• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

CD52mk2 Special Edition measurements

horias2000

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
198
Likes
292
Location
Cluj-Napoca, Romania
This is an update of the initial measurements I did here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...special-edition-cd-player.57160/#post-2089935

I wanted to make a new post instead of continuing the one from the link as it will help to see the actual performance as the initial measurements were flawed. So if you want to see how the device looks on the outside and inside, visit the thread from the link above.

My measurement setup is made out of an E1DA Cosmos ADC (grade A) and a Cosmos Scaler. Both devices are powered from battery packs (each device has its own pack). The CD player is connected to the Scaler via a single ended cable. For test signals, I used @NTTY 's test CD.

Let's start with the 1kHz test tone:

CD52_1kHz_0dB_R.jpg


This looks really good for such an old device. Having a SINAD of 91.4 dB is great considering the results @NTTY got on his CD players.
Next is the 1kHz test tone with extended frequency, up to 48kHz

CD52_1kHz_0dB_R_extended.jpg


Now 1 kHz test tone but at -3dB FS

CD52_1kHz_-3dB_R.jpg


We naturally see a decrease in SINAD but it's still pretty good.

Multi tone:


CD52_Multi_0dB_R.jpg

This looks very clean!

Next we'll have a look at the frequency response:
CD52_FR.jpg


Nice and flat in the audio band

Net we'll have a look at the filtering performed by the device (this is a test that @NTTY does and I thought it's nice to include it as well):

CD52mk2_SE_filter.jpg


Jitter:

CD52_J_test.jpg

This doesn't look too clean but comparing to what @NTTY is getting on his players, I think this is good as this is the limitation of the test CD.

Next I looked at two-tones signals to see IMD:

CD52mk2_SE_41_7993.jpg


CD67_18k_20k.jpg

Again, very good results.

Now a look at inter-samples as per @NTTY did (unfortunately I forgot to increase the sampling frequency to 192kHz so it only goes up to 48 kHz):

CD52_ISO_5512.jpg


CD52_ISO_7350.jpg


CD52_ISO_11025.jpg


we have -34dB at 5512Hz, -27.6dB at 7350Hz and -16.2dB at 11025Hz

And lastly, the THD vs frequency plot:

CD52mk2_SE_thd_vs_freq.jpg


Conclusion:

I'm happy to say that the CD52mk2 Special Edition is a good device. I enjoyed listening to it for some years now and I was hoping it will not disappoint on measurements. It didn't. Most of the time I listen to it through my SU-9n DAC but from time to time, I switch to its analog output, just to listen to the 1bit DAC that's inside.

THD is at -97dB so it's clear that the DAC and the analog circuitry works really well. Noise isn't bad at all for a consumer device.
 

Attachments

  • CD52_J_test.jpg
    CD52_J_test.jpg
    460.9 KB · Views: 20
  • CD52mk2_SE_thd_vs_freq.jpg
    CD52mk2_SE_thd_vs_freq.jpg
    412.1 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
This is an update of the initial measurements I did here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...special-edition-cd-player.57160/#post-2089935

I wanted to make a new post instead of continuing the one from the link as it will help to see the actual performance as the initial measurements were flawed. So if you want to see how the device looks on the outside and inside, visit the thread from the link above.

My measurement setup is made out of an E1DA Cosmos ADC (grade A) and a Cosmos Scaler. Both devices are powered from battery packs (each device has its own pack). The CD player is connected to the Scaler via a single ended cable. For test signals, I used @NTTY 's test CD.

Let's start with the 1kHz test tone:

View attachment 398805

This looks really good for such an old device. Having a SINAD of 91.4 dB is great considering the results @NTTY got on his CD players.
Next is the 1kHz test tone with extended frequency, up to 48kHz

View attachment 398806

Now 1 kHz test tone but at -3dB FS

View attachment 398807

We naturally see a decrease in SINAD but it's still pretty good.

Multi tone:


View attachment 398808
This looks very clean!

Next we'll have a look at the frequency response:
View attachment 398810

Nice and flat in the audio band

Net we'll have a look at the filtering performed by the device (this is a test that @NTTY does and I thought it's nice to include it as well):

View attachment 398811

Jitter:

View attachment 398813
This doesn't look too clean but comparing to what @NTTY is getting on his players, I think this is good as this is the limitation of the test CD.

Next I looked at two-tones signals to see IMD:

View attachment 398814

View attachment 398815
Again, very good results.

Conclusion:

I'm happy to say that the CD52mk2 Special Edition is a good device. I enjoyed listening to it for some years now and I was hoping it will not disappoint on measurements. It didn't. Most of the time I listen to it through my SU-9n DAC but from time to time, I switch to its analog output, just to listen to the 1bit DAC that's inside.

THD is at -97dB so it's clear that the DAC and the analog circuitry works really well. Noise isn't bad at all for a consumer device.
Nice review, thanks!

Did you check for intersample overs?
 
Very nice and thank you for the update!

These are good performances indeed. Note that the ENOB is incorrectly calculated because of the -7dBFS attenuation that the ASIO driver sees at the input of the ADC. So it's roughly 1bit lower than what is showed (ie. 15.7bits, which is very good).

This is very close to the Teac VRDS-20 which was using the TDA1547 as a higher end DAC to complement the SAA7350. So now we know that a a standalone DAC, the SAA7350 was already very good.

May I recommend you use smaller print-screens because it's difficult to read when on a mobile phone?

Can you add the THD vs Frequency @-12dBFS too?

Cheers
 
Very nice and thank you for the update!

These are good performances indeed. Note that the ENOB is incorrectly calculated because of the -7dBFS attenuation that the ASIO driver sees at the input of the ADC. So it's roughly 1bit lower than what is showed (ie. 15.7bits, which is very good).

This is very close to the Teac VRDS-20 which was using the TDA1547 as a higher end DAC to complement the SAA7350. So now we know that a a standalone DAC, the SAA7350 was already very good.

May I recommend you use smaller print-screens because it's difficult to read when on a mobile phone?

Can you add the THD vs Frequency @-12dBFS too?

Cheers
Done! I add it at the end. I will try and use lower resolution images for the next one. What resolution works well for mobile?
 
The size below is ok (example from a low value Pioneer PD-30 which I will review soon):

Pioneer PD-30_1kHz_0dBFS_LR.jpg


As you can see, I first copy-screen an overlay of L+R channels, and then I insert the dashboard of one of the two channels.

About the THD vs Frequency, in the overlay window, set it this way:

1728902683789.png


So it will show distortion in dBr on the left and % on the right (and I set -40dBr as top graph axis limit, that's 1% distortion).

Cheers
 
Last edited:
The size below is ok (example from a low value Pioneer PD-30 which I will review soon):

View attachment 398829

As you can see, I first copy-screen an overlay of L+R channels, and then I insert the dashboard of one of the two channels.

About the THD vs Frequency, in the overlay window, set it this way:

View attachment 398834

So it will show distortion in dBr on the left and % on the right (and I set -40dBr as top graph axis limit, that's 1% distortion).

Cheers
Done! I updated the THD vs frequency plot. Thanks for the input.
 
The [picture] size below is ok [for mobile] (example from a low value Pioneer PD-30 which I will review soon):
By the way, it is OK for a desktop computer screen also.
 
Back
Top Bottom