• 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!

What CD Player would you like to see tested?

@NTTY You're on Headphonesty, a clickbait online audio magazine.

I don't have the background to break that down, although my BS meter is activated. What is the real world take home from that testing? Measurable but not audible?
 
@NTTY You're on Headphonesty, a clickbait online audio magazine.

I think the title of the article is somewhat misleading and some conclusions biased. The take home message somewhat beeing that "good old NOS R2R cd players outperform modern ones" (But what is a modern CD player? A 90’ Sony or Denon or a smsl cd player?).
While pointing out the great work of Florent, I feel that the paper is rather confusing and does not do justice to the finesse of the tests he carried out.
 
Last edited:
I think the title of the article is somewhat misleading and some conclusions biased. The take home message somewhat beeing that "good old NOS R2R cd players outperform modern ones" (But what is a modern CD player? A 90’ Sony or Denon or a smsl cd player?).
While pointing out the great work of Florent, I feel that the paper is rather confusing and does not do justice to the finesse of the tests he carried out.
It’s cool to see my work reused. I take it as recognition!
It looks AI written and uses my article here "More than we hear" as the basis, with few complementary sources. I like it because the content is precise, and is a good summary of what I wrote. It might be a little confusing on NOS and R2R, indeed. Well the AI was not. It correctly mentions NOS and R2R flaws and advantages.
I guess the writer wanted to talk about the why and how vintage CD players outperform newer design because they have a better resistance to intersamples over. But it’s funny because I only ever measured one of these (the Yamaha CD-1) and never published the review here.
And yes the title might not be appropriate, but it makes you want to read the article, and so the objective is achieved :)

I don't have the background to break that down, although my BS meter is activated. What is the real world take home from that testing? Measurable but not audible?
Yep, reason why my article here is titled "More than we hear".

A honest Thank You, Flo, and respect: this article says the same.

(but no excuse to pause or stop ... ;) )
Thank you! And I won’t ;)
 
The SMSL PL200 and PL200T have impressive design specifications which are a major step up from the PL100, including a top loading tray - most definitely preferable to a slot loading mechanism. Perhaps SMSL could arrange a product loan??

Given the impressive mechanical design of the tray mechanism for the top-end Yamaha CD players, running the rule over one of the CD-S series would be most welcome.

The weight of a Yamaha CD-S2100 prevents drop-shipping, unfortunately; the SMSL players are feather weight in comparison.
 
It sure would be nice to get one on loan from SMSL. I’m not sure I reached enough popularity for that though ;)

Shipping costs for a high-end CD player, like the Yamaha you mentioned, is indeed problematic.
 
It sure would be nice to get one on loan from SMSL. I’m not sure I reached enough popularity for that though ;)
Hmmm ... anyone who knows someone here who has 'enough popularity' to nudge SMSL to do so? :cool:
 
It’s cool to see my work reused. I take it as recognition!
Yes, I understand. It happened to me too: a year ago I posted on these pages a detailed measurement of the wow and flutter of some turntables I own. A few months later I came across an article on Headphonesty and thought: “Hmm, this guy did the same experiments I did... But that’s me!”

In my case, the article had been largely manipulated and ended up drawing conclusions I never meant to make. The title was also misleading, clearly chosen just to attract as many clicks as possible.

It makes me happy anyway!
 
Last edited:
I don't have the background to break that down, although my BS meter is activated. What is the real world take home from that testing? Measurable but not audible?
I read it quickly. Its nonsense as as far as any audibility goes
 
It’s cool to see my work reused. I take it as recognition!
It looks AI written and uses my article here "More than we hear" as the basis, with few complementary sources. I like it because the content is precise, and is a good summary of what I wrote. It might be a little confusing on NOS and R2R, indeed. Well the AI was not. It correctly mentions NOS and R2R flaws and advantages.
I guess the writer wanted to talk about the why and how vintage CD players outperform newer design because they have a better resistance to intersamples over. But it’s funny because I only ever measured one of these (the Yamaha CD-1) and never published the review here.
And yes the title might not be appropriate, but it makes you want to read the article, and so the objective is achieved :)


Yep, reason why my article here is titled "More than we hear".


Thank you! And I won’t ;)

I read it again, and you're right, the content of the paper is rather precise (very good point), but the title (and one or two conclusions drawn in the text) may be misleading for people who didn't follow your work. Hopefully,this paper should encourage people to go to the original source of information :)
 
Yes, I understand. It happened to me too: a year ago I posted on these pages a detailed measurement of the wow and flutter of some turntables I own. A few months later I came across an article on Headphonesty and thought: “Hmm, this guy did the same experiments I did... But that’s me!”

In my case, the article had been largely manipulated and ended up drawing conclusions I never meant to make. The title was also misleading, clearly chosen just to attract as many clicks as possible.

It makes me happy anyway!
I would be nice to propose a comment to be published on Headphonesty. I hope Headphonesty cited the source of information as they did in the case of NTTY.
 
And how about a Cambridge CD 3 with 4 X TDA1541 :-)
It is unobtainable, but I had a look at this one in the past, because it mentions 16x oversampling on the front and has only one SAA7220, and so there’s something wrong here :)
I met soon after the Sony 337ESD with the staggered conversion that you know very well, and so I moved on to something else after that. I don’t expect the TDA to become much less distorted or much more linear by multiplying them. Maybe the SNR can be improved but I think the staggered 8x oversampling of Sony had a better theoretical advantage.
It would be interesting to double check though.
 
Back
Top Bottom