CD transport advice

[alin_im]

Hi all,

I am currently in the market for a CD transport (around 500-600 EUR, willing to wait for Black Friday in EU). One other consideration is that I would like to match my aesthetically current setup (I know it is a superficial aspect, but for me I think it would tingle my OCD). I do not need a DAC and I would prefer to be able to play mp3 / WMA files using a CD-R type medium (not sure if this should be a deal breaker as I can use a USB stick or network streaming for those files). I am looking for a good sound stage and best price to performance option.

I am currently considering the following models:

• Cambridge Audio AX35 (400EUR) (I am not sure if this is the same grey as the CXC lunar grey... please if you have this setup let me know)
• Cambridge Audio CXCv2 (400EUR - special price) (best match aesthetically, but I read some reviews that it might not be worth it and AX35 would be a better solution)
• Rotel CD-11 Tribute (360EUR) (heard a lot of good things about Rotel Tribute range, but I am not sure if Ken Ishiwata was involved into the the Analogue only in which case it does not matter for me as I am only using the digital side).
• Panasonic DP-UB820 (480EUR) (most sensible option when it comes to versatility of the device as I can use it with UHD bluerays. not a must have as I am using my PS5 to play Bluerays and I onl have about 10-20 movies anyways)

I am not considering Marantz as they are too aesthetically different from my current setup and I do not consider used equipment as I would like warranty and not to think about find replacement parts for it.

In my country the new album records are 4 times the price compared to CDs. I know about the old analogue vs digital debate or the dynamic range comparison between the 2 formats, but I observed that for albums I love, I am willing to spend 40-50 EUR for the vinyl version, while for the albums from where I like 2-3 songs, I would much prefer a CDs which are about 10-15 EUR. I am a sucker for physical media, but I am not sure if it is worth going into CDs in 2024... Any help with this dilemma would be much apricated. I previously had records from my dad, but I currently do not own CDs.

My current setup is:

• Amp&Speakers: Cambridge Audio CXA81 (Lunar Grey) & KEF LS50 Meta (White).
• Phono Amp & Record player: Cambridge Audio Alva Duo (Lunar Grey) & stock Audio Technica LP5X
• Network Streamer: Bluesound Node (White)

EDIT:
I had a quick look at the specs of my equipment.
CXA81 has a ES9016K2M DAC
Bluesound Node has a ES9039Q2M DAC (better DAC)

For best performance I will need to connect the CD transport to the Bluesound Node DAC and then use CXA81 stictly as an amp. That is fine, the only thing I need to consider is that the CD transport needs to have optical output because bluesound node has no Coax in.

By the looks of it it is between CA CXC and Panasonic DP-UB820.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Welcome to ASR.

Nearly any CD player/tranport will have audibly transparent sound quality. Any of those you list will. So you are thinking correctly to purchase it based upon appearance, features you desire, and maybe a nod to build quality.

Despite reviews you read, jitter/timing is not a problem. Nearly none (probably none unless they are malfunctioning) will effect sound quality at all when used as a transport. Zero audible difference. This might be hard to accept, but it is true. If you want to know more, some of us here can provide that information. This makes your decision much easier.

 

[Doodski]

I have extensive experience working with Panasonic as a warranty service tech and they have to my experience the best service and parts availability. For example if there is a issue with the transport skipping etc they replaced the entire transport sub-assembly. This includes the disc motor, rack and sled motor and the laser assembly too.

 

[Petevid]

I'd go for a Cambridge to match your CXA81. I'd flog the Bluesound to pay for the CD player and get a Wiim device.

 

[alin_im]

Welcome to ASR.

Nearly any CD player/tranport will have audibly transparent sound quality. Any of those you list will. So you are thinking correctly to purchase it based upon appearance, features you desire, and maybe a nod to build quality.

Despite reviews you read, jitter/timing is not a problem. Nearly none (probably none unless they are malfunctioning) will effect sound quality at all when used as a transport. Zero audible difference. This might be hard to accept, but it is true. If you want to know more, some of us here can provide that information.

Glad to be here. From what I have seen and please correct me if I am wrong the forum is driven towards technical people with a passion for audio, correct? Myself, I am an electronics/network engineer and I am a little bit hesitant when it comes to things like "you can hear the difference because of the jitter". On a day-to-day basis I am working with frequencies in the Ghz range where jitter is really important, but for when it comes to audio and we are talking about clocks of a few MHz that is where I am becoming sceptical.

