T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
96.1 | Better sound, how much? | WARBLY::MEAKINS | Clive Meakins | Thu Jun 22 1989 13:27 | 16 |
| I haven't heard any of the machines you mention, I can only go on
what the press say. The CD65IISE seems to be excellent value, is
the Yamaha a transport only?
Returning to what the press say... I too have a Phillips CD104B,
though my works ok at the moment. Last night a friend brought round
his Phillips CD 371 - a bottom of the range 16 x 4 machine. We
really could hear no difference between these two bottom of the
range machines (my 104 has a decent Van den Hul cable). I had almost
conned myself into thinking that I should upgrade my CD as the
technology it uses is old that the sound must be bad! It just goes
to show, don't read the press, use your ears.
Sometime my 104 will no doubt give out, if I want to improve on
it's sound significantly, how much do I need to spend? I don't
want to send several hundred pounds extra for a samll improvement.
|
96.2 | Try this beauty... | URIAH::PETTEFAR | | Tue Jul 11 1989 10:25 | 9 |
| I can recommend the Philips 473, it is a modern machine with great
features such as remote volume control, headphone socket with level
control, favourite track selection etc. Etc.
I bought mine for �199.95 from a Philips Staff Shop but I think
they go for about �250 in a crap shop (Dixons/Laskys/Comets etc.)
Nick.
|
96.3 | CD vs Vinyl | VANISH::BARRON | Snoopy Vs Red_Barron | Thu Jul 13 1989 12:06 | 34 |
| Re: 96.2
> I can recommend the Philips 473, it is a modern machine with great
> features such as remote volume control, headphone socket with level
> control, favourite track selection etc. Etc.
>
> I bought mine for �199.95 from a Philips Staff Shop but I think
> they go for about �250 in a crap shop (Dixons/Laskys/Comets etc.)
I can agree with the above recommendation. I have purchased the Philips 373
which is exactly the same as the 473 except its Midi size.
I purchase mine at Sewards in Yateley and paid �159.95 + �25.00 for an extra
two year warrenty. It's a great performer for the money.
Having auditioned CD Vs Vinyl at Farnborough HI-FI Queensmead I still felt
that I was more involved with the songs,music when played through a Linn
Sondek/Itok/Asak setup than when listening via Marantz 65IIISE?/Denon �300 CD.
The amplification was the same Exposure amp Roksan speakers. The guy then
played the sources through a ARCam Alpha and my KEF Coda III's and the
differance was none as far as I was concerned.
The first demo may be unfair to the CD but the guy in the shop said these CD
players represented the best value for money and spending any more was a
doubtful investment as the CD media was the limitation. The media companys will
have produce a better product first before your 18bit 8x oversampling CD's
will produce a better sound.
I wanted a CD, but having listened to a good vinyl setup I could'nt justify
spend twice the amount on one.
Any comments,thoughts,agreements/disagreements?
Dave.
|
96.4 | More Choices | KERNEL::AUSTIN | | Thu Jul 13 1989 16:35 | 38 |
| Before I plunged into buying a new player a friend advised me to
get Covent Garden Records quote a repair on my old 104b. ( The original
estimates I had recieved after describing the problem, said that
the laser transport was the problem and would cost 100 - 120 pounds.
Which persuaded me to think about about buying new)
I described the fault to the engineer at C.G. Records and he said
it sounded like a dry joint and would cost about 35 pounds. I was
then in 2 minds as to what to do. I decided to take my player in
to C.G.Records and get it repaired. I discussed the problem more
fully then. Apparently the main bord in the 104 is backed with a
copper sheet and when the system warms up the board flexes like
a bi-metal strip. So you can imagine what happens with each use
of the player unless you leave it switched on. This can eventually
cause breaks in the circuit to occur on the board. ( He said "I always
advise 104 owners to leave their players powered on to prevent these
problems" ) He said the breaks could be bypassed by wire links. I then
asked about the possibility of upgrading the player to improve its
sound quality. He said that there are a few component changes that
could be made but even then the standard of sound could be surpassed
by a 200 pound player.
If it had been a 16 x 4 Philips player then he could supply and
fit an upgrade kits costing between 120 and 250 pounds. The more
expensive upgrade kit includes component changes and a new power
supply unit. He said that players costing 250 pounds fitted with
his 250 pound upgrade kit had been favourably reviewed against players
costing twice the total cost.
He has modified and non-modified machines he can demonstrate at
C.G.Records so I have another option to let my ears consider !
Or perhaps keep my existing player and spend the rest of the money
on more CDs.
Some careful thinking is required !
Simon A
|
96.5 | cd vs Vinyl ?? | KERNEL::AUSTIN | | Fri Jul 14 1989 15:06 | 26 |
| Re 96.2 CD vs Vinyl
I have never listened to a really good record playing system such
as the Linn setup you mentioned. When I first purchased arecord
playing system budget did not allow me to consider much above 80
to 90 pounds so the DUAL 505 filled that gap at that time (1983).
Although I have bought quite a few records I don't think I would
consider spending a large amount on a better record playing system
as the trend with classical music recordings is going strongly
to CD only. I think Grammophone reported some time ago that DG are no
longer releasing any new recordings on LP, so I would imagine that
this will gradually spread across the other main classical labels.
An example the reasoning behind this was given, a new recording
of Pictures at an Exhibition sold a few hundred LPs and over 10,000
CDs.
