Do CD players sound different to each other?

[Mean & Green]

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.

I agree, for many the price is the only parameter they really take any notice of. Sometimes they are brought back to Earth with a bump.

 

[EJ3]

I agree, for many the price is the only parameter they really take any notice of. Sometimes they are brought back to Earth with a bump.

And most buy cheap because they believe that any old CD player will be great (and they have no idea that there is a DAC inside it, what a DAC is, what it does or why it is important for it to be a good one). Because they believe what the mass marketers have told them: their all the same sound, anything more than cheap and it's how expensive do you want it to look. (I've been into stereo gear since I was 14 [1971] did not know about any such thing as a DAC until I came onto this site).
As a percentage, most people do not read about stereo gear, magazines or on line, and only know what other laymen who also don't know, have told them, based on what they have heard (or maybe seen at a friends house that bought a system from Best Buy due to the sales person there).

 

[Mean & Green]

And most buy cheap because they believe that any old CD player will be great (and they have no idea that there is a DAC inside it, what a DAC is, what it does or why it is important for it to be a good one). Because they believe what the mass marketers have told them: their all the same sound, anything more than cheap and it's how expensive do you want it to look. (I've been into stereo gear since I was 14 [1971] did not know about any such thing as a DAC until I came onto this site).
As a percentage, most people do not read about stereo gear, magazines or on line, and only know what other laymen who also don't know, have told them, based on what they have heard (or maybe seen at a friends house that bought a system from Best Buy due to the sales person there).

With respect I believe the mass marketeers feed people whatever they think sells their product aided by subjective mumbo jumbo reviews. The layman (none audiophile) probably just buys whatever fits their budget and does the job. Which these days will be some form of smart speaker rather than a CD player.

It’s only audiophiles who ponder about DACs and the reality is any reasonably designed and made audio component has DAC performance better than the limits of human hearing. ‘Any old CD player’ which is a hifi separate made in the last two or three decades will be perfectly fine at playing CDs properly it doesn’t matter how much it cost. That’s not to say build quality and user appeal doesn’t change, but from the varying CD players, CD recorders, Bluray/DVD players and DACs I’ve had they are much of a muchness in terms of what comes out of them sonically.

Do you disagree?

I find it odd that someone into audio for so long didn’t know what a DAC was until recently. Is it correct to assume your experience with DACs is very limited?

Audiophiles who don’t know any better will over spend on digital sources believing they are getting superior audible performance, when the reality is they are not.

 

[Mart68]

And most buy cheap because they believe that any old CD player will be great (and they have no idea that there is a DAC inside it, what a DAC is, what it does or why it is important for it to be a good one). Because they believe what the mass marketers have told them: their all the same sound, anything more than cheap and it's how expensive do you want it to look. (I've been into stereo gear since I was 14 [1971] did not know about any such thing as a DAC until I came onto this site).

No, that's the complete opposite of what most audiophiles think. They take it for granted that paying more money for the player means better sound. And that's before they get onto 'tone and texture' since it is no different to buying a musical instrument to them.

The marketeers' efforts are aimed at promoting that fantasy. Not saying they all sound the same. No audiophile wants to read or hear that about any component, cable or tweak. It's all about finding differences, that's the hobby for them.

Over 30 years I've owned dozens of the things at all price ranges. I have thought there were sometimes subtle differences but that is the most I could say. And that's without any controls of course.

 

[EJ3]

No, that's the complete opposite of what most audiophiles think. They take it for granted that paying more money for the player means better sound. And that's before they get onto 'tone and texture' since it is no different to buying a musical instrument to them.

The marketeers' efforts are aimed at promoting that fantasy. Not saying they all sound the same. No audiophile wants to read or hear that about any component, cable or tweak. It's all about finding differences, that's the hobby for them.

Over 30 years I've owned dozens of the things at all price ranges. I have thought there were sometimes subtle differences but that is the most I could say. And that's without any controls of course.

Most people that own CD players are not audiophiles. They just want good sound (and think that they are getting it, when they are not.
I want the tide that we create here to lift ALL the boats.

 

[Mean & Green]

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.

Actually by audiophile standards my equipment has always been fairly modest, with many audiophiles having much more expensive equipment than myself. Anywhere on the price ladder though subjective audiophiles will make all kinds of claims regarding digital audio sound quality usually the pricier the better.