So theoretically, the AXC35 is a better transporter than the CXC if only using the Coax outs on both? AXC35 can read MP3/WMA formats while CXC is strictly CD-DA format. And to top it all off, the Panasonic beats all of them because it can play Bluerays?

I might need to go and have a listening test and decide, but I will be honest, I just might go with the one that looks the best with my setup. If AXC35 will colour match my CXA81, I will go with that, if not get the special price CXC and call it a day.

One last thing, if you were to have a preference between coax and optical which type of connection would you choose?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Glad to be here. From what I have seen and please correct me if I am wrong the forum is driven towards technical people with a passion for audio, correct? Myself, I am an electronics/network engineer and I am a little bit hesitant when it comes to things like "you can hear the difference because of the jitter". On a day-to-day basis I am working with frequencies in the Ghz range where jitter is really important, but for when it comes to audio and we are talking about clocks of a few MHz that is where I am becoming sceptical.

So theoretically, the AXC35 is a better transporter than the CXC if only using the Coax outs on both? AXC35 can read MP3/WMA formats while CXC is strictly CD-DA format. And to top it all off, the Panasonic beats all of them because it can play Bluerays?

I might need to go and have a listening test and decide, but I will be honest, I just might go with the one that looks the best with my setup. If AXC35 will colour match my CXA81, I will go with that, if not get the special price CXC and call it a day.

One last thing, if you were to have a preference between coax and optical which type of connection would you choose?

See the go and have a listen approach is no good. I know it doesn't seem that way, but it doesn't work. Our minds in this situation tend to mislead us. We'll hear a difference for many reasons when there is actually no difference in the signals. A transport has a job of reading digital information and sending it out unchanged. It will do this. Timing is contained in the output of a transport and while there are tiny and measurable differences those differences are far too small (by like a couple of orders of magnitude) for us to hear it.

The one possibly worthwhile difference in Toslink and Coax is Toslink prevents any possible ground-loops between the two devices. Usually either is just fine. Toslink usually is limited to 96 khz sample rates if that matters to you.

 

[rank]

I had problems with Panasonic (of course when the warranty was expired). Since then, goodbye. I use a Teac VRDS 10 and an old Micromega Drive 3, I mention them because it seems to me to be an outdated idea, player + converter like Wadia (last century). If it is only used for reading, a Cambridge can do the trick but a Rotel Ken Ishiwata at this price should be much more solid.

 

[rank]

See the go and have a listen approach is no good. I know it doesn't seem that way, but it doesn't work. Our minds in this situation tend to mislead us. We'll hear a difference for many reasons when there is actually no difference in the signals. A transport has a job of reading digital information and sending it out unchanged. It will do this. Timing is contained in the output of a transport and while there are tiny and measurable differences those differences are far too small (by like a couple of orders of magnitude) for us to hear it.

The one possibly worthwhile difference in Toslink and Coax is Toslink prevents any possible ground-loops between the two devices. Usually either is just fine. Toslink usually is limited to 96 khz sample rates if that matters to you.

Blind listening shows the opposite.
The one of the speakers (all types and prices) is also edifying...

 

[alin_im]

The one possibly worthwhile difference in Toslink and Coax is Toslink prevents any possible ground-loops between the two devices. Usually either is just fine. Toslink usually is limited to 96 khz sample rates if that matters to you.

In the CD transporter context you are limited to 44.1kHz anyway so none of the connections will be a bottleneck.

 

[Doodski]

Blind listening shows the opposite.

Have you been blind listen testing using a switchbox for instant comparison?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Blind listening shows the opposite.
The one of the speakers (all types and prices) is also edifying...

Please explain?

The 1st sentence needs expanding as to what you are referring as it seems it is probably in error in the context of transports.

The 2nd sentence is incomplete and is not really comprehensible as to what you are saying.

 

[rank]

Have you been blind listen testing using a switchbox for instant comparison?

Yes of course, to equalize the sound levels, although it is not always necessary, but purists do it like that.
Between electronics, it is difficult to hear a difference, sources or amps, there are some for vinyl on the other hand. Often not huge, and the most expensive is not necessarily, or even never, the best. Then it would be necessary to quantify sound quality. Is it "better" with THIS cartridge/tonearm/turntable ? But it has already been done in the last century. And recently a test on Tracking angle demonstrated that a SAT performed like another costing "only" $3000 (which is already a sum for many, & all that for vinyl).
I humbly admit and I am not the only one, to have lived with frankly not great speakers (and worse basic DIY!) and to have appreciated them beyond reason. While the measurements taken afterwards were scary.

