SACD Player choice; Yamaha CD-S1000 or Denon DCD-1600NE

[Trebdp83]

So, what it comes down to henry is that there are many options available to you at different price points and you can continue to enjoy your Oppo in the meantime until you find the player that is just right for you.

 

[henry001]

How would you output the results of the dac without analog outputs, tho?

yes I have the same question

So, what it comes down to henry is that there are many options available to you at different price points and you can continue to enjoy your Oppo in the meantime until you find the player that is just right for you.

Exactly

 

[jinjuku]

That's the theory you read. You didn't experiment with your fcking ears on a good stereo.

If you like please provide factual responses that bolster your argument. This is a warning.

 

[pcosmic]

You already got a few answers and I'm not trying to dog-pile on you. I'd just want to draw your attention to these few details:
having 1.5k = having 3k, well, not really, it's 100% increase on the budget
hearing a difference = performing better, again, this is not what people here are saying, differences in sound can be imagined, and let's not waste time on those and can be real in which case it's the same story about sound signature and the question should it be there.
3k Technics = sounds like it has 3k transport and DAC, this can be exactly because it costs that much, also how does 3k sounds, right?
DAC difference = speakers difference, not even in the same class, these shouldn't be in the same sentence and the difference in one of those says nothing about the difference in the other
SACD > CD, hardly ever is the SACD merely a transfer from a CD, almost always there has been some remaster done, it is quite possible you heard the audio engineers work rather than SACD's superiority.

As much as I have read on the pages of the AH forums, the point is that once you get a well performing, neutral transparent piece of gear, you can even tweak it to sound like 3k Technics. Other way around much harder if at all possible. So neutral takes the cake every time.

Neutral eh? Have you heard anything neutral in your life? Do you know what's neutral dude? Every song you ever heard was already colored per the mastering engineer/apparatus's tastes. But, you heard neutral somewhere eh?

And i guess whatever ya can't afford couldn't ever make a difference huh? That's a common trend with the forum warriors. And, Yep, never heard the gear, but real quick with a prophesy about how it might sound right? Are most of ya migrants from ASR? Lol. Carry on boys.

 

[Trell]

^ Dude, this thread is not in the SteamVent, so why don't you stop being a lord helmet?

 

[killdozzer]

Neutral eh? Have you heard anything neutral in your life? Do you know what's neutral dude? Every song you ever heard was already colored per the mastering engineer/apparatus's tastes. But, you heard neutral somewhere eh?

And i guess whatever ya can't afford couldn't ever make a difference huh? That's a common trend with the forum warriors. And, Yep, never heard the gear, but real quick with a prophesy about how it might sound right? Are most of ya migrants from ASR? Lol. Carry on boys.

Look, you got me wrong and some very simple things you fail to understand, I'm beginning to think you do it on purpose.

I heard, owned, own a lot of very expensive equipment. CD player I have at the moment sold for 3k when it was new. I had others. It plays differently, it's easy to hear it. The difference shouldn't be there and I wouldn't recommend this player with a straight face. I'm selling it, but I clearly state what it is. Luckily it's very famous with audiophiles and they know what they're getting so it's not hard to sell it.

The basic division as I see it and as was often mentioned in these forums is; what ever happens during the production of music and recording of the music, happens. In reproduction, however, the less happens, the better. That's what I meant by neutral. The idea is recording is storing of the music on a medium, reproduction should tell you what is stored and not change that.

Of course (!!!) this is not entirely possible and it describes something you strive for. Well, something you may or may not strive for. It's up to each one of us when choosing for ourselves.

I migrated to ASR from AH. Kiddin', of course. I use both and in combination with AudioBS, I can get straight answers and not waste time on hearing what someone likes (in his house, with his ears/age, shape of listening room, material of walls and perhaps even sound signature equipment where combining a few in a chain would make the "untangle-able Christmas lights"

For comparison; why would you put on blue sunglasses and go to a museum to look at pictures differently coloured, right?

So, that's it; there IS a difference, but is not welcome IMO, also some differences are imagined, neutral is desirable in reproduction, not necessarily for the artist, EVEN if you want to tune the sound to your liking, it's gonna be easier starting from as neutral as you can get. OTOH if you get a sound signature you don't like, you'll have a hell of a time to correct it. And it is almost impossible to get a sound signature that will work with all programs. Imagine equipment that sounds "warm" to you and imagine playing program that sounds "warm" to you. It can get hot!

I hope you at least understand the general idea.

 

[pcosmic]

Look, you got me wrong and some very simple things you fail to understand, I'm beginning to think you do it on purpose.

I heard, owned, own a lot of very expensive equipment. CD player I have at the moment sold for 3k when it was new. I had others. It plays differently, it's easy to hear it. The difference shouldn't be there and I wouldn't recommend this player with a straight face. I'm selling it, but I clearly state what it is. Luckily it's very famous with audiophiles and they know what they're getting so it's not hard to sell it.

The basic division as I see it and as was often mentioned in these forums is; what ever happens during the production of music and recording of the music, happens. In reproduction, however, the less happens, the better. That's what I meant by neutral. The idea is recording is storing of the music on a medium, reproduction should tell you what is stored and not change that.

Of course (!!!) this is not entirely possible and it describes something you strive for. Well, something you may or may not strive for. It's up to each one of us when choosing for ourselves.

I migrated to ASR from AH. Kiddin', of course. I use both and in combination with AudioBS, I can get straight answers and not waste time on hearing what someone likes (in his house, with his ears/age, shape of listening room, material of walls and perhaps even sound signature equipment where combining a few in a chain would make the "untangle-able Christmas lights"

For comparison; why would you put on blue sunglasses and go to a museum to look at pictures differently coloured, right?

So, that's it; there IS a difference, but is not welcome IMO, also some differences are imagined, neutral is desirable in reproduction, not necessarily for the artist, EVEN if you want to tune the sound to your liking, it's gonna be easier starting from as neutral as you can get. OTOH if you get a sound signature you don't like, you'll have a hell of a time to correct it. And it is almost impossible to get a sound signature that will work with all programs. Imagine equipment that sounds "warm" to you and imagine playing program that sounds "warm" to you. It can get hot!

I hope you at least understand the general idea.

I got the general idea alright.

This may have come up on other threads before. But, you do know that I have a console and a buncha gear in my music room (recorded/mastered albums etc before). I’ve been known to accommodate a few upcoming local starving artists in my house a.k.a helped them out pro bono. I am no Darcy Proper, but, hey, it was free. Stop by my house when you visit this country someday. I’ll pour you some wine, introduce you to some fine musicians and illustrate all the supposedly trivial things that could fck up the sound in a studio (it’s a black box for most of ya, I know). I’m a nicer guy in person actually bwaaahahahaha


P.S

As for the SACD sounding better, I see that this is just another ASR style fiesta with forum read talking points (dynamic range, level matching, ugh) spouted by a coupla other forum read scientists with no hands-on experience or knowledge. I prefer not to waste my breath.

 

[Kleinst]

Does the OPPO 83 make for a good office CD Player? I know it's very old now. What price would be a bargain to pick one up for?

I think the Sony UHD players are going to be best for video at this point even for normal DVDs and Blue rays right?

 

[Verdinut]

If I were in your shoes, I would just get a brand new Sony that sells for $75 which is covered with a warranty:

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-BDPBX370-Blu-Ray-Player-Wi-Fi/dp/B01I5QZN8E/ref=sr_1_3?crid=HLVSGTKNII2T&keywords=Sony+Blu-ray+player&qid=1668924709&sprefix=sony+blu-ray+player%2Caps%2C103&sr=8-3

 

[Kleinst]

Thanks, so nothing really compelling to play CDs for the OPPO 83 vs a newer Sony Blue Ray player?

If so, I guess it's the alure of a well put together device. But it is older. So probably sounds precisely the same I presume. And Sony Blue Ray players (not UHD) can be had for $15 or less on Facebook or Craigslist.

 

[sterling shoote]

I enjoy stereo and 5.1 SACDs via my OPPO-205 yet I also have a Sony UBP-X800M2 which is connected to a Marantz NR1200 Receiver via HDMI. The Sony outputs DSD to the Marantz but the Marantz converts DSD to PCM before converting to analog. Still sounds on par to the OPPO’s DSD to analog conversion , which just sounds great. At any rate, I’m really impressed by the Sony Player.

 

[Kleinst]

Thanks, so nothing really compelling to play CDs for the OPPO 83 vs a newer Sony Blue Ray player?

If so, I guess it's the alure of a well put together device. But it is older. So probably sounds precisely the same I presume. And Sony Blue Ray players (not UHD) can be had for $15 or less on Facebook or Craigslist.

I did pick up the Oppo 83 for a bargain price. Nice addition to my office to play CDs. It does sound better than the older Sony DVD player I was using. I'm sure my Sony UHD's could do the trick as well. But at the price I got it, it was a nice addition. I'll keep testing it out.

For just CDs does the 103, 203 really add much? I know it adds other functionality I wouldn't be using. I won't be paying crazy money to upgrade for that. OPPO told me I wouldn't notice much difference.

 

[dianaermos]

Dear everybody
I appreciate if somebody could help me social network hosting in the choice of above CD player.
I can not choose which one to go with. Which one has native DSD A/D conversion and which one is better in terms of sound quality and overall product?

The Sony player will be fine. There is no reason to avoid a universal player. It will be the receiver or pre/pro that will do the conversion anyway.

 

[Verdinut]

I did pick up the Oppo 83 for a bargain price. Nice addition to my office to play CDs. It does sound better than the older Sony DVD player I was using. I'm sure my Sony UHD's could do the trick as well. But at the price I got it, it was a nice addition. I'll keep testing it out.

For just CDs does the 103, 203 really add much? I know it adds other functionality I wouldn't be using. I won't be paying crazy money to upgrade for that. OPPO told me I wouldn't notice much difference.

Why would a Oppo 103 or 203 add anything to CD playing? The CD technology is 40 years old and any Blu-ray player will play a CD. If a player can play more complex blu-ray discs with DTS Master Audio tracks, it sure can play any CD, The sound quality will be limited by the CD itself.

 

[lovinthehd]

I did pick up the Oppo 83 for a bargain price. Nice addition to my office to play CDs. It does sound better than the older Sony DVD player I was using. I'm sure my Sony UHD's could do the trick as well. But at the price I got it, it was a nice addition. I'll keep testing it out.

For just CDs does the 103, 203 really add much? I know it adds other functionality I wouldn't be using. I won't be paying crazy money to upgrade for that. OPPO told me I wouldn't notice much difference.

Hard to imagine any disc player that functions correctly used as transport to sound better than another....maybe if you're using its dac but even that is questionable. I have a 203 and it plays optical discs fine....but so do my older disc players.

 

[j_garcia]

Hard to imagine any disc player that functions correctly used as transport to sound better than another....maybe if you're using its dac but even that is questionable. I have a 203 and it plays optical discs fine....but so do my older disc players.

I have owned a lot of players and quite a few SACD/DVD-A players including the 83SE. The 105 and 205 you really will hear the difference. There's a reason they were highly praised and it is those DACs. As a transport though, you will hear ZERO difference.

 

[lovinthehd]

I have owned a lot of players and quite a few SACD/DVD-A players including the 83SE. The 105 and 205 you really will hear the difference. There's a reason they were highly praised and it is those DACs. As a transport though, you will hear ZERO difference.

I doubt it, have not heard any dacs particularly making that sort of audible difference. How does the difference manifest itself particularly? I'd love to see someone properly test the comparison between units, tho.

 

[j_garcia]

I doubt it, have not heard any dacs particularly making that sort of audible difference. How does the difference manifest itself particularly? I'd love to see someone properly test the comparison between units, tho.

Detail, clarity and a "realness" for lack of a better term. Sense of the recording space is reproduced better, granted this is recording specific. It won't transform bad recordings into good ones, but good ones sound amazing. Think Jazz at the Pawnshop or Patricia Barber Café Blue.

 

[lovinthehd]

Detail, clarity and a "realness" for lack of a better term. Sense of the recording space is reproduced better, granted this is recording specific. It won't transform bad recordings into good ones, but good ones sound amazing. Think Jazz at the Pawnshop or Patricia Barber Café Blue.

Jazz at the Pawnshop is just boring, I have the multich sacd, tho (just a disappointment), and have some Patricia Barber, too. Can't see the dac making any particular differences with those recordings, they sound great now with a variety of gear/dacs. They're mostly just good recordings on a technical level. Did you do any kind of blinded level matched comparisons? Or just the magic that happens when you plug in a new highly touted piece of gear ?

 

[j_garcia]

Jazz at the Pawnshop is just boring, I have the multich sacd, tho (just a disappointment), and have some Patricia Barber, too. Can't see the dac making any particular differences with those recordings, they sound great now with a variety of gear/dacs. They're mostly just good recordings on a technical level. Did you do any kind of blinded level matched comparisons? Or just the magic that happens when you plug in a new highly touted piece of gear ?

I only listen to Jazz at the Pawnshop in stereo. Cafe Blue is only stereo.

I had the 83SE for years so I knew what it sounded like. I had a Denon 2900 before that and the 83SE was an improvement over it. Those are considered benchmark units, then the 105 came out and became the "standard" for players at the time. I would say it is more like a fine wine, where it is subtle what makes it better, but you CAN taste it. Is it worth the price may be a different story (and I don't like expensive wine lol) and everyone's tolerance is different for how much improvement you get. It isn't like "a veil was removed" and this isn't like cables or other things that people assign magic words to, it is verifiable as noted in Gene's bench tests of the 203 and 205. The difference between the 105 and 205 is hard to hear, but between the 83SE and 105 I could hear it.

Oppo UDP-203 & UDP-205 Ultra HD Blu-ray Players Review

We reviewed Oppo's newest Blu-ray players, the UDP-203 and UDP-205. With very responsive interfaces and state of the art playback performance The UDP-203/205 will leave you wanting very little.

www.audioholics.com