There will always be people with cheaper or more expensive equipment than ourselves, but with regard to digital audio that doesn’t correlate with audible performance much to many audiophiles displeasure and defiance.

 

[Mean & Green]

Most people that own CD players are not audiophiles. They just want good sound (and think that they are getting it, when they are not.
I want the tide that we create here to lift ALL the boats.

What makes you say that in this day and age of streaming being the norm? (I.E it is also non audiophiles preferred music source).

Anyone messing around with separate component CD players today are most likely going to be audiophiles don’t you think?

Also how are they not getting good sound as you put it?

 

[MattHooper]

Unless you have done a double blind test you havent proved anything. I've never seen one documented. Ever

As mentioned previously, FWIW, I was able to identify between two CDPs and a DAC Under blind conditions

 

[krabapple]

No, they do not all sound the same (or even close to the same).
Only the better quality ones do.

'better quality' is pretty typical these days, and has been for a long time

Even SONY made some cruddy price point ones, helping propagate the myth that they all sound the same (unfortunately I had one) but years later (after swearing off SONY CD players for many years):
I have an old used (but higher up the line SONY that can not be distinguished from my other gear that can also play CD's [oPPo 205 UCD]).
This does not mean that you need to get the highest price CD player, not even close.
Just stay away from the really cheap ones (say, ones that cost under $250 when they were new).
That is my opinion based on my own EMPIRICAL evidence. You MMV. But I'm sticking to what I know to be true for me.

'empirical' here means 'anecdotal garble with zero account of typical biases'.

Check Amir's measurments of DACs/players under $250.

 

[EJ3]

With respect I believe the mass marketeers feed people whatever they think sells their product aided by subjective mumbo jumbo reviews. The layman (none audiophile) probably just buys whatever fits their budget and does the job. Which these days will be some form of smart speaker rather than a CD player.

It’s only audiophiles who ponder about DACs and the reality is any reasonably designed and made audio component has DAC performance better than the limits of human hearing. ‘Any old CD player’ which is a hifi separate made in the last two or three decades will be perfectly fine at playing CDs properly it doesn’t matter how much it cost. That’s not to say build quality and user appeal doesn’t change, but from the varying CD players, CD recorders, Bluray/DVD players and DACs I’ve had they are much of a muchness in terms of what comes out of them sonically.

Do you disagree?

I find it odd that someone into audio for so long didn’t know what a DAC was until recently. Is it correct to assume your experience with DACs is very limited?

Audiophiles who don’t know any better will over spend on digital sources believing they are getting superior audible performance, when the reality is they are not.

I lived on islands in the Western Pacific & Indian ocean for 17 years.
But, when I came back here 4 years ago only one person I know new that his CD player has a DAC.
I knew that I had one when I read the report that AMIRM did on the oPPo 205 UDP.
I know quite a number of people & only one of them has ever mentioned a DAC to me & that is because he wants a new CD player with a GOOD DAC.
And yes, based on what I have seen and heard, I dis-agree.
Again, very few people are Audiophiles. We are a niche group. Now, most people I know do not live in city's of even 1 million people (my Tri-County area has about 700,000, and the islands I lived on had from 975 to 155,000. So population density may have something to do with the % of audiophiles. Many of us just have a lot more stuff to do than sit around & listen to music for hours a day, even though we love it. If it is not heavily raining, I'm outside, as are most of the people that I know.

 

[EJ3]

What makes you say that in this day and age of streaming being the norm? (I.E it is also non audiophiles preferred music source).

Anyone messing around with separate component CD players today are most likely going to be audiophiles don’t you think?

Also how are they not getting good sound as you put it?

Pehaps where you are streaming is the norm. It certainly is not the norm where I am. What makes you think that all others are like you?

 

[krabapple]

The evidence is based on both testing (NTTY being one example) and CD players that lasted a day or 2 past warranty (Coby).

LOL, *Coby*.

OK, you are *way* down on the audio food chain with that.

 

[Mean & Green]

Pehaps where you are streaming is the norm. It certainly is not the norm where I am. What makes you think that all others are like you?

I didn’t say it was the norm for me.

Statistically streaming is the norm and CD players today are very much an afterthought with much more limited choice compared to two decades ago. Where I am in the UK most people look at you as if you have two heads if you mention you still play CDs (which I do).

The only streaming I do is from my own ripped CD library I am in a very small minority these days.

 

[krabapple]

That is only true if you buy sufficiently high in the chain.