 

[restorer-john]

I would go for a machine that offers the fastest response, quickest track to track times and proven ability to track difficult, damaged and out of spec CDs.

Sadly, very few reviewers are equipped to do those tests these days.

 

[rank]

Please explain?

The 1st sentence needs expanding as to what you are referring as it seems it is probably in error in the context of transports.

The 2nd sentence is incomplete and is not really comprehensible as to what you are saying.

https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/a...usion.htm

 

[DVDdoug]

I never heard anything "wrong" with my 1st CD player from about 40-years ago. (I haven't used it for a couple of years, so I should try it to see if it still works. ) My inexpensive Blu-Ray player also plays CDs "just fine" (and I think discs with MP3s) but it doesn't have a front panel display (you have to turn-on the TV to see the track number) and it doesn't have a DAC.... No analog outputs.

I am looking for a good sound stage

Electronics don't affect soundstage unless something is terribly wrong. Soundstage depends on the recording, to some extent you speakers and room acoustics, and since it's an illusion with the sound really coming from a pair of speakers, your brain is involved.

Floyd Toole says:

The important localization and soundstage information is the responsibility of the recording engineer, not the loudspeaker.

I know about the old analogue vs digital debate or the dynamic range comparison between the 2 formats,

What is it that you "know"?

You know from listening that the analog format is worse because the dynamic range on the quiet-end is limited by noise which is most audible during quiet passages, during fade-outs, and between tracks. And sometimes a louder click or pop is audible in the middle of a song. With CDs there is pure digital silence between tracks. Any audible noise on a CD is from the acoustic/analog recording/production process, or from the analog electronics in your playback system. As a format, CD is technically superior in every way.

Sometimes the recording will be mastered differently so a record might have more program dynamic range (i.e. "musical dynamic contrast") than the CD. Older records that were made before modern digital (dynamic) compression may have more dynamic contrast than a re-mastered and loudness-war over-compressed CD. BUT, often records and CDs (and MP3s) are made from the same master, or often some additional processing is applied to the vinyl master. But the record cutting and playback makes it measure more dynamic without sounding more dynamic. This has fooled lots of people doing "DR" measurements!

Something similar often happens when you make an MP3. MP3 is lossy compression (file compression, unrelated to dynamic compression). The wave shape is changed and some peaks end-up higher and some end-up lower, and the new higher peaks can make the dynamic range measure higher without affecting the sound of the dynamics. The peaks are too short in duration to perceive the loudness (and there are some other reasons it's not 'louder"). MP3 does actually have more dynamic range capability than CD but of course in other ways it's worse and both generally have enough dynamic range for human hearing.

 

[antcollinet]

Other:

Any old branded CD player on ebay with digital out. Plug into any modern Dac. Audibly as perfect as any new device.

Plus this:

I would go for a machine that offers the fastest response, quickest track to track times and proven ability to track difficult, damaged and out of spec CDs.

Sadly, very few reviewers are equipped to do those tests these days.

 

[amper42]

Denon DCD-900NE

DENON DCD-900NE CD Player with Advanced AL32 Processing Plus

Denon Factory Refurbished

www.accessories4less.com

See the review on ASR

Denon DCD-900NE (CD Player)

Hello Everyone, This is a review and detailed measurements of the Denon DCD-900NE stereo player and transport. I previously reviewed the Marantz CD6007 which is in the same category. So much so that packaging is identical, as well as the remote control, as well as the user guide. All look to...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Ropeburn]

"Transports" are a waste of money insofar as a simple, properly done one-time ripping process offers the superior performance through a sufficiently good DAC forever, independently from the original CD which is nothing but a digital data carrier and will degenerate over time. Unlike the file you ripped from it.

 

[Chrispy]

Can't imagine wanting only a cd transport as I want ability to play all my optical discs. For cds I'd just rip them and play them another way after that. Aesthetics of an optical disc player, meh.

 

[Mikig]

Smsl PL200. Top loading, can be used as a CD player, Dac, and Bluetooth.