Conference hips::uk_audioo

    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.

    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                            

    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
    

	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

    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

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.

    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
    

    	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

    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