• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Accuphase DP-70 Review (CD Player)

Sound reproduction is the function of cd player and if you look for every metric in that area, SMSL Just eats the acvupahase.
At dangers as well, the usual is to go deaf or electrocute yourself if you get intimate with your gear.
SMSL ramps up with lockjaw as well.

What's audio without a little danger??? :facepalm:
 
Thanks for this beautifull review :cool:

Comparatively, we should be able to see if an SMSL PS200 will still work in 40 years and if this is not the case, if it is repairable...
... this Accuphase DP-70, just like a REVOX B-226S have this 'ability' :)

I will avoid talking about 'SQ' so as not to start a controversy but from a purely aesthetic and manufacturing quality point of view, my heart leans towards these last two readers rather than a modern disposable plastic device. ;)
I fail to see the point of using a mechanical device to convert digital data to analog. But I also have a $50 digital watch not a $10,000 Rolex.
 
Not a right comparison. In terms of sportiness the Ferrari still would ride like a Ferrari, which is it’s use case. Sound reproduction is the function of cd player and if you look for every metric in that area, SMSL Just eats the acvupahase. One must be an idiot to spend money on gear like Accuphase these days in a world where topping and SMSL rule.
With respect, I think you've missed the point here...

At my age now, I can look at an SMSL box (SU1 in my case) and it does the job I bought it for. A great CHEAP tool for the job and that's absolutely fine. My 1988 era Micro Seiki machine (based on the donor chassis of the Marantz CD94 and Philips CD960) is a solid old thing, with solid (I think rosewood) sides, substantial base and a thick top plate, is another from this period which inspires good vibes in owning and using it and it did have a great sound, although the SU1 has it beat in deciphering double-tracked vocals and flutter echo types of reverb.

cd-m2-h.jpg


DSCF1369.JPG


They just don't seem to make 'em like that any more and the confection above cost £2800 back in 1998...

This Accuphase is a gorgeous thing to behold. I did 'meet' one or two in my past times, but kind of took this engineering vibe for granted then as other makes approached it in solidity if not quite the elegance. To get that level of performance and sonics took a HUGE amount of love and care and the designers MUST be respected for that, even today when it's so much easier it seems!
 
Could be me remembering wrong but I am 99.9% sure that launch price of this CD player back then in 1987 was close to 10 000 dollars folks.
So yes it is a very good CD even by todays standards but if you adjust for inflation according to Google 10k in 1987 is like paying 28 500 dollars today for a bit of HIFI. It better be good !!!!!
 
With respect, I think you've missed the point here...

At my age now, I can look at an SMSL box (SU1 in my case) and it does the job I bought it for. A great CHEAP tool for the job and that's absolutely fine. My 1988 era Micro Seiki machine (based on the donor chassis of the Marantz CD94 and Philips CD960) is a solid old thing, with solid (I think rosewood) sides, substantial base and a thick top plate, is another from this period which inspires good vibes in owning and using it and it did have a great sound, although the SU1 has it beat in deciphering double-tracked vocals and flutter echo types of reverb.

View attachment 490708

View attachment 490707

They just don't seem to make 'em like that any more and the confection above cost £2800 back in 1998...

This Accuphase is a gorgeous thing to behold. I did 'meet' one or two in my past times, but kind of took this engineering vibe for granted then as other makes approached it in solidity if not quite the elegance. To get that level of performance and sonics took a HUGE amount of love and care and the designers MUST be respected for that, even today when it's so much easier it seems!
For me, its a sound machine, looks is not its function. For example I just like a smart watch than a Rolex which is ridiculously expensive for showing time the same 20 dolla smart watch can show. It not more accurate. I thought this forum was about sound, not show off. Agree the engineering was great for its age. But there is no same reason to buy this in 2025
 
At dangers as well, the usual is to go deaf or electrocute yourself if you get intimate with your gear.
SMSL ramps up with lockjaw as well.

