Mine also cost £20. And I know that with it's digital output used it sounds identical to any other CD player at any price.
-
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!
Do CD players sound different to each other?
- Thread starter Digby
- Start date
Mine also cost £20. And I know that with it's digital output used it sounds identical to any other CD player at any price.
Seems people do not agree. I do not think there is much to be objective about when it comes to audio gear. Each person has a different set of ears. 2 plus 2 equals four no matter how large or expensive the calculator. I have never been able to tell much difference no matter the brand or the price. I have never listened to a $20,000 CD player though. I am sure it would look impressive and expensive. Buy an old Jolida JD100A tubed player. See if that sounds different. I sold Jolida and Black Ice Aduio gear for 13 years. I compared a $150 Sony 5 disc player to a $2000 Jolida Fusion DAC Transport. 5 people in my store could not tell the difference. What difference there was could never justify the expense. For years I have been using a DVD player. I am happy so why spend a ton of money. I should think years ago many cars were bought because of the hood ornament. If a man was turned on by the hood ornament he could soon find the engine superior.
The evidence is based on both testing (NTTY being one example) and CD players that lasted a day or 2 past warranty (Coby).
With a DAC (an extra piece of gear with extra connections and needing a place to plug in that many [actually most people that I know] do not want in their tidy little system).
As I understood the question, we're talking about a CD player in & of itself (Simplicity, primarily).
Not a CD player + a DAC.
I actually do not know a single person that I know for sure owns a separate DAC.
There is on built into my oPPo 205 UDP (that I have never used) and I have a friend that has an oPPo 203 that may have a built in DAC (my guess is, that if it does, he does not even know about it). But he is one of the people I know looking for a quality output CD player.
I DO know at least 5 people that are looking for good quality output, stand alone CD players, though.
tineared
Member
Back in 2006 I had a Rega cd player that I paid too much for. Then the DV-980H was released by Oppo with silly good specs and I bought one and ever since then all of my optical transports have been Oppos. While I do have a couple of Panasonic UB820 players for secondary audio/video systems, my main player is the Oppo UDP203. So I am happy believing that there are no better players than the ones I have been using.
On the other hand I have multiple digital inputs into my AVR which also does double duty for music. I also have a miniDSP flex which I previously used with my Marantz.
I'm hoping to get a test setup in the near future that will allow me to test the analogue output - just out of interest.
Petrushka
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2024
- Messages
- 1,266
- Likes
- 1,415
Digital is either perfect or not.
You do not listen to digital. You listen to the analog output of a DAC. There is no good reason to put an expensive DAC in a CD player. Even a thrift store DVD player has an optical output, and when connected to a DAC or to a device having a DAC, the result will be the same, regardless of the price of the player.
I did not see where it wad asked if all CD players running into a DAC would sound the same. I believe that you are over analyzing the question.
Please allow me answer the part of the question that you are answering that was not asked:
But why buy an additional piece of gear (when, if the CD player itself has a good enough DAC built in that needs to have an additional outlet and additional out cables and needs an additional space to be)?
Sorry, but every single person that I know well (maybe because they don't have much space & do have a significant other who [like my significant other] does not give a DAMN about music or stereo gear]) and for certain: does not want extra, unnecessary items: "cluttering up the house" as they put it.
There is a level of tolerance that she has for my things (and the reverse is true [I wouldn't clutter up the yard growing food items but she does]).
I would clutter up the yard with sheds full of car & motorcycle parts instead.
So we compromise, I can have some of my stuff & she can have some of hers.
And a CD player having a separate DAC may be nice (I would not want one that needed that), it's not a necessity if you have a good quality CD player (meaning RELIABLE and with an EXCELLANT internal DAC) to begin with.
I'm a guy whose system is Tri-Amped, so I view necessity one way and clutter with a jaundiced eye.
YMMV.
Waxx
Major Contributor
CD players are as weak as their analog parts, because digital they are all the same. So find one with a good analog part if you don't want to use a seperate dac, the OPPO mentioned is great but NLA like all OPPO cd players.
Marantz still makes a good one that is not extreme expensive, the CD6007. I bought that one for my father (in his mid 70's) who wanted a no nonsens easy to use player and he is very happy with it. I also don't hear any "digital sound", it sounds quiet transparent. Denon makes still the very popular DCD-600NE, and has a good track record on making cd players and it's a lot cheaper than the Marantz. Both of them have digital out (if you still want to use a dac) and have a very good reputation, on sound but also on reliability. I never seen tests like here of them altough.
Marantz still makes a good one that is not extreme expensive, the CD6007. I bought that one for my father (in his mid 70's) who wanted a no nonsens easy to use player and he is very happy with it. I also don't hear any "digital sound", it sounds quiet transparent. Denon makes still the very popular DCD-600NE, and has a good track record on making cd players and it's a lot cheaper than the Marantz. Both of them have digital out (if you still want to use a dac) and have a very good reputation, on sound but also on reliability. I never seen tests like here of them altough.
I actually own both of those players. Both are quiet, good remotes. good visuals , appear to be well made an d good functionality. Sound quality is not an issue since all CD players sound the same
Measurements can easily tell you that they don't.
Looking at the schematics can many times tell you they don't. (That is physics, when you measure or have known measured components)
As far as I know, that is at least as scientific as a double blind test.
The year was 1998. I owner a highly rated (back then) Denon DCD-1290. Which actually was hearably better than the cheap CD player I had before, some second hand entry level Sony model (which in turn was a huge improvement over vinyl, sorry to the stalwarts). I had a windfall and got an Accuphase DP65v. I was using the same speakers initially, the improvement was merely visual. So I'll side with those who say that digital -done competently- has exceeded human hearing capacity for at least 2 decades.
I 100% agree with you:
Therein lies the problem: there is a lot of digital out there (in CD players and elsewhere) that was not/is not "done competently".
And, if we were to choose one of those: NTTY has proven that, if it has an other than it's not so good DAC (decent transport mechanism, etc), adding a good DAC to it can make it viable.
Hence we have wonderful folks like NTTY (and others) that provide us with real measurements that allows us to chose great CG player (with their included DAC's [my personal preference for many reasons]) or CD players that we might want to add our own separate DAC to with the confidence that we will have a good setup.
Unfortunately:
Therein lies the problem: there is a lot of digital out there (in CD players and elsewhere) that was not/is not "done competently".
And, if we were to choose one of those: NTTY has proven that, if it has an other than it's not so good DAC (decent transport mechanism, etc), adding a good DAC to it can make it viable.
Hence we have wonderful folks like NTTY (and others) that provide us with real measurements that allows us to chose great CG player (with their included DAC's [my personal preference for many reasons]) or CD players that we might want to add our own separate DAC to with the confidence that we will have a good setup.
i lived in Germany at the time, and the HiFi mags did publish measurements."measurements'' Is your argument? The proof is in the pudding ie actually identifying audible differences between CD players using a legit test ( double blind with the ONLY variable being the two different players being tested). As soon as you introduce a visual aspect or long delays between switching players etc the test is not valid. As has been stated many times here on this site there has never been a test that proved audible differences. I would love to see one though
Double blind testing certainly has it's place. But there is absolutely no need to do it if the gear doesn't meet certain parameters to begin with.
Next: not everyone's ears hear the exact same way, so that is an uncontrol-able variable (having uncontrol-able variables is not all that scientific, in my opinion).
Since it is obvious that we will always disagree on this, I hope that you can find it in your heart to agree to disagree and lets move on to some other audio subject.
Mean & Green
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2022
- Messages
- 360
- Likes
- 502
I’m surprised we’ve got up to 8 pages on this topic. Even before forums like ASR I always thought the differences between CD players were none existent.
I remember What hifi magazine reviewing my Sony CD player 25 years ago and they were describing the sound of the variable filter settings like they were some sort of pre set graphic EQ.
I’ve never ever been able to detect any difference whatsoever between the filter settings, even the instruction manual says their effects are outside of the audible frequency range. Also my 25 year old Sony CD player sounds identical to the Pioneer N50-A network player beneath it which in turn sounds identical to the Arcam DAC I had before it, which sounds the same as my Topping D10S.
I could list lots of digital sources I have here and have used in my setups and they have no flavour or colour I can discern. As far as I’m concerned digital audio is a long solved problem. I will say differences in level can play tricks on us, but other than that I think there are much more important parts of the chain to worry about.
I remember What hifi magazine reviewing my Sony CD player 25 years ago and they were describing the sound of the variable filter settings like they were some sort of pre set graphic EQ.
I’ve never ever been able to detect any difference whatsoever between the filter settings, even the instruction manual says their effects are outside of the audible frequency range. Also my 25 year old Sony CD player sounds identical to the Pioneer N50-A network player beneath it which in turn sounds identical to the Arcam DAC I had before it, which sounds the same as my Topping D10S.
I could list lots of digital sources I have here and have used in my setups and they have no flavour or colour I can discern. As far as I’m concerned digital audio is a long solved problem. I will say differences in level can play tricks on us, but other than that I think there are much more important parts of the chain to worry about.
That is only true if you buy sufficiently high in the chain.
All of the gear that you have had, even that of 25 years ago, is higher up the chain than average.
You cannot confirm gear that others have as being as good as yours. That is what we are trying to find out.
Because you intelligently (or just got lucky) bought good gear (intentional or not) does not mean that it is all that good.
If so, in automotive terms, a Trabant would be just as good as a Lexus. They are similar, in that they both will take you somewhere. But they are very different in many ways.
Reliability being one.
Which ones are at that level & which ones are 14 bits (or less) or have some other inferior issues to them (such as wonky loading mechanisms, lases that are faulty, etc).
I specifically had a SONY CD player that was inferior in every way to any other CD payer that I have ever owned (and it was not cheap to me at the time). It dissuaded from that brand for many years (I did not buy any other CD players either) and just relied on my analog stuff.
Eventually I got another SONY one & it was fine. I could play it next to the other SONY one & that was not fine. Testing (at the time) revealed that my earlier SONY, was, in fact, inferior. Prior to the first SONY, I had a Philips Magnavox, which I had thought would not be great but it was.
You need to add a qualifier there. There has never been a blind test that proved audible differences between transparent measuring devices.
There have been many tests that demonstrated audible differences between devices where at least one is measured as having audible noise or distortion. It sort of goes with the definition of "audible"
I used to have that Sony, one of the few things I regret selling.
Bloke bought it off me for his daughter. Put it in his own system to check it worked, in place of whatever multi-thousand pound boutique thing he was using ( he did say but I forget what).
Messaged me to say he was astonished that the Sony sounded pretty much identical.
People deny it but they really do listen to the price tag.
Similar threads
- Locked