Like, a foot off the ground floor.

It's not that hard to find, really.

All of the gear that you have had, even that of 25 years ago, is higher up the chain than average.

Coby was never 'average'. Coby was a Sony knockoff sold in blisterpacks behind the counter in cornershops and chain store pharmacies like CVS in the States

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.

What result from testing showed you that your Sony CDP would be audibly distinguishable form other CDPs in a level matched blind test?

Or are you saying yours was just measureably *broken*/*defective*?

 

[Mart68]

Most people that own CD players are not audiophiles. They just want good sound (and think that they are getting it, when they are not.
I want the tide that we create here to lift ALL the boats.

There was an Onkyo CD player tested here recently, pretty much textbook perfect. Now discontinued but it was under $300.

How cheap do you want to go? Below a certain price we will start losing non-sonic attributes, like the sturdy plastic case which prevents fall-apart.

Non enthusiasts will likely have far larger problems with their replay system than the quality of the DAC. in the CD player. If they are still using one.

 

[MRC01]

Most CD players do sound "the same" at least when level matched in a proper system. But not all, and I can think of several reasons why:

• They tend to have different output levels, and even slight differences (less than 1dB) are perceptually detectable, so they sound different unless the comparison is volume matched.
• They tend to have different tolerances for disc imperfections (such as scratches). An imperfect disc may play fine on player A but have obviously audible glitches on player B.
• Some of them have analog stages with noise or high output impedance (like tubes, but sometimes with solid state too) that can alter frequency response depending on the load they are driving.
• The DACs that CD players use typically have several built-in filters available. Some CD players use filters that have audible passband attenuation (several dB below 20 kHz), or no attenuation (NOS mode) which can introduce audible passband distortion.
• Edit: one more: some CD players don't implement the pre-emphasis flag properly, so CDs using this feature sound painfully bright. The difference is not subtle - starts at 1 kHz and grows to about 10 dB at 20 kHz.

Those are just a few that come to mind...
Note: I didn't have time to read all 9 pages so some of the above have likely been mentioned already.

 

[krabapple]

As mentioned previously, FWIW, I was able to identify between two CDPs and a DAC Under blind conditions

Both of which are way 'up in the chain' by EJ3's standards. So 'the chain' doesn't mean much.

I wonder which your 90s devices was either broken by design, or broken by accident? Because if your anecdote is to be believed, it's one or the other.

 

[rank]

Why dig up such non-subjects.
That said, some 'high end' (uh uh) manufacturers of digital or even analog stuff (high capacitance MIT cables, very colorful cartridges at five figures price with distortion at the max worthy of an effects pedal) have tried to stand out by trying to obtain a unique sound different from the others. Which are more linear.
I have retained among others two Naim players without bass (one was probably screwed but both had their special cable), a Studer too, not famous but made in Switzerland, country of watchmaking so it's good huh.

 

[Wolf11Man]

Today all my CD player sound the same. When I was younger, I heard differences I didn't like. Then I bought another one that had a better sound, to me at least. The "bad one" was sold or given away, like some Rotel and Sony. Now I only have a handfull of identical sounding players left, the cheapest was about €450 when new. There is only one that seems to sound a little different, maybe because it has a valve output stage. The AMC pretends to have more room information, but all the others, from Onkyo Integra, Marantz, Teac and Denon are just identical, perfect sounding machines. Then there is this 100 CD changer from Pioneer, I'm not 100% sure it sounds fine. I simply implanted a digital output and use it with an external DAC, for peace of mind, now it sounds just as good, I'm sure...

 

[krabapple]

Today all my CD player sound the same. When I was younger, I heard differences I didn't like. Then I bought another one that had a better sound, to me at least. The "bad one" was sold or given away, like some Rotel and Sony. Now I only have a handfull of identical sounding players left, the cheapest was about €450 when new. There is only one that seems to sound a little different, maybe because it has a valve output stage. The AMC pretends to have more room information, but all the others, from Onkyo Integra, Marantz, Teac and Denon are just identical, perfect sounding machines. Then there is this 100 CD changer from Pioneer, I'm not 100% sure it sounds fine. I simply implanted a digital output and use it with an external DAC, for peace of mind, now it sounds just as good, I'm sure...

When you were younger, your hearing was better, but you were no less susceptible to normal sighted biases. So those CDPs probably really sounded the same too. If you compared them blind and matched output levels.