Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Hello All,
I am constantly amazed by the prices people pay for a CD player
(>$1000!!!) and wondered if maybe the wisdom of the group could help me
out again. As I had suspected, there is no quality improvement from
using expensive cables vs. lamp cord, I now ask the same question about
CD players: is there any reason why any cd player is better than my $20
Walmart special DVD player? Now I understand that there could be
allegations that the DAC circuitry is terrible in the cheaper players,
but shouldn't a $150 DAC such as the Behringer Ultramarch or DIO solve
all such problems and even be overkill? I absolutely fail to see how
there can be a difference.

Furthermore, for the price that people spend on some CD players you can
get a computer, the free EAC software, a good external soundcard or DAC,
_and_ have money left over. The EAC software pretty much guaratees
perfect copies of CDs and you would be able to store them all on the
computer to boot, no more fooling with CDs. Hrm, maybe a new product
idea for audiophiles with too much money?

Thanks
Mike

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Michael Dombrowski" <legodudenein@hammycorp.com> wrote in message
news:coqr8l0kuh@news2.newsguy.com...
> Hello All,
> I am constantly amazed by the prices people pay for a CD player
> (>$1000!!!) and wondered if maybe the wisdom of the group could help me
> out again. As I had suspected, there is no quality improvement from
> using expensive cables vs. lamp cord, I now ask the same question about
> CD players: is there any reason why any cd player is better than my $20
> Walmart special DVD player? Now I understand that there could be
> allegations that the DAC circuitry is terrible in the cheaper players,
> but shouldn't a $150 DAC such as the Behringer Ultramarch or DIO solve
> all such problems and even be overkill? I absolutely fail to see how
> there can be a difference.
>
> Furthermore, for the price that people spend on some CD players you can
> get a computer, the free EAC software, a good external soundcard or DAC,
> _and_ have money left over. The EAC software pretty much guaratees
> perfect copies of CDs and you would be able to store them all on the
> computer to boot, no more fooling with CDs. Hrm, maybe a new product
> idea for audiophiles with too much money?
>

In addition to DAC quality (Wolfsan, for example), their can be substantial
differences in power supply size and quality, transport quality and
reliability, vibration isolation, efi shielding, the quality of passive
parts, and especially analog output design and quality. Where the
"leveling" point is open to debate, but it sure ain't at the $20 Wal-Mart
level.

As to computers, some people go that way. A lot aren't so inclined, and if
music is their main interest, a quality CD or CD/DVD-A/SACD player makes
sense.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"In addition to DAC quality (Wolfsan, for example), their can be
substantial differences in power supply size and quality, transport
quality and reliability, vibration isolation, efi shielding, the quality
of passive parts, and especially analog output design and quality. Where
the "leveling" point is open to debate, but it sure ain't at the $20
Wal-Mart level."

How about at the audibility level, as of yet undemonstrated for those
things you claim make a difference?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Harry Lavo wrote:
> "Michael Dombrowski" <legodudenein@hammycorp.com> wrote in message
> news:coqr8l0kuh@news2.newsguy.com...
>
>>Hello All,
>>I am constantly amazed by the prices people pay for a CD player
>>(>$1000!!!) and wondered if maybe the wisdom of the group could help me
>>out again. As I had suspected, there is no quality improvement from
>>using expensive cables vs. lamp cord, I now ask the same question about
>>CD players: is there any reason why any cd player is better than my $20
>>Walmart special DVD player? Now I understand that there could be
>>allegations that the DAC circuitry is terrible in the cheaper players,
>>but shouldn't a $150 DAC such as the Behringer Ultramarch or DIO solve
>>all such problems and even be overkill? I absolutely fail to see how
>>there can be a difference.
>>
>>Furthermore, for the price that people spend on some CD players you can
>>get a computer, the free EAC software, a good external soundcard or DAC,
>>_and_ have money left over. The EAC software pretty much guaratees
>>perfect copies of CDs and you would be able to store them all on the
>>computer to boot, no more fooling with CDs. Hrm, maybe a new product
>>idea for audiophiles with too much money?
>>
>
>
> In addition to DAC quality (Wolfsan, for example), their can be substantial
> differences in power supply size and quality, transport quality and
> reliability, vibration isolation, efi shielding, the quality of passive
> parts, and especially analog output design and quality. Where the
> "leveling" point is open to debate, but it sure ain't at the $20 Wal-Mart
> level.

Okay, but does any of this actually make a difference? IE, has anyone
tested the digital output on a $20 DVD player vs. an expensive one and
compared them? I strongly suspect they would be identical, or identical
save errors so infrequent that it makes no difference in sound quality.
Basically my question is there anything that differentiates a cheap
player from an expensive player other than the DAC (which, after a
point, I don't think even makes that much of a difference)?

Have you ever heard a Wal-Mart player? One with an external DAC?