Bearing this in mind I think my money might be better spent on a
better CD player and discs ,rather than trying to achieve a really
good sound from my existing LPs.
Just some thoughts, and my reasons, but if you buy a lot of LPs
still then may you could justify it.
Simon A
|
96.6 | Marantz recommendation | TRAAL::MARTIN | | Mon Aug 07 1989 16:20 | 13 |
| I have recently bought a Marantz CD65IISE and am pleased with
it. The reviews rate it highly for sound quality, it has little
in the way of of bells & whistles, however.
I repaced a four year old Yamaha player, & the sound is (not
surprisingly) much better.
The big problem these days is the relatively short life time of
CD players. It appears that the CD75IISE is to be replaced & the
Sony models seem to be upgraded every six months or so!
Chris
|
96.7 | marantz cd65 | SEDCAS::FSOR_ADMIN | | Wed Sep 06 1989 18:32 | 9 |
| I have had a cd104 cd473 and marantz cd65mk11se. I think the marantz
is miles above the rest. I had to wait 3 mths before I got the cd65
though.
I would suggest you go to a shop where you can do an AB test
on the CD players. I went to sevenoaks HIFI took some CDs with me
and compared 5 different players the Cd65 stood out a mile.
If you want remote control the CD65 has it.
wayne
|
96.8 | Different boxes, same sound? | VANISH::BROWNM | | Thu Sep 07 1989 10:17 | 10 |
| I have a lot of difficulty understanding how one CD player can sound any
different to another. I can see that you might select one on style or
functionality, as I did, but the electronics and transports come from only a
small number of original manufacturers and since the quality (in terms of
distortion, frequency response etc) is far, far better than the amp or
speakers, what is there to choose in terms of sound quality?
Maybe someone can explain this, or is it all just hype?
Mike.
|
96.9 | Oh, you mean perfect sound forever? | BAHTAT::SALLITT | Dave - @RKG & ICI, 0642432193 | Thu Sep 07 1989 12:24 | 19 |
| re .8...."since the quality (in terms of
distortion, frequency response etc) is far, far better than the amp or
speakers, what is there to choose in terms of sound quality?"
What basis do you have for this statement? Show me an amp or speaker
where the distortion gets worse as the signal gets lower, and I'll
believe you. Even Philips, who used to mislead Joe Public with comments
like the above, have conceded that present manifestations of CD replay
are inadequate.
Compare a low-fi CD player to a more upmarket one in a budget system
and you may not hear a difference. Compare them via even modest
mid-fi electronics and speakers and you'll realise how dreadful
the cheap CD player is; the fact is that there is more to CD replay
than just reading the bits and pumping them through a DAC, which
even hardened digiphiles will concede.
Dave
|
96.10 | Why? | VANISH::BROWNM | | Thu Sep 07 1989 13:58 | 0 |
96.11 | Well.... | VINO::SWARD | Tolerant to a Fault | Thu Sep 07 1989 15:52 | 14 |
|
A few quite obvious places will make a huge difference.
1. The powersupply.
2. Capacitors and resistors used
3. The analog section, opamps and filters
Most Hifi players have a lot more attention paid to the above than
the cheaper players.
So even if there is the same bitstream coming of the disk it
certainly not the same sound coming out of the player.
Peter
|
96.12 | Some reasons why..... | BAHTAT::SALLITT | Dave - @RKG & ICI, 0642432193 | Thu Sep 07 1989 16:03 | 54 |
| re last...
This may answer your question:-
Power supplies....
Inadequate or poorly designed (i.e. designed by accountants) power
supplies cause problems in several areas....
1. High frequency digital signals find their way into the analogue
circuitry via power supply rails,
2. If a player encounters uncorrectable errors, it tries to re-read,
causing the servo to work harder; power supplies with poor regulation
drop their output voltage sufficiently to cause interaction with
the DAC and the analogue circuits.
These effects are minimised in the more upmarket models by using
discrete supplies for servo, digital, and analogue circuitry. Even
then the physical proximity of components means that rfi from the
digital circuits can couple to the analogue side; some manufacturers
try to get around this with extensive screening, or putting the
DAC in a seperate box with its own supplies.
Flimsy chassis cause problems because acoustic feedback can cause
the transport to vibrate, in turn causing read errors. If these
errors are uncorrectable, we're back to 1. above.
The D-to-A process itself is full of problems; the original 14-bit
converters only worked to about 12-bit resolution, due to the grotty
samples mass manufacture required to make a profit. The later 16-bit
machines are just using a 16-bit DAC with two bits grounded in an
attempt to get near 14-bit resolution. 18 and 20 bit DACs are further
attempts to get true 14-bit performance without having to hand-pick
every DAC chip. Some manufacturers are more rigorous than others,
and usually the more upmarket you go, the more selective is the
manufacturer.
Next, transistor radio grade analogue electronics (probably the
accountants at work again) complete the destruction before the
amplifier gets the signal.
The quality of output (no matter how you measure it) of any component
of a hifi system is at the mercy of its input - garbage in, garbage
out. The better an amplifier and speaker subsystem is, the more
it will reveal these defects. The better they get, the more it becomes
obvious that all CD players *do not* sound the same, in spite of
what you may read in "Which?".
Finally it's worth pointing out that there's more to good sound
than frequency response, distortion, signal-to-noise-ratio and dynamic
range. They're important, but they don't say it all.
Dave
|