Old CD's on New Hardware

[MarkS]

The Meridian was built off the same platform but is substantially upgraded.

The Meridian was much more expensive, but I'm not aware of any evidence that it could be distinguished from the base player in blind listening.

 

[boswell]

My partner gave me a Sony CDP C500M (5 CD changer) for my birthday mid to late 80's, sounded great then (so much better than vinyl, no hiss, crackle or pop) no syrup either. It still works perfectly and even sounds better as ears have finally burnt in. Keep CDs.
No digital out back then. The DAC in it just works well.

 

[Billy Budapest]

The Meridian was much more expensive, but I'm not aware of any evidence that it could be distinguished from the base player in blind listening.

Right. My only point is that although it used the Philips hardware as a base, it was not the same machine, unlike the Marantz and Magnavox which were. There might have been some other Philips rebrands too—a Grundig unit comes to mind.

 

[nerone]

My Grundig CD7500 player equivalent to the Philips CD303 sounds better than the latter despite being very similar

 

[Snarfie]

I'm trying to decide about keeping my old CD collection. I have about 200 CD's mostly from the 1990's and early 2000's. If I drive digital out of an older CD player (good in it's day) into a new, highly regarded DAC am I likely to see any improvement in sound? I have good hardware in the rest of the system. I listen to hi res streaming mostly with occasional records (not for the "sound" quality but because I like the whole experience).
Thanks in advance

One thing to note is most of these CD's were good recordings back in their day. A lot of classical.

I would suggest keep them. Older cd's are priceless because they contain transients that are lost due to time on analoge mastertapes.

Some insights from Roger Nichols who recorded most of Steely Dan records about transients that already disapear from analog mastertapes with in a few houres. So what about the quality of analog masters (guess the majority) that are already loosing transients with in a few hours and are now 2021used for remasters, MQA, DSD what have you. You are lucky if you have a Cd that is produced some years or sooner after recording which contain transients that are lost an never coming back. For convinience because using a dac i did rip all of my cd's.

Roger Nichols interview – Sound Design, production et conception audio

– What were the determinant factors.....? RN : Well, that goes back quite a way. I love listening to music. I think it was hereditary. You know, my grandfather was in the film and the music…

pieralessandri.com

 

[Billy Budapest]

Right. My only point is that although it used the Philips hardware as a base, it was not the same machine, unlike the Marantz and Magnavox which were. There might have been some other Philips rebrands too—a Grundig unit comes to mind.

The Bang & Olufsen CDX is similar superficially too, but I believe is based on the Philips CD-104 hardware.

 

[tmtomh]

Personally I'm a big fan of CDs, mainly because they are what I came of age with musically: Got my first CD player for my 16th birthday in early 1985, and summer/fall of that year was when the global production backlog started to ease and albums on CD became truly widely available in the U.S. without the huge time delays compared with LP and cassette pressings that had plagued the CD format in North American up until that time. I had been buying LPs since about 1982 when I was 13, but my mid-teens were when my musical taste really got cemented and at that time it was all CDs for me.

At any rate, I would say it's certainly possible that a new DAC could result in a small but noticeable difference in sound compared to an old CD player. However, I'd say the most likely causes of such a difference would be newer/different analogue output components or power supply/noise improvements.

The digital reconstruction filters will also likely be different, but I am hesitant to attribute any real difference to that, as I've only ever heard filter-related differences in sighted listening comparisons and I suspect they'd disappear if I took a blind test. (I did, however, once see a fascinating comparison online showing how "apodizing" filters favored by Bob Stuart/Meridian could in certain situations actually result in the disappearance of certain transients. It wasn't a "sound quality" thing - it was an A/B comparison where the transient simply wasn't there when the apodizing filter was used.)

@julian_hughes is indeed correct that the earliest Philips DACs were 14 bit units. However, even 14 bits gives a noise floor of just over 84dB without dither and something like 105dB with dither, which is going to be indistinguishable from 16-bit in most home listening situations. Moreover, my understanding is that some (all?) of those early units used two of the 14-bit chips together, in order to achieve 16-bit resolution.

To @qec I would say that since truly excellent outboard DACs are available today for very little money, why not try one and see if you hear a difference? I'm not in favor of high-dollar audiophile "musical chairs" with constant equipment swapping. But this is a hobby after all, and it's meant to be fun - if you can get a great DAC for $150 or less, why not give it a shot?

If nothing else, you'll be prompted to listen to a lot of your CD collection again, with a new level of focus, and that can be fun in and of itself.

 

[preload]

What about jitter performance? Wasn’t that supposed to be one of the big improvements over the decades?

 

[Pluto]

Deemphasis also uses a relay, so unless that circuit were malfunctioning I can't see where a substantial treble rolloff would be coming from.

I know it's a bit late but let's try to put this one to bed.

The use of de-emphasis is optional in the Red Book specification for the production of CD masters which, in those very early days, were invariably U-Matic video tapes produced using a Sony PCM 1610 unit which, in principle, was an A to D converter with a video output which carried an encoded version of the digital audio.

The core problem with early digital audio was, essentially, one of confusion as to whether the optional pre-emphasis was in use, or not. As I remember, there were two ways of flagging the pre-emphasis state. One, within the actual data stream and the other, in the table of contents (TOC) that, in the main, defined the position of each ‘song’ on the disc but could also carry some ancilliary metadata. The de-emphasis switching was too clever for its own good as it provided options for most of the disc to have EMPH disabled, except for some tracks or the possibility that most of the disc had EMPH enabled, except for those tracks that did not. In short, a silly mess far too confusing for its own good. And that's before we even consider the possibility that some players had the priority of EMPH flagged via data stream or via TOC, the wrong way round.

Two things come from this disaster that could nearly have been responsible for the nascent failure of the CD format. CD's early reputation for harshness almost certainly arose from players’ failure to enable de-emphasis when they should have and, contrariwise, issues of insufficient HF resulting from the inappropriate application of de-emphasis.

One cannot entirely blame players for this as, in the time-honoured manner, many of them were merely following orders; orders that were wrong owing to confusion and over-complexity. But the fact remains that there are many discs (possibly still out there) on which the emphasis flagging does not match the actual state of the audio. Fortunately it was realised, sufficiently early, that emphasis was an unnecessary affectation and the whole world would be better off were the facility simply not used…

 

[Mart68]

It's interesting to note that CD became the dominant music format not because hi-fi enthusiasts took to it but because the great mass of civilians did, once you could buy a midi-system or a portable unit with a CD player for a couple of day's wages.

Possibly because, as they are unencumbered by the neurosis of the typical audiophile, it simply sounded better to them.

 

[DanielT]

I'm trying to decide about keeping my old CD collection. I have about 200 CD's mostly from the 1990's and early 2000's. If I drive digital out of an older CD player (good in it's day) into a new, highly regarded DAC am I likely to see any improvement in sound? I have good hardware in the rest of the system. I listen to hi res streaming mostly with occasional records (not for the "sound" quality but because I like the whole experience).
Thanks in advance

One thing to note is most of these CD's were good recordings back in their day. A lot of classical.

Well, that's the question.

What is this? No golden ears!

Got an idea last week. Connected a Blu-ray, Sony BDP-S570, and a CD- player Marantz CD5001 to the pre amp. It has line selectors. Went to the local flea market and managed to find duplicates, CDs. Exactly the same CDs, the same recording on the discs. Same master. Enter with the discs in the...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Billy Budapest]

As an aside, the usage rights are tied to the physical media, so legally you have to keep these even after ripping.

You don’t have to keep them, you just cannot resell them, donate them, or gift them. You could throw them away or repurpose them into a non-musical use.

 

[DanielT]

Qec. Do this. Buy two identical CD players. You can get old CD players for practically no money at all. Make sure they have digital out. The same discs in both, so the same master no different versions. Into an amplifier with line selector. One with external modern DAC. The second CD player as it is. Really make sure that it is the same level of signal from them ( CD vs CD + external DAC) . Very important. Then you can switch back and forth.

After your test, you sell the CD players.

Edit:
Just because I was curious. Checked the used market. Pretty soon found two Yamaha CDX-710. Old player, but with digital out.

Signal to Noise Ratio: 106dB
Total harmonic distortion: 0.005%
That's enough.

I could buy both for around $ 50. Can I find then you can. If you feel like comparing.

 

[ThatM1key]

As an aside, the usage rights are tied to the physical media, so legally you have to keep these even after ripping.

I personally think you if you got a version of an album and/or a song that's not being made and sold by the publisher (for example, MFSL's Nirvana – Nevermind), then you should archive it.

 

[Kevbaz]

I went down a similar route, I have a large CD collection, many inherited for my dad.
I chose to keep my old Arcam CD player and take optical out to an RME DAC which allows me to apply EQ, crossfeed etc knowing the performance is as good as it can be, letting me focus on the headphones and EQ.
I could stream from Qobuz but why bother if you already have a good cd collection, good CD players are cheap now also, and buying CDs on amazon or in store is really cheap.

 

[Timcognito]

I could stream from Qobuz but why bother if you already have a good cd collection, good CD players are cheap now also, and buying CDs on amazon or in store is really cheap.

Yes but you can preview the new and new to you music on Qobuz before you buy and support the music/musicians you love. You can read about new music because there are hundreds of discovery resources on the internet and hear on internet radio. Your Dad's old stuff is probably a treasure trove of great stuff so get a NAS. I felt the same way acquiring LPs (600) and Cds (over 1000 on a music server) but once I got a server and Qobuz I listened to my old stuff there due to great sound and easy interface through Roon and the BluOS. With the fuss of LPs, cleaning and flipping every 20 minutes, I rarely play them, and space they take up, as with CDs. I keep everything I store and as you probably believe, there is pride and value in ownership.

 

[GXAlan]

Download Sony Music Center for PC and enable DSEE HX. It genuinely sounds different and may help older recorded content sound better. It’s FREE and survives ABX testing as being different. It’s not necessarily better for everything but I personally like it.

 

[krabapple]

Download Sony Music Center for PC and enable DSEE HX. It genuinely sounds different and may help older recorded content sound better. It’s FREE and survives ABX testing as being different. It’s not necessarily better for everything but I personally like it.

What Does DSEE HX AI / DSEE Ultimate / DSEE Extreme Do?

Without a DSP called DSEE HX AI, audio seems blended with collapsed soundstage. Basically smoother vocals and transient attack is what DSEE HX already had, whereas ‘height’ is by AI… You could try out these audio players with some headphones and mp3s. It should bring out details - restore...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Yuhasz01]

See Archimago’s Musings blog, dec 4, 2021 where he does detailed measurements for a couple of 80, 90 CD players

 

[Yuhasz01]

Saturday, 4 December 2021​

RETRO: Technics SL-P110 (1986) & Sony CDP-690 (1990) CD Players. Did early CD players sound bad?​

As we enter the last month of 2021, let's go back in time and consider the question: "Did early CD players sound any good?"