What's audio without a little danger??? :facepalm:
I think this is inappropriate
 
For me, its a sound machine, looks is not its function. For example I just like a smart watch than a Rolex which is ridiculously expensive for showing time the same 20 dolla smart watch can show. It not more accurate. I thought this forum was about sound, not show off. Agree the engineering was great for its age. But there is no same reason to buy this in 2025
The hobby side of music reproduction can be a soulful and emotive thing too, you know. I couldn't care less what this forum is 'supposed' to be about and I celebrate the technical advances reviewed here, but sometimes, it doesn't hurt to emote about nice looking and feeling vintage gear with decent performance as well you know, especially a CD player like this one that is so well conceived AND designed and which still does the job really well. I think the vast majority here appreciate how far things have come on since this machine was brought to the high end market, in terms of simplification and ever-reducing costs.

Those able to find and afford a good working one of these, can use and enjoy it, knowing it's still doing the job to a still high standard.
 
A real diamond is not comparable to a synthetic diamond:
to make a 'comparable analogy' you can go to the opera in a prestigious hall with renowned artists or in an open air dump with amateurs...
... there is no possible comparison, we are not talking about the 'same universe' :rolleyes:

The Mayans, Aztecs, Incas or even the Egyptians built buildings which spanned centuries or even millennia later, in more modern eras, others were also built but no trace remains or they collapsed :confused:

PS: '...I fail to see the point of using a mechanical device to convert digital data to analog...'

You have to 'project' yourself into the conditions of the past (its time, the 80s, exactly décembre 1982, early March 1983 in France but the first turntable was sold in Japan on November 1, 1982) when PHILIPS* invented the CD:
not everyone had the possibility of having a personal computer (PC), so it was necessary to invent a new medium like magnetic tape with its known defects because we would have had to use vinyl records to write digital data on them but I'll let you imagine the diameter of such a disc to achieve this (LOL) :D

*PHILIPS invented the process, SONY 'imposed' the coding format (16 bits) and the duration (74 minutes).

NB: The invention of electricity was materialized by Coulomb's law (1785), allowing Volta to create the first electric battery (1800)** then Thomas Edison to light factories and homes (1879)***, this allowed various developments known since but we cannot say that what was the beginning is not remarkable. ;)

**although there is the 'Baghdad Electric Battery' dating from the 3rd century BC. AD but whose usefulness is controversial by archaeologists...

***Engineer Nikola Tesla found himself in competition with industrialist Thomas Edison in the late 19th century.
The first praised the merits of alternating current, the second wanted to defend its monopoly with direct current.
Edison, however, knew that Tesla's invention represented the future and threatened his monopoly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We offer you a night in a hotel in Paris:

Do you choose the 'premiere Classe' Porte d'Italie hotel or the 'Georges V' at the Champs Elysees?

Knowing that both are used for sleeping and that the first is much more recent than the second...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What we are looking for when listening is a moment, a sensation, a pleasure: no matter the technological means to achieve this, what matters most will be your own feeling.
 
Last edited:
I deeply and sincerely thank you, as always, for your great efforts on sharing these amazing information and measurements on Accuphase DP-70.

As a Japanese citizen, as well as a lover of Accuphase gears (I still use E-460), I am very happy and proud of the "Japan Quality" even back to around 1985, although I will not be purchasing CD player/transport anymore...

I shall be keeping my treasure DENON DCD-3500RG in its perfect condition (ref. here #8 and #21 on your wonderful thread on DCD-3560) which I seldom power-on nowadays, though.
 
Last edited:
I fail to see the point of using a mechanical device to convert digital data to analog. But I also have a $50 digital watch not a $10,000 Rolex.
That explains it all..;)
 
Could be me remembering wrong but I am 99.9% sure that launch price of this CD player back then in 1987 was close to 10 000 dollars folks.
So yes it is a very good CD even by todays standards but if you adjust for inflation according to Google 10k in 1987 is like paying 28 500 dollars today for a bit of HIFI. It better be good !!!!!
The Accuphase DP-70 was apparently 3 times the price of the Sony CDP-707ESD which was at $1800, both info from HiFi-Wiki. So with 38 years of inflation, it means $15k today :eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom