• 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!

Michi Prestige Q430 CD Player, and its $4,400 Fatal Flaw & Rotel's Bizarre Support

Gets on hifi dealer horse -

Looking at the OPs sound rig, I'd ask them to PLEASE look at a thick rug or something in front of and between the speakers.

All this extra 'detail' you're hoping for and spending shedloads of money on trying to achieve it, is seriously going to be totally swamped by room/floor reflections smearing it all. I'm not suggesting to damp every reflection out to make a domesticated anechoic chamber, but no audio system I've ever heard in my nearly 70 years has ever sounded any good in a minimalistic 'bathroom style' acoustic. Anything that makes normal speech better to hear in there will improve reproduced sound as well.
 
I want to make it clear my objection here was never about the cost. It's about assuming a certain price point automatically buys you an extensive feature set. Especially in high end audio, we know that's seldom the case.

I don't even remember if my Accuphase DP-65v had ff/frw...
Since when is fast forward and rewind an extensive feature set? My $50 discman from 1996 had that. I don't think I've ever seen a CD player that doesn't have it - excepting this one, of course.
 
Gets on hifi dealer horse -

Looking at the OPs sound rig, I'd ask them to PLEASE look at a thick rug or something in front of and between the speakers.

All this extra 'detail' you're hoping for and spending shedloads of money on trying to achieve it, is seriously going to be totally swamped by room/floor reflections smearing it all. I'm not suggesting to damp every reflection out to make a domesticated anechoic chamber, but no audio system I've ever heard in my nearly 70 years has ever sounded any good in a minimalistic 'bathroom style' acoustic. Anything that makes normal speech better to hear in there will improve reproduced sound as well.
Yeah, for sure. I do have an absorbent (and decorative) rug. But I also have a pair of eleven-month-old twin nephews who both decided to puke on it on the very same afternoon last weekend while my brother and sister-in-law were visiting, so it's currently at the cleaners :p:p.
 
It is a cd reader with an ess dac . It has way less technology than a budget smartphone. Sure it can be expensive for the fancy chassis and high margins, but there is nothing there that justifies 4k. And it even lacks basic features as the original post of this very thread said.
I agree, and I am a MICHI customer. I am very happy that @Tomassio reported the issue, because I was considering this CD player. Thanks ever so much to him.

Cost is a personal decision as many have said before. And missing very basic features is outrageous, IMO, at this price point and way below it.

I am sad that moderation here think comments of @marin.weigel are not a concern, and at the same time I’m happy that they are opened to such.
 
Last edited:
Good afternoon from Spain.

As I said yesterday, I can't reply to every single participant in the thread, though I appreciate all the input given in good faith and with good intentions.

What I can do is summarize a few points that seem to still be up for debate or discussion here, but which I see quite clearly.

1: Another remote control WOULD NOT HAVE SOLVED ANYTHING. The whole "minimalist style" thing was just the first excuse they came up with.
2: The manufacturer neglected to implement a VITAL function for any player: fast-forward and rewind. I respect everyone's opinion, but I simply cannot understand how some of you think this omission isn't a big deal, or why you've called my complaint "whining."
3: "A cheap player sounds the same as a $10,000 one." For starters, that's not true, or at least not always true (and I know what digital audio is, and how ones and zeros work). But even if it were, EVERYONE CAN SPEND THEIR MONEY ON WHATEVER "VICE" THEY PLEASE. I have a massive CD collection, about 5,000 I figure, and for many years I've wanted to finally own a great Hi-Fi setup, including a player. And performance isn't the only thing that matters in a device. The simple act of using it is also part of the enjoyment, especially when you have a piece of gear in front of you that you bought to last at least the next 15 years.
4: None of you who now see everything so clearly in the owner's manual would have caught this issue beforehand. NONE OF YOU. Purely and simply because you wouldn't have needed to, since you would never have even imagined that these functions wouldn't be there. You would have taken them for granted, just like we take for granted that the unit will have Play, Pause, or Stop.What do you actually need to know before buying a unit like this? Well, basically the inputs and outputs it has, to see if they fit your needs. But NOBODY goes to the manual to check what happens when you press the Play button, because you know exactly what's going to happen when you do. Well, it's exactly the same deal with fast-forward and rewind. From the moment you see the first picture of the remote, or the front panel of the player itself, you assume that a short press will skip the track, and a long press will fast-forward or rewind rapidly within the track itself.

Let me give you an example: When you bought your latest, shiny $50,000 OLED TV, for instance, did you bother reading a manual beforehand to explain what the power button was going to do? With all due respect, if anyone says yes, that they carefully read that little section, I don't believe you.
Now imagine your TV arrived, you mounted it on the wall, you DIY, and you're happy. But upon testing it for the first time, you discovered that the power button boots up the device and the picture comes on, but it turns out that pressing the button again doesn't turn the TV off. You write to tech support, you pull some strings with them, and the manufacturer eventually tells you that, in order to turn it off, you have to unplug the TV, or wait two hours for it to turn itself off "thanks to the autosleep option", because in a "minimalist design choice," they decided their magnificent, ultra-expensive TV can turn on, but it can't turn off. And if you don't like it, just go buy another remote. But oh, wait, it turns out another remote wouldn't work either, because what's really missing is the power-off function itself. They just forgot it. And no, they aren't going to fix it, but if you're not happy, just return the TV and be done with it.

Does it make sense now? Because this is exactly the same, or at least very similar to my issue with this—otherwise absolutely magnificent—Michi Prestige Q430. An absolutely essential function is missing, and the manufacturer hid it. Because with some things, it's not enough to just not mention them, to not say they're there. You have to clearly state that they are NOT there. Because those two things might seem the same, but they are absolutely not.
5: An owner's manual has contractual value when it comes to the features the device discussed in that manual will have, true. To give a pretty extreme example, no one would expect the manual for this Rotel/Michi to specify that it can't be used to heat up a hamburger, or wash your socks. Those aren't features anyone would look for in a CD player. But when on ALL, ABSOLUTELY ALL players on the market, a buyer expects to find 7 essential functions, which are:
  • Play.
  • Stop.
  • Pause.
  • Open/Close tray.
  • Power ON/OFF.
  • Track skip forward/backward.
  • Fast-forward/rewind within the track.
...at that point, if you as a manufacturer decide (for whatever reason, even due to the sheer incompetence of your engineering team) to remove one of those functions, you must state it WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT both in the manual and in the promotional material you've sent to every website on the planet.

In the manual for this Q430 (thanks, @marin.weigel), it shows there are two buttons for forward and backward. Well, 100% of buyers are going to understand that those buttons include both types of seeking: full track skip and partial scan. Are you seriously going to try to convince me that, even in the highly unlikely event that it had crossed your mind that this missing feature wouldn't be there, that information wouldn't have led you to the same conclusion I came to?

IMG_0050.jpeg

Put another way:
A - No one, beforehand, would have imagined that this function would be missing from any player on the market, from the cheapest to the most expensive.
B - No one, beforehand, bothers to read the manual to see what the Play or Pause button does on their remote or on the front panel of the unit, because everyone KNOWS what they do.
C - Even in the highly unlikely event that someone, before buying this player said: "Oh, look, I'm going to see what the manual specifically says about the forward and backward buttons, because hey, I don't know what those buttons could possibly be used for on a CD player...", upon seeing this in the manual, they would absolutely, 100% assume the dual function of those buttons. It would never cross their mind, once again, that the function wouldn't be there. Because, I insist, I have NEVER encountered a CD player without fast-forward and rewind. And I'd venture a guess that none of you had either, until the one we're dealing with here.

Cheers.
 
It's a silly omission. The UI cost would have been ZERO – hold the << >> buttons as any user would expect. The 'minimalist' argument does not hold up.

This is a fail at any price.
 
Given that (IMO):
1. This thread has run its course (maybe 2 pages ago)
2. This issue is essentially unresolvable

I’m still setting the over/under on this thread at 9 pages.
 
It's a silly omission. The UI cost would have been ZERO – hold the << >> buttons as any user would expect. The 'minimalist' argument does not hold up.

This is a fail at any price.
It's by far not the only high end CD player missing the function. Accuphase supports it on all CD players though, if you feel like splurging.
 
Just out of curiosity. My last two CD players were Cambridge Audio, the Azur 640A and CXC (V2) series:

20250714_184024.jpg


01.jpg


01.jpg


03.jpg


Leaving aside the fact that both of them had less "minimalist" remotes, I should point out that from the front panel, both operated exactly how my current Q430 should. That is, with dual functionality for the skip buttons, depending on whether you use a short press or a long press.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAB
This is the remote control of the Michi Q5. According to the descriptions, the track forward/track backward buttons don't seem to function any differently from the Q430.
1788042010105.png


This is the RS232/IP control protocol for the Q5 (for some reason, Rotel's website doesn't have the commands list for the Q430). But it does have the fast forward and fast backward functions. My guess is the Q430 also supports them internally. There is a chance that it may be possible, if you really really want to, write a custom remote control app and communicate to it and command it using TCP/IP. Please note I am not saying I recommend this route.

1788042436131.png
 
This is the RS232/IP control protocol for the Q5 (for some reason, Rotel's website doesn't have the commands list for the Q430). But it does have the fast forward and fast backward functions. My guess is the Q430 also supports them internally. There is a chance that it may be possible, if you really really want to, write a custom remote control app and communicate to it and command it using TCP/IP. Please note I am not saying I recommend this route.
Thanks, @NTK for the detailed explanation. This brings really good info here.

Honestly, this lines up exactly with what I've been saying these past few days, I think, which is based on the response I got from the brand's Sales Department after they consulted with their Engineering Department. Basically, they admitted that the feature isn't there, but they also have made absolutely clear that, whether the issue can be fixed via a firmware update or not, they have no intention of doing so, period.

As for the control app, I also think it would work, but personally, I wouldn't risk it due to warranty concerns with the unit.

The fact that this Q430 doesn't allow fast-forward and rewind is absurd to me. But my main complaint, as I've been pointing out throughout the thread from the very beginning, is the lack of transparency regarding the absence of this functionality. The manufacturer should have clearly disclosed this, because it's next to impossible to discover the issue before getting the unit home. And I would never have bought it had I known.

Cheers.
 
Huh? Seriously? A high-end CD player that can't fast-forward to a specific point on the track?
More than a fatal flaw, I'd call it a dumpster player


.This observation has absolutely nothing to do with the case in question, I use a CD player purchased for 80 euros second hand but everyone has the right to buy what they like with their own money, even the use has equivalent performances
Sure you can buy whatever works, but coming here just to rant about a purchase you made and just don't like the features because you way overpaid....meh.
 
Sure you can buy whatever works, but coming here just to rant about a purchase you made and just don't like the features because you way overpaid....meh.
To me the issue is the assumption high end CD players these days MUST preserve feature sets from an age where they were omnipresent. They are not anymore, and people buying them should be aware high end vendors want to cater to the purist experience... kinda like vinyl style...

Last contribution to this discussion. In audio, since many ages ago, you better inform yourself from several angles before you buy into "high end value propositions".
 
Last edited:
Sure you can buy whatever works, but coming here just to rant about a purchase you made and just don't like the features because you way overpaid....meh.
To be honest, I get the feeling you've completely missed the point of what's going on here. No offense.

To me the issue is the assumption high end CD players these days MUST preserve feature sets from an age where they were omnipresent. They are not anymore, and people buying them should be aware high end vendors want to cater to the purist experience... kinda like vinyl style...

Last contribution to this discussion. In audio, since many ages ago, you better inform yourself from several angles before you buy into high end value props.
We're not talking about "legacy features" here, but rather functionality that any CD player has today. Or well, 99.99% of them, by the looks of it. I humbly don't think that's the issue here.

Cheers.
 
To be honest, I get the feeling you've completely missed the point of what's going on here. No offense.


We're not talking about "legacy features" here, but rather functionality that any CD player has today. Or well, 99.99% of them, by the looks of it. I humbly don't think that's the issue here.

Cheers.
Perhaps, not offended. What is the point? You bought something without knowing its actual functionality then ranted about it, more a caveat emptor sort of thing it seems to me....but enlighten me.
 
Perhaps, not offended. What is the point? You bought something without knowing its actual functionality then ranted about it, more a caveat emptor sort of thing it seems to me....but enlighten me.
Everything is here. The money I paid or I didn't pay has NOTHING to do with this (by the way, official cost is €3999, but there was a €3299 bargain when I bought it).

Close to 4 AM in Spain. Good Night to ASR!
 
Everything is here. The money I paid or I didn't pay has NOTHING to do with this (by the way, official cost is €3999, but there was a €3299 bargain when I bought it).

Close to 4 AM in Spain. Good Night to ASR!
Just keeps me thinking more it's a rant than you doing logical things or expecting logical things. Keeping purchases to provide the specific functions you require can help. Good night, or rather good morning :)
 
Except...

Usually some 200k$ car does at least one or two things better than a 50k$ one. Like, factually.

A 4400$ CD Player cannot sound a bit different than any good ones at 1/4 the price (if not way less)...

;)
But it should function at least as good as an inexpensive ones, it shouldn't compete on looks alone!
 
We're not talking about "legacy features" here, but rather functionality that any CD player has today. Or well, 99.99% of them, by the looks of it. I humbly don't think that's the issue here.
Sadly I think we are. CDs are a semi-dying medium and so are CD players.
They are clearly as per your experience becoming as impractical as anything before. I am not saying that's right.
Wish I could have sold you my Accuphase DP-65v.
 
Rotel has solid engineering. Unfortunately, this is a matter of picking the wrong product for one's own needs. The owner's manual of the product in question here states quite clearly that there isn't a fast forwarding/rewind button:

".. Track Buttons / B: These buttons are used to select tracks on the disc. When a disc is playing, pressing the TRACK button advances to the beginning of the next track. Pressing the TRACK button returns to the beginning of the previous track. .." No mention of FF/RW.
Few people read the owners manual before making a purchase. And, if not having that function (which, as far as I know, all other CD players have as a standard function, somehow makes the manufacturer think that makes it a "better" CD player, they should have pointed it out that they think that it is better to not have this function (and what they think the benefit of not having it is).
It is beautiful! But not competent, feature wise (as to performance wise, we don't know). And, it doesn't matter: because of the incompetency of it's functionality.
(I am one that just likes to play my CD's on a CD player. I do want to back them up to a NAS but that is for incase something happens to the CD. Then, I would make a new CD from what I backed up. (yes, I can record and make a CD, in either 16 bit or 20 bit).
 
Back
Top Bottom