Mike

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
digital output.


---MIKE---

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 12/4/04 11:54 AM, in article cosq4e02fkg@news1.newsguy.com, "Michael
Dombrowski" <legodudenein@hammycorp.com> wrote:

>> In addition to DAC quality (Wolfsan, for example), their can be substantial
>> differences in power supply size and quality, transport quality and
>> reliability, vibration isolation, efi shielding, the quality of passive
>> parts, and especially analog output design and quality. Where the
>> "leveling" point is open to debate, but it sure ain't at the $20 Wal-Mart
>> level.
>
> Okay, but does any of this actually make a difference? IE, has anyone
> tested the digital output on a $20 DVD player vs. an expensive one and
> compared them? I strongly suspect they would be identical, or identical
> save errors so infrequent that it makes no difference in sound quality.
> Basically my question is there anything that differentiates a cheap
> player from an expensive player other than the DAC (which, after a
> point, I don't think even makes that much of a difference)?
>
> Have you ever heard a Wal-Mart player? One with an external DAC?

That is a good point. The basic assumption is that for the things a
transport does - present the digital data properly interleaved with the
clock signal, at a accurate 75 Ohm output, with data that is read of the
disk with little/minimal jitter - cannot be done for under a certain price
point. Decent transports from OEM's tend to cost more than $20 - has a Wal
Mart no-name broken some price barrier with no gegradation of quality? If
so, as an audiophile we ought to know - after all if we spend $20 on a
transport, we would have a couple of hundred dollars, minimum, left for more
recorded music!

I have my doubts, but hey, why shouldn't it work OK? It probably used a
DVD-ROM drive - or a CD-ROM drive from a computer - and as long as the rest
of the circuitry is A-OK it should work? I am having a hard time to think
that in large volume even, that a $20 retail price is gaing to give high
qulaity - assuming that Wal Mart is using it as a loss leader or selling it
at a break even, that BOM is likely to be <$15 which again is kinda
difficult to think it is designed with anything but cost in mind.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 4 Dec 2004 20:02:13 GMT, twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) wrote:

>I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
>for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
>there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
>Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
>very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
>digital output.

However, before offering such opinions, it would be good to check your
facts. If it does indeed have a digital output, a $20 Walmart CD
player may indeed be the equal of a $10,000 Mark Levinson 'Reference'
transport, if used into a genuinely competent DAC such as the
Benchmark DAC-1. OTOH, if it doesn't have a digital output, this would
be a problem.............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

---MIKE--- wrote:
> I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
> for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
> there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
> Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
> very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
> digital output.
>
>
> ---MIKE---

It does, optical and digital. At least, the three that I've used have
had them both. As well as component output. Why would it not hold up as
well? The ones I've bought are still going strong. And at $20/piece,
does it matter that much if it holds up only half as long as a player
costing six times as much?

Mike

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 12/4/04 3:02 PM, in article cot54502r9d@news1.newsguy.com, "---MIKE---"
<twinmountain@webtv.net> wrote:

> I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
> for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
> there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
> Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
> very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
> digital output.

Some transport mechanisms would cost more than $130 - so I am not so sure it
is all horses for all courses. And given the way the US dollar is plunging,
that $130 is likely to cost $180-200 before too long...

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 4 Dec 2004 23:56:17 GMT, B&D <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>On 12/4/04 3:02 PM, in article cot54502r9d@news1.newsguy.com, "---MIKE---"
><twinmountain@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
>> for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
>> there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
>> Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
>> very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
>> digital output.
>
>Some transport mechanisms would cost more than $130

I'm not aware of any, aside from idiocies like the belt drive mech
used by Burmester. It's worth remembering that under all the shiny
alloy of the $10,000 Mark Levinson 'Reference', lies the same $50
Philips mech that you'll find in the CD jukebox in your local bar.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 4 Dec 2004 23:55:31 GMT, Michael Dombrowski
<legodudenein@hammycorp.com> wrote:

>---MIKE--- wrote:
>> I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
>> for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
>> there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
>> Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
>> very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
>> digital output.

>It does, optical and digital. At least, the three that I've used have
>had them both. As well as component output. Why would it not hold up as
>well? The ones I've bought are still going strong. And at $20/piece,
>does it matter that much if it holds up only half as long as a player
>costing six times as much?

