will unfortunately get some people here all worked up.
Man, it's about the music. I grew up on vinyl, had a huge collection, did not try CDs till 1992, compared vinyl recording to the CD, and really could not hear that much of a difference except on dynamics, and the CD was better, Long story short sold my vinyl collection that year, never looked back, the only thing I miss on vinyl is the large covers, the rest is the myth of vinyl being superior is just that what arm, cartridge, support table, cables is TT in the room as speakers if so you get feedback, each changes the sound of the given LP played and sometimes from warm to thin and poor arm and cartridge setup all bets are off, but then that buying would not know. Compared today to the golden ERA of vinyl they nowhere have the equipment and expertise as a whole as back then when they used scopes to adjust all key needs of good vinyl playback. I had my TT playing an LP but the source playing was a CD, my audiophile friend said Man that vinyl sounds so much better than CD. I said you're so right and we listened more, and he kept raving, I then said Man it's the CD player playing, his jaw dropped, and he got upset because his myth was broken, and showed how much we influence ourselves by our own prejudice. Mastering any format is key, the formats are all so far from the master tape or what was heard in the studio when they recorded that's why, today's music recordings suck, no need t even have anyone in the same studio, all play their parts then the producers put it all together as he sees fit, add compression to it all due to 99% of listeners using phones and earbuds so they make music sound good on such devices. Sony's pro-Walkman was so good that I had a cello player from the Cleveland Orch pick up their Walkman and check it see set it up and bright in her Cello, she played it for a minute or so and then played it back with her headphones and just smiled and set it sound great, I then asked to listen having just heard it live, and I was so impressed on how much it sounded like I just heard LIVE! case closed to me that digital sucks, so it gives you what you send it, unlike vinyl that is colored throughout its playback, and I still love it but I have not purchased vinyl in 30 years now.
Thanks for your contribution to the discussion
Thank you for confirming my views on CD players. I still use a Rega Planet player bought new by myself in about 1994. I've listened to many newer players and could hear no reason to "upgrade".
You’re welcome!
Rega Planet super CD Player ❤❤❤
Oh, silly.
I bet you haven't replaced any components yet.
Have you measured any values yet?
Have you found any corrosion yet?
But the audiophile would say "you need better resolving speakers to hear the difference when just using them as a transport!". And you need to get those cables off the floor.. and shave and colour that CD as well. May as well sacrifice a small chicken because that might do something. Thanks for the great video. Was debating on getting a transport but now I am keeping my player with the separate great DAC and putting in a 2 channel amp just for the CDs instead of going to my home theatre amp. That saved my a good thousand bucks. I sure can spend that on some great music instead.
You’re very welcome! 😉 Enjoy the music
Not an audiophile and cannot afford expensive machines. I found this video very informative, educational and most of all, enjoyable. Thank you !
Interesting to see such thorough, objective, scientific analysis of a HiFi topic, an area which is so often very subjective, thank-you.
I have been an audiophile for over 50 years now and I am gratified to find your conclusion matches my own. I would only add that a DAC with a separate power supply will improve with a better supply: I am electronic engineer and build some of my own kit. When I built a linear shunt-regulated supply for my DAC, the improvement was quite obvious. As with everything to do with HiFi, your mileage may vary. 😀
Thank you for your very welcome comment. I am very glad you appreciated it. Thanks too for your interesting contribution to the discussion. Enjoy the music.
I've really enjoyed this series so far. It seems to have fairly convincingly challenged the idea that CD transports make a big difference to the sound, something that many of us suspected. The methodology seems pretty sound (small pun intended), and I appreciate the care taken. So your next task is to bump up the sensitivity of your excellent speakers so I can power them with the 12.5 Watts my 300b amp puts out. 😉
Hi Jim. Thanks for your kind comment! It’s much appreciated. Now increasing the efficiency of the Sibelius loudspeaker is going to be a massive challenge! 😉. If you have a true 12,5watts per channel with both channels driven, you will have about 100db into your room. For me that’s more than enough 😂. Enjoy the music. Best wishes, Harley
Indeed I have found the transport to be almost as important as the dac.
@@davidspendlove5900 I'm confused, are you disagreeing about the OP's comment?
Sorry to say my transport only has transformed my system . I was already using a very good universal blu Ray player to the same dac . Its only better organisation of sound but amounts to a transformed sound with detail being affected in a positive way . Texture too is better but clarity is about the same .
If you have a good dac, a good transport is vital to get the very best from that.
I love my TEAC VRDS10. Very sturdy, it has been working so far since I purchased it in1993
That's great - what value for money that has turned out to be!
The last part was the most important: The DAC is what makes the difference, but not the transport. L-O-V-E it! As with integrated amps, paying for a built-in DAC is a bad choice. Rather get a dedicated external DAC, and when DAC technology moves ahead, just change the DAC. FWIW, I use a Holoaudio May DAC L2 (R2R) and like it quite a bit. Have not heard any Danafrips, so can't compare. Thanks as always for all the excellent service you do for the community!
Thanks Daniel, your compliments are much appreciated and interesting comment as always.
How do you know a built in dac is not as good as an external ? What is that based on ?
I fully agree that built-in DACs are to be avoided if (financially) possible. Also DACs probably matter more than transports. But as I wrote elsewhere here, this test was not suitable to test differences amongst transports. Humans hear differences, and when these differences suddenly get smaller or other differences appear, you will have a very hard time noticing. If you want to know if transports differ, test transports, and transports only. With a Holo Audio May I would certainly test out different transports if you play CDs.
Spoiler: I have a Jays Audio transport, and even though the main reason I bought it was that I wanted a device that would last 25+ years, it actually gives a noticeable better sound (IMO) than any other digital source have connected to my DAC so far.
@@alphaniner3770 Testing transports is what the second part of this test did, and the golden eared young musician/engineers could not hear any differences, which is exactly what someone who understands how this stuff works would expect.
@@nehocm123 still getting worked up about this topic? - I told you that you should stay in your simplistic world, while I keep enjoying mine. Byebye
fantastic video,can't wait for part 3,i have cd player philips cd670 and my opinion about good sounding of philips players is,they have very good cdm 4/19 transports,also good 1541 dac in all sorts of variants..can't wait for third part video...i wish you all the best..
Thanks Miljan
Thanks for doing this, I have heard small differences with transports, I ended up some time ago just using an old Rega planet, with a good Burson dac 160, not the best but great analogue out.
You’re very welcome. Sometimes the simplest solutions are the best.
I have a large CD collection and a large vinyl collection - I kept every LP I ever purchased so have quite a few! Pretty much every record I own that was recorded in the 60's through the 80's is duplicated in CD and generally the records sound better than the CDs, which are often rather harsh. That is the case with classical pieces as well as pop/rock. I have the first all-digital set of Beethoven's 9 symphonies on CD I have to EQ them to make them sound decent. I'd say roughly beginning in the late 80's the engineers figured out how to record with digital and from then the CDs sound great - although I have some records where the dynamic range is wider on the record than on the CD! Go figure...
Sadly, I mostly listen to music nowadays via my iPhone through a bluetooth adapter connected to my sound system. I have multiple preamps/amps/speaker combinations, both solid state and vacuum tube from my avid audiophile days. The gear is dramatic overkill for streaming via bluetooth but convenience/laziness has come to greatly outweigh sound quality. The turntable and CD player are exercised occasionally to keep them "working," as are the two 1/4" tape machines.
Thanks very much for your insightful comment. It’s weird isn’t it, just how badly many CD’s of earlier recordings for vinyl were mastered (if they were mastered at all)!
Thanks for video! Suspicions confirmed: cd transports, so long as they're mechanically sound, have no bearing on the sound. It's all about the DAC. Edit: of course a solidly engineered and built transport will last years longer and for that reason it might be worth getting such a one. But sound is all about the DAC.
You’re very welcome. You’re absolutely right, but I think the biggest difference is found in the analogue circuit, immediately after the DAC itself. But in essence one can call it ‘the Dac’
@@PearlAcoustics Yes, that makes sense.
My transport has elevated my system for sure . Was already using the transport from my good quality universal blu Ray to the same dac . This new transport brings easier on the ear more organised sound and longer listening session. Gotta trust your ears man
I have had the Creek Destiny CD player for 10 years : a great player indeed; i now have the NORMA Audio (cdp-1br), and, wow, this is a big improvment. Yes, not cheap, but the money worth ! you hear the sound from CDs you think you already know. Firstly, the typical harshness of digital sound are missing, but at the same time you can find much more information and a lot more dynamics. All this happens without listening fatigue, but rather with a sense of neutrality and a surprising lack of artificiality. But perhaps even more spectacular is the reproduction of the soundstage.
Thanks for your comment
Very interesting and informative. Since I am older and have had CD players since the mid 80's (my first was a Philips) I have always told others that older CD players can sound just as good as modern players. I love that one of your listeners liked the vintage Philips the best. I am keeping my now older McIntosh MCD500 as it sounds great.
Thanks Dale. Indeed, if what you have sounds great and works just fine, why would anyone change?
Thank you Harley, this sounded like such a fun thing to be apart off. You made it very clear (to me) regarding the cd transport into a modern Dac. This has always been a question of mine, is there a difference in transports? Glad there isn't a big difference. I can leave my Cyrus 6s (second hand) alone.
You’re very welcome Hardeep. Indeed enjoy your Cyrus 6
No! All modern transports and DACs are only copies of Philips, Sony and teac-tascam! Do not waste your money on these fraud products!
I don’t quite agree with you on your outcome. On my TH-cam channel I tested out two different transports with the exact same coaxial cable an Illuminati from Kimber Kable, and a Conrad Johnson Premier 9 DAC. One transport was a DR 1 from Conrad Johnson. The other transport was an MCT 500 from McIntosh, the transports made everything sound completely different and it was not the DAC that change the sound. It was the transport that had more of an impact on sound quality. I could not believe that a transport would make that much of a difference, but it did.
What test equipment did you use?
Hi, thanks for your comment. To be correct it was not my outcome but that of my panel. It would be very interesting to see your video on the topic. Feel free to send me a link via our website.
Yeah, I call bullshit. Bits go in bits go out. If that wasn’t the case then it wouldn’t be red book compliant.
@@aarocka11 Total BS.
Something's amiss with your testing.
Nice to see a "no bull" and unpretentious review done in a completely logical fashion for once. The eventual conclusion about the DAC being the part that influences the sound makes perfect sense. After all the transport only has to turn at the correct speed and collect all the information available. I've often wondered why people will spend many thousands on a transport alone and this rather backs up the point that it's not necessary, except _perhaps_ from the point of view of longevity.
Thanks for your kind remarks. Exactly, a transport has a job to do, to pick up all the 1’s and 0’s and feed them to the Dac… the Dac can then process them accordingly… and I believe the sound differences are mostly in the amplification component at the backend of the Dac, when the now analogue signal is amplified enough to be passed down the interconnect cable to the amplifier
Harley, that's excellent work. I did the same thing about ten years ago when my NAD CD player started to fail. I had several DVD players, that no longer played DVDs due to weak lasers, three Sonys & a Panasonic. When compared at the analog outputs, the Panasonic DVD-A110 (with DVD Audio DACs) was the only one that matched the sound quality of the NAD. I still use it daily, it only plays pressed discs, so I have a Sony BDP-S3700 & Schiit Modi DAC for all other discs/formats. I'm not sure why but the 3700 plays scratched discs better than any of my other players!
Thanks Trevor! Technology can be unpredictable at times! Enjoy the music
The old masters Philips, Sony and teac-tascam are still superior to the new ones!
Thank you Harley. I am a delighted to hear the results of your evaluations with friends and colleagues - not only because it was revealing, but also because it will likely save me a bunch of money. My CD section comes from an old OPPO BDP-83SE, which was released in 2009, but was used only a few times before I purchased it about a year ago. This is used Digital Out (bypassing the DAC) to the Digital In on a Devialet Expert 120 amplifier, which had a great DAC in its day. What your research tells me is that I would have to spend a lot to improve on what I have (which I would not like to do as I love being married more than owning hifi!). Regards from Perth, Australia. Derek
You’re very welcome Derek. Indeed, keep your marriage and your existing HiFi! 😀
Hi Derek. I use exactly the same Oppo player as a transport with a slight wrinkle. I purchased a little Chinese box for about £50 which strips the audio stream from the hdmi out and converts it to I2S via hdmi, which then plugs into my Denafrips Terminator Plus dac. The sound is great, and the bonus is that it allows me to output the DSD stream to the dac and play SACDs via the DACs' superior processing. I just checked, and it also has optical and coaxial outs, though I'm not sure if it will output DSD via coaxial. Don't see why not, though. That Oppo is a lovely player. Real shame they got out of the Bluray business.
@@jimfarrell4635 Hi Jim. This is wonderful information! I've been looking for a way to play SACDs. The problem is that there is no input to use on the Devialet. What I have as a link is a Cambridge Audio CXN 2 streamer/DAC. What is the name of the "little Chinese box" and do you have any links or advice on how to connect this? Many thanks. Regards from Perth, Derek
@Derek Cohen Hi Derek. I had a look for the name on it and couldn't find it. I will check ebay. So does that mean you are effectively using the DAC in the Cambridge ? If so you would need to check if it can handle DSD via the digital inputs. I will get back shortly with the name of the wee black box.
@@jimfarrell4635 Jim, the OPPO is connected to the Devialet, but only plays CD not SACD. How do I get SACD to the Devialet? Neither the Devialet nor Cambridge have HDMI, only Toslink and Coaxial. Regards from Perth, Derek
Thank you for Part 2. I compared a Marantz CD 42 via koax-digital Out to a modern Audiolab6000cdt (also via coax). I connect both to an Audiolab6000A (intern DAC). They sound very similar. The more i hear Musik (and not compare) the more i like the the Marantz CD 42 …it is a little more detailed in the upper Midrange - this gets more and more important because this makes the Music more Driven by the Rhythm.
Thanks Peter. Interesting observation
The analog output stage is bypassed when using coax out. The output stage is where most of any additional sonic characteristics come from. I have repaired 6000cdt and consider them mediocre in terms of circuit design and parts quality. Also, Marantz CDP's have an amazing ability to oulast most others ... Denon and Marantz just seem to care about their customers more.
Yeah, well comparing the oscilloscope capture from the SPDIF interface says otherwise. Control for dac and there will be no difference
@@aarocka11 what means ‚control for DAC‘? What is to do?
Would be interesting to compare the 2 same transports with a higher quality external dac and more expensive amplifier and suitable speakers.
Thanks for this great series.
I just added the Topping E50 DAC to my headphone stack ..being fed by my decades old Denon 3520 cd 💿 player …and you’re absolutely correct .
If the mechanical composure in working order and all the ins and outs are correctly functioning…an outboard DAC is an excellent way to update and upgrade the sound🎉
Thanks once again.
You’re very welcome Carmine
@@PearlAcoustics I look forward to the 3rd video in this series.
Thank you 🍕👍
If you believe that any modern DAC (including this E50 that you mention and i have never heard of) could beat the DENON sound, especially 3520 or 3560......man, you are deeply wrong. I have DENON 2560GL and it still sounds better than the newest giga, mega, hyper, super-duper, ultra advanced Saber ESS ES9026PRO which is in Technics SL-G700 M2. The only reason that it sometimes loses in terms of punch, bass and dynamics in some demanding Metallica tracks is that there is not a single electrolyte capacitor alive into the device. Neither in power supply section nor in audio circuit. Simply their lifespan is over. But i remember it when it was new....it was not a DENON, it was real sound DEMON. So go have your capacitors replaced and forget about all the modern stuff. 😉👍
@@nickolaymiltenov interesting 🤔
@@carminedesanto6746 .....but true. Wait for my comment in general discussion where i will explain in details my point of view.
Brilliant review
Thanks Ricky!
I recently used my old Audiolab 8200CD as transport into my Moon DAC. Just like I bought a new CD player. Don't need a new one anymore. Very interesting video.
Thanks Alain!
So is it therefore a myth that the laser itself has a shelf life and therefore deteriorates over time?
it will either work, or it wont :o) they do wear out tho, the old Philips swing arm mechs are the best and longest lasting I have encountered
Hi Henk, as the other person said. They do fail in time, but early Philips products are rather robust
As a great CD enthusiast with a very large collection, I am loving this! Very well done, informative and entertaining. I have six CD player (Naim, Rega, Musical Fidelity, Rotel, Sony, Parasound) and a Denafrips Pontus II dac, that has been a really wonderful surprise on soind quality. I am really curious on what would be the outcome if could add one of this recent R2R dacs to that comparison. My Parasound bcd2000 transport and dac1000hd dac combo mentioned above, is more than 20 years old and still is a reference. In my opinion, CD reproduction has been totally satisfying since the late 90’s... at a cost of course. I can’t wait for part 3...and 4 :)
I am so glad you are enjoying our videos. I enjoy making them too, so it’s a win, win. I wonder which player you would keep, if you could only have 1? 😉
You should see your doctor!
amazing series!! 🙌
Thank you 🙏
Thank you for your comparisons and explanations which are very clear.
You are very welcome! Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts
I’m even more curious to see how a Sony PS1 would compare now!
😉
Ah but it's a specific version of the PS1 that's got a reputation... the one with Philips TDA1541 DAC.
That’s my conclusion as well. I’m able to a/b/c test my pioneer elite dvd/sacd/cd player because it has rca analog outs, a coax digital and an optical digital out. Tested the internal player’s dac, a budget external dac (SMSL SU-1) and my pioneer receiver dac (burr brown dac). The player’s internal dac sounded best (punchier, livelier, cleaner) vs the two digital out options. I suspect it’s because the SACD playback capability demanded a better/more expensive dac.
Thanks for your contribution to the topic
Branded Interconnects? That's a whole other 3 part series 🙂
I have to laugh when I hear claims that expensive digital interconnects sound better than cheap ones.
😀
@@nehocm123 Connectors & materials may be better but I doubt whether many if any could identify accurately & repeatably which was the more expensive in a blind test tbh
I've been listening to a vintage marantz SACD for three years. It sounds great. All of a sudden it started scratching my CD'S. I replaced it with a Phillips CDI player made for gaming that I puchased new in the mid 80'S. It still works perfectly and only has analog outputs, so I'm using the build in DAC. I really can't hear any difference in the sound quality from the marantz. I've been shopping around for a new transport, but I'm sure I need one.
Interesting. Thanks for your comment
In my experience you can't do a fair comparison between two products by switching between them as the song is playing. It would be the same as comparing picture quality from different cameras taken from a moving train. None of the pictures will be of the place in the landscape. It would be very difficult to tell them appart because you are basically comparing apples and oranges
Hi, I get your point. Obviously, in these comparison tests we were very flexible. Allowing the listener to listen to the whole track or sequences of it. I know it’s not perfect, but it was an honest attempt.
What Harley did is the proper way of doing a blind test to assess the sound and that is due to the phenomenon called echoic memory. This particular sensory store is capable of storing large amounts of auditory information that is only retained for a short period of time (3-4 seconds). This echoic sound resonates in the mind and is replayed for this brief amount of time shortly after being heard. If you pause for more than that time your perception is not based on hearing any more.
@@emilspec1227 I don't agree. I my view you can't compare two different elements of a song to each other. I agree more with Harley about his point of letting the listener listen to the whole song on each unit
@@jwester7009 it certainly helps if the two examples are as similar as possible aa another enemy of sound tests is diferent volume of samples but Harley did mention that he did start all of the songs at the same time or as close as possible.
ABSOLUTE RIGHT Mr. Webster ! ................The reason is that brainwaves decoding sound continue for seconds after switchind between components , so A/B testing is false ...........it was even demonstrated that a faulty amplifier passed unnoticed due to this...........one must hold a pause between comparing to let the brain reset !
John Broskie brought this to my attention years ago......since I only look for those systems and or components that connect me to the music without listening fatigue .......not hifi performance and audiophile analyzing , in real life when going to a concert I listen to music and I do not analyze the music as do audiophiles .