• 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!

Audiolab 6000CDT, bright sounding, burn in time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 77844
  • Start date Start date
Understood, so why do folks spend the big bucks on say an Audio Note transport? Or why does the Audiolab 9000CDT (at nearly 3x the price) exist? It can't all be "snake oil" surely?
Oh yes it can!!!!!

I'm going to state that I don't think Audio Note make much if any 'High Fidelity' equipment in the purest sense of the term today. Look at DCs, which, I gather, makes hugely expensive 'answers' to basically non-existent 'problems' yet high end dealers love it and buy into the magic on offer :D

If you want some subjective 'fun' in terms of digital replay, Schiit Yggy owners seem to enjoy what this often characterful (depending on version) dac does. Everything there is 'listened to' and I doubt the terms 'lean toned hardness' feature sonically in *anything* that this brand have ever made frankly :)
 
The concept that I'm going into the listening biased has merit, but not in this instance, the sound is indeed sharp and bright

Perceptive bias has nothing to to with you conscious prejudices, preconceptions etc. They are down to the way our unconscious brain pre-processes the raw signals coming from our sense organs. They can literally change what we see, or hear to help the conscious brain make sense of it's environment.

Here is an example - not the same bias as happens when listening to audio gear - this is speech related. But illustrates how it can happen, and that even when you know your brain is fooling you - you can't stop it happening.

 
Understood, so why do folks spend the big bucks on say an Audio Note transport? Or why does the Audiolab 9000CDT (at nearly 3x the price) exist? It can't all be "snake oil" surely?

Why did you? Because you have been convinced by the audiophile industry, press, and other audiophiles that it will sound better.

Just because people think something is true doesn't make it true.
 
Anyway, I'm not arguing these points, just volleying them out for clarification/discussion.

More on perceptive biases:
**********************************

Trouble is - one of the aspects of being human is having a brain that acts as a prediction machine. All those optical illusions you’ve seen, or the auditory illusions you've heard : They're the result of your brain making stuff up from imperfect senses bringing in imperfect information.

See that 3D world all around you as you look around? That perception exists only in your brain. It is built from the ground up based on two tiny blurry and with a blind spot right in the middle images projected onto your retina. I think it is almost miraculous how the brain manages to create that perception for you.

Now without moving your head, picture the stuff that is behind you. You can actually build that into your perception of the world even when not looking at it. It is not coming from any of your senses - it is simply a prediction from your brain based on what you've seen in the past.

Ever been walking down a path in woodland and seen a person up ahead that turns into (e.g.) a tree stump when you get closer - that's your brain predicting.

Ever heard someone say something, and then they deny they've even opened their mouth - brain prediction.

This is happening all the time. Our brain is continuously making pretty good predictions based on imperfect information - we couldn't function if it didn't. Sometimes though it gets the predictions wrong. And it is multi-sensory. It can alter sound based on what you see, or change what you see based on what you hear. Or how we feel, or what we've imbibed, or how comfortable we are, or if we are in unfamiliar surroundings.

It is well known that we will hear differences between audio devices even when there is no difference in the sound reaching our ears. We've all experienced it. In fact we all experience it all the time. Ever sat down to listen to music to find your system doesn't impress you the way it normally does - or on this day it suddenly sounds sublime. The system hasn't changed, you have : your perceptions have.

Your subjective listening can be evidence, but it has to be controlled (eg accurately level matched) and blind (so that you don't know what device is playing), and you have to be able to consistently detect the difference (at least 9 out of 10 times).

Without that level of rigour, then your subjective experience is nothing more than anecdote and tells us nothing about what actual physical differences there may (or may not) have been between your two CD transports (or DACs or Amps etc).
 
If not, why would anyone pay more than the cost of the 6000CDT? There are some VERY pricey transports out there, that I'm sure folks on this Forum own... why pay more? I can't be just for the loader/tray differences?
There are people who pay $50K+ for power cables that have even fewer (practically speaking, zero) plausible ways to affect the sound, so price and market fit don't necessarily tell us anything about sound quality. ;)
 
- I understand the argument that a CDT is not a complicated unit per se, so there won't be any difference from one unit to the other. But I suggest that it's more than just the laser/reader. There are caps etc that must effect the tone if designed in such way. If not, why would anyone pay more than the cost of the 6000CDT? There are some VERY pricey transports out there, that I'm sure folks on this Forum own... why pay more? I can't be just for the loader/tray differences?
I had the 6000CDT for a few years then changed it for the TEAC VRDS701T about 5 times the price.

Sound quality was fine but the slot loading irritated me and I was not so keen on the aesthetics of the unit. Plus due to the layout of the controls I was often pressing 'eject' instead of 'Play'. So I decided to get something else. The TEAC was the cheapest transport I liked the looks of.

An indulgence, true, but I had the money so why not?

Obviously that's not typical and most will buy it on the grounds that it cost more so it must sound better. The audiophile rules are:

1) Different badge on the front means it must at least sound different
2) Higher price tag means probably sounds better.

Hi-fi industry marketing has conditioned us to believe these things since we were teenagers. The dealers too, which is why when they're telling you a load of old pony most of them actually beleive it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdW
Understood, so why do folks spend the big bucks on say an Audio Note transport? Or why does the Audiolab 9000CDT (at nearly 3x the price) exist? It can't all be "snake oil" surely?
Bragging rights. Conformation bias. The notion of "it costs more so it has to sound better".
 
Thanks all, I will say "The Emperor's New Clothes" is one of my favorite fables which dovetails with this conversation
One more thing- watch a good close-up magician. Your unconscious perceptual biases are what he or she manipulates, not just the cards or coins. It’s VERY convincing but of course you understand that the card did not transport through glass and the pennies did not turn into goldfish. :cool:
 
I had the 6000CDT for a few years then changed it for the TEAC VRDS701T about 5 times the price.

Sound quality was fine but the slot loading irritated me and I was not so keen on the aesthetics of the unit. Plus due to the layout of the controls I was often pressing 'eject' instead of 'Play'. So I decided to get something else. The TEAC was the cheapest transport I liked the looks of.

An indulgence, true, but I had the money so why not?

Obviously that's not typical and most will buy it on the grounds that it cost more so it must sound better. The audiophile rules are:

1) Different badge on the front means it must at least sound different
2) Higher price tag means probably sounds better.

Hi-fi industry marketing has conditioned us to believe these things since we were teenagers. The dealers too, which is why when they're telling you a load of old pony most of them actually beleive it.

Curious to hear if you heard a difference?
 
Perceptive bias has nothing to to with you conscious prejudices, preconceptions etc. They are down to the way our unconscious brain pre-processes the raw signals coming from our sense organs. They can literally change what we see, or hear to help the conscious brain make sense of it's environment.

Here is an example - not the same bias as happens when listening to audio gear - this is speech related. But illustrates how it can happen, and that even when you know your brain is fooling you - you can't stop it happening.


This was amazing thank you!
 
Well, just purchased a 6000CDT from my local audio shop and it does do a better job than my old Music Hall CD-25 as a transport. Maybe jitter or something about more data making it to my Schiit OG Modius, but there is more detail there and more layering to voices. I'm just going to chalk it up to my old player having some flaws in the filtering that was sending information to my DAC.

Confirmation for me that a transport can make a difference. Bits are bits only if they are all being transmitted, I suspect.
 
Confirmation for me that a transport can make a difference. Bits are bits only if they are all being transmitted, I suspect.
And amazingly, the lost bits somehow elude robust error correction in such an amazingly cosmically unlikely manner as to coherently change the sound. In the rest of the universe, lost bits cause a rather different effect.
 
Well, just purchased a 6000CDT from my local audio shop and it does do a better job than my old Music Hall CD-25 as a transport. Maybe jitter or something about more data making it to my Schiit OG Modius, but there is more detail there and more layering to voices. I'm just going to chalk it up to my old player having some flaws in the filtering that was sending information to my DAC.

Confirmation for me that a transport can make a difference. Bits are bits only if they are all being transmitted, I suspect.

Did you read any of the posts in this thread before yours? They explain quite well why you might think it somehow sounds better. Hint: It's not due to "jitter or something about more data making it to" the DAC.
 
Confirmation for me that a transport can make a difference. Bits are bits only if they are all being transmitted, I suspect.
If bits are getting lost or corrupted and the error correction cannot deal with it, the result is not subtle. Either the sound drops out entirely or you get some very audible pops, clicks, or other strange noises. Much the same way that errors in digital video doesn't result in subtle shifts in the shade of a purple or losing a subtle expression on an actor's face. The image breaks up dramatically, skips frames, or the video stream stops entirely.
 
Last edited:
I did read the thread. I do know how people on ASR view the question. Just relaying what I heard. I'll let you figure out why. I'm fairly sure it was not bias, as I was expecting it to sound just like the old player when I started it up... and it doesn't.
 
Bias doesn't just work in such a simple way. There are things going on in your brain that you are aware of, and things going on you are not aware of.

There are good reasons why so many people on here insist on proper controls (blinding, level matching, etc) in order to give any credibility to listening impressions.
 
Last edited:
this tread is an exercise in practiced stupidity. It is like talking on and on about the various commercial additives you can add to your fuel in a gasoline auto.
 
Well if you read this and many other threads regarding this subject you must have an iron plate before your head to still percist in the opinion that a cd transport makes an audible difference. IT DOES NOT.
Do a DBT.8 out of 10 and then come back.
 
Curious to hear if you heard a difference?
Sorry for late reply, I missed this.

Yes, initially I did. It was subtle and I did not think anything of it since it's normal to perceive at least some difference even if there is none in reality.

About a year later someone wanted to buy the Audiolab off me so I had to check it was working. I again compared the players, back to back. That time there was no difference I could discern.
 
Back
Top Bottom