Good point. And if it does indeed have a coax digital output, then
combining it with say the Benchmark DAC will give you a truly SOTA CD
player with which you can really irritate your 'high end' friends! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Harry Lavo" harry.lavo@rcn.com wrote:
>"Michael Dombrowski" <legodudenein@hammycorp.com> wrote in message
>news:coqr8l0kuh@news2.newsguy.com...
>> Hello All,
>> I am constantly amazed by the prices people pay for a CD player
>> (>$1000!!!) and wondered if maybe the wisdom of the group could help me
>> out again. As I had suspected, there is no quality improvement from
>> using expensive cables vs. lamp cord, I now ask the same question about
>> CD players: is there any reason why any cd player is better than my $20
>> Walmart special DVD player? Now I understand that there could be
>> allegations that the DAC circuitry is terrible in the cheaper players,
>> but shouldn't a $150 DAC such as the Behringer Ultramarch or DIO solve
>> all such problems and even be overkill? I absolutely fail to see how
>> there can be a difference.
>>
>> Furthermore, for the price that people spend on some CD players you can
>> get a computer, the free EAC software, a good external soundcard or DAC,
>> _and_ have money left over. The EAC software pretty much guaratees
>> perfect copies of CDs and you would be able to store them all on the
>> computer to boot, no more fooling with CDs. Hrm, maybe a new product
>> idea for audiophiles with too much money?
>>
>
>In addition to DAC quality (Wolfsan, for example), their can be substantial
>differences in power supply size and quality, transport quality and
>reliability, vibration isolation, efi shielding, the quality of passive
>parts, and especially analog output design and quality. Where the
>"leveling" point is open to debate, but it sure ain't at the $20 Wal-Mart
>level.

How would you know this? Have you tested one?

>
>As to computers, some people go that way. A lot aren't so inclined, and if
>music is their main interest, a quality CD or CD/DVD-A/SACD player makes
>sense.

I bring this up as an issue because of my experience in the late 80s. In the
last half of that decade I taught an economics class sponsored by Ameritech the
the Regional Bell Operating Companies and other industry groups like other
local operating telephone companies and Bellcore.

To illustrate telephony technology embedded in consumer products I used the
then-new compact disc (negative feedback, transistor, information theory,
integrated circuits...) and gave away a player (which I paid for out of my own
pocket) at each class. I purchased all of them one at a time from retail
outlets and never paid more than $100 for any single player. The least
expensive was about $60 at that time.

This was back when even the inexpensive major brands cost $400 apiece. In
listening comparisons with up-scale Marantz, Sony and ES models I never found a
single cheap player that sounded any different from the more expensive players.

Of course, I have little feedback on the reliability of those products so I
can't say they weren't as stoutly built I can say the the off-the-shelf sound
quality was deficient in any way. Maybe that's true about the Wal-Mart
products. As far as I could tell in the late 80s the transports and user
interface of the cheap products were alarmingly similar to more expensive
products of the time.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

In article <cove760fdl@news2.newsguy.com>,
Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:

> On 4 Dec 2004 23:56:17 GMT, B&D <bromo@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >On 12/4/04 3:02 PM, in article cot54502r9d@news1.newsguy.com, "---MIKE---"
> ><twinmountain@webtv.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I would suspect that the $20 Walmart player would not sound as good as,
> >> for example, the pioneer DVD/CD/SACD player for $130. I don't think
> >> there is any point in paying more than that for any player. If the
> >> Walmart player DID sound good when new, it probably would not hold up
> >> very well. As far as using an external DAC with it, I doubt if it has a
> >> digital output.
> >
> >Some transport mechanisms would cost more than $130
>
> I'm not aware of any, aside from idiocies like the belt drive mech
> used by Burmester. It's worth remembering that under all the shiny
> alloy of the $10,000 Mark Levinson 'Reference', lies the same $50
> Philips mech that you'll find in the CD jukebox in your local bar.

I wonder if the DAC and electronics were different. Depends on how big
the Reference is, I guess.

Wasn't the same mechanism was available on ARC and Rotel players?

Is this the one?

http://siber-sonic.com/audio/swingarm.html

Stephen

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 6 Dec 2004 00:33:40 GMT, MINe 109 <smcatut@mail.utexas.edu>
wrote:

>In article <cove760fdl@news2.newsguy.com>,
> Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:

>> It's worth remembering that under all the shiny
>> alloy of the $10,000 Mark Levinson 'Reference', lies the same $50
>> Philips mech that you'll find in the CD jukebox in your local bar.
>
>I wonder if the DAC and electronics were different. Depends on how big
>the Reference is, I guess.

It's purely a transport, it doesn't have a DAC. The matching ML
'Reference' DAC is $17,000! And it isn't as good as the $900 Benchmark
DAC-1.................

>Wasn't the same mechanism was available on ARC and Rotel players?
>
>Is this the one?
>
>http://siber-sonic.com/audio/swingarm.html

That mechanism was indeed very good, but it went out of production
about ten years ago as the CDM-9 (all the stock was bought up by
Naim). Modern Philips-based players all use variants of the CDM-12
linear sled mechanism, which is much like the classic Sony CDM-14 in
principle. The Mark Levinson uses the 'industrial' version, which is
designed for heavier duty than the standard version, and can be found
in 'CD jukeboxes' in bars all over the world.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering