Question on "Audiophile" CD players

[nitin_mehra20]

Hi All,

I have a question on these "Audiophile" CD players. From what little I have read and understood pertaining to these players, the reason they are expensive is due to the high end circuitry which keeps signal noise at a minimum and a great DAC built into them. But these players cost quite a bit for what they do

Now even if I am using my woobly CD player and ripping the CD, I am getting all the bits off the CD correctly after a proper checksum, converting it into a lossless audio format like Apple Lossless or FLAC and then streaming it to my pre/pro as a digital bit stream, it works out to be a cheaper solution than one of these 5K+ CD players.

My question is, are these audiophile CD players really worth the price????

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hi All,

I have a question on these "Audiophile" CD players. From what little I have read and understood pertaining to these players, the reason they are expensive is due to the high end circuitry which keeps signal noise at a minimum and a great DAC built into them. But these players cost quite a bit for what they do

Now even if I am using my woobly CD player and ripping the CD, I am getting all the bits off the CD correctly after a proper checksum, converting it into a lossless audio format like Apple Lossless or FLAC and then streaming it to my pre/pro as a digital bit stream, it works out to be a cheaper solution than one of these 5K+ CD players.

My question is, are these audiophile CD players really worth the price????

Well, to some it is worth it for bragging rights, looks, or convincing themselves that it makes an audible difference, but to many others, it is just not worth it, as they usually don't make an audible difference under bias controlled conditions.
In your case, digital out, you can certainly wipe audible benefits off the reason to buy

 

[DaleAV]

You will hear little advantage unless you have all the equipment of the same high standard down the line, including direct stereo output from an upscale receiver or pre-amp and of course excellent speakers for reproduction.
Even then, the differences are rarely worth the expense involved for most of us.
Certainly a personal thing.

 

[nitin_mehra20]

Well, to some it is worth it for bragging rights, looks, or convincing themselves that it makes an audible difference, but to many others, it is just not worth it, as they usually don't make an audible difference under bias controlled conditions.
In your case, digital out, you can certainly wipe audible benefits off the reason to buy

I was considering picking up a audiophile CD player and after I read what it did, i wasn't quite sure and wanted to get some opinion on the same

You will hear little advantage unless you have all the equipment of the same high standard down the line, including direct stereo output from an upscale receiver or pre-amp and of course excellent speakers for reproduction.
Even then, the differences are rarely worth the expense involved for most of us.
Certainly a personal thing.

As for my setup, I have a QNAP NAS on which i store my apple lossless encoded songs, ripped off a CD. I stream this over my network to Roku Soundbridge which has an optical out and keeps the sample rate at 44.1 khz.

I feed this optical output to my Onkyo SC885P which has a Burr Brown chip for decoding.

Now, if I were to get an audiophile CD player, will that beat my current setup substantially to warrant the price demanded??

 

[nibhaz]

Now, if I were to get an audiophile CD player, will that beat my current setup substantially to warrant the price demanded??

NO!

Take whatever monies you where considering for an “audiophile” CD player and instead purchase acoustical treatments for your listening room. With this approach you’ll a actually hear a positive improvement…not think you hear

 

[nitin_mehra20]

NO!

Take whatever monies you where considering for an “audiophile” CD player and instead purchase acoustical treatments for your listening room. With this approach you’ll a actually hear a positive improvement…not think you hear

Thanks!!! This is my understanding too Now I can rest in peace and not feel guilty about NOT having an audiophile CD player

 

[jamie2112]

"Audiophile shmile" Get an Oppo IMO they sound great for cds as well...

 

[nitin_mehra20]

"Audiophile shmile" Get an Oppo IMO they sound great for cds as well...

I am waiting for the Bluray player to come out. That's on my buying list. I am guessing that should take care of my need for Bluray, Audio DVD and SACD. The rest are sounding great on my existing setup

 

[DaleAV]

NO!

Take whatever monies you where considering for an “audiophile” CD player and instead purchase acoustical treatments for your listening room. With this approach you’ll a actually hear a positive improvement…not think you hear

It's amazing how many miss that precise point. Often when with empty stares when it is suggested.

I used these folks for the low cost but effectiveness of their panels.

www.atsacoustics.com

 

[lsiberian]

It's amazing how many miss that precise point. Often when with empty stares when it is suggested.

I used these folks for the low cost but effectiveness of their panels.

www.atsacoustics.com

Treatments are usually not accepted by many of our SOs. They are considered ugly and not fitting for the living room.

Still an EQ would be a superior investment and can sometimes be gotten away with.

 

[agarwalro]

Think of it as the law of deminishing returns gone mad.

The audiophile players (or for that matter anything tagged "audiophile") generally tout specs "improvements" that cannot be perceived by human hearing. Once you get outside the range of human perception, it does not matter how far out you are, it will not matter.

For instance, all else being equal, a player that has flat FR between 10Hz-25KHz will sound no less flat than a player that has flat FR between 1Hz-100KHz, or all else being equal, for the same power at same frequency, 0.001% IMD will sound no worse than 0.0001%. But to achieve the respectively latter specs, the players will be orders of magnitude more expensive.

Also, there is a lot of BS going around in the AV review world. A $50000 "CD Transport" MUST SOUND BETTER than the $2500 "CD Player". A $1000/ ft "Speaker Interconnect" must sound better than a "$0.50/ ft "Speaker Wire".

For people with a lot of money, logical reasoning seems to be the first thing that they loose. That combined with bragging rights is what drives the "audiophile". For the rest of us (comparitively no money, plenty of brains) there is AH.

As stated before, there are several additions to the setup and room that provide considerably more palpable improvements. Eg. Speakers, placement, eq, treatments, etc.

 

[DaleAV]

Treatments are usually not accepted by many of our SOs. They are considered ugly and not fitting for the living room.

Still an EQ would be a superior investment and can sometimes be gotten away with.

My wife helped me color coordinate my choice. Granted, there are some modifications that can certainly look out of place, but fortunately my room was not that bad to start with.
It also depends how far you want to go, but any improvement is welcome.

 

[Thisdale]

As for my setup, I have a QNAP NAS on which i store my apple lossless encoded songs, ripped off a CD. I stream this over my network to Roku Soundbridge which has an optical out and keeps the sample rate at 44.1 khz.

I feed this optical output to my Onkyo SC885P which has a Burr Brown chip for decoding.

Now, if I were to get an audiophile CD player, will that beat my current setup substantially to warrant the price demanded??

Say i don't have any of those components... a Audiophile CD player would probably be far less expensive, am i right?

 

[Thisdale]

Think of it as the law of deminishing returns gone mad.

The audiophile players (or for that matter anything tagged "audiophile") generally tout specs "improvements" that cannot be perceived by human hearing. Once you get outside the range of human perception, it does not matter how far out you are, it will not matter.

I must voice my opinion here, as i believe this is actually false. Firstly, not every human "hears" the same exact frequence range. Some are more sensible than others to "hearing".

Second, frequencies "above" or "below" a person's ability to "hear" them doesn't mean they do not exist and can definitely be felt by the human senses. Very low rythmic bases for example, are not perceptible by the ears, but are definitely felt. A good system (starting from the media itself, down to the speakers) will be able to reproduce those frequences, and they will most definitely be felt by the audiophyte. The effect of "soundstage" is partially explained and "felt" that way; the same way you get a strange sensation of suffocation and vertigo when you enter an arena. You do not hear the "emptiness" but it is still there in frequences you do not "hear", but feel.

I though i'd share my though on the subject.

 

[nibhaz]

I must voice my opinion here, as i believe this is actually false. Firstly, not every human "hears" the same exact frequence range. Some are more sensible than others to "hearing".

Second, frequencies "above" or "below" a person's ability to "hear" them doesn't mean they do not exist and can definitely be felt by the human senses. Very low rythmic bases for example, are not perceptible by the ears, but are definitely felt. A good system (starting from the media itself, down to the speakers) will be able to reproduce those frequences, and they will most definitely be felt by the audiophyte. The effect of "soundstage" is partially explained and "felt" that way; the same way you get a strange sensation of suffocation and vertigo when you enter an arena. You do not hear the "emptiness" but it is still there in frequences you do not "hear", but feel.

I though i'd share my though on the subject.

Your opinion does contain some truth, but I believe that you are missing the general spirit of all the responses to the op, which is that an audiophile” cd player does not represent a good ROI.

First, I don’t think science has conclusively shown that ultrasonic information above 20 kHz positively adds to listening experience. But that in its self is mute since we are talking about CD which is limited to 20 kHz to allow for the anti-aliasing process.

Subsonic information is a much more visceral experience!

But does it really matter if a CD player can accurately output this information if your speakers do not? And if your speakers can accurately output this information does it really matter if your room’s acoustics are muddling the output of your perfect chain of reproduction equipment?

Now suppose your room is well treated with a ruler flat response, wouldn’t you need source material, which contains the subsonic or ultra sonic material?

Now suppose you have said source material, was it recorded with the appropriate equipment to accurately capture subsonic and ultrasonic information?

For me, there are too many ifs to justify the exuberant prices charged for specifications of questionable real world application.

 

[Tomorrow]

OP, Nibhaz's points are right on the money. And his first suggestion regarding room treatments should be heeded, IMHO. You'll gain much more in audio performance from that kind of investment.

Last year, just for fun, we ran a blind test on a small, clunky, $10 Sears yard-sale CDP against a highly praised, modded, smooth-as-silk JVC XL-Z1050. When corrected for output levels, no audio difference could be detected. While it wasn't hard science, our little experiment convinced me of the benefits of buying a feature, aesthetics, or cost driven, but not a "performance" driven CDP.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I must voice my opinion here, as i believe this is actually false. Firstly, not every human "hears" the same exact frequence range. Some are more sensible than others to "hearing".

Second, frequencies "above" or "below" a person's ability to "hear" them doesn't mean they do not exist and can definitely be felt by the human senses. Very low rythmic bases for example, are not perceptible by the ears, but are definitely felt. A good system (starting from the media itself, down to the speakers) will be able to reproduce those frequences, and they will most definitely be felt by the audiophyte. The effect of "soundstage" is partially explained and "felt" that way; the same way you get a strange sensation of suffocation and vertigo when you enter an arena. You do not hear the "emptiness" but it is still there in frequences you do not "hear", but feel.

I though i'd share my though on the subject.

Actually, soundstage is not felt that way at all, you are mistaken. Low frequency is omni directional, no soundstage.
Frequencies above detection are not felt nor heard even if they are there.

While hearing differently is true, so what.

 

[Thisdale]

Actually, soundstage is not felt that way at all, you are mistaken. Low frequency is omni directional, no soundstage.
Frequencies above detection are not felt nor heard even if they are there.

While hearing differently is true, so what.

As you know, Soundstage is a term that refers to the ability to hear music the way it was recorded (how instruments and musiciens were placed in a room/on a stage). Its not a set value you can adjust. Imagine having the very low frequencies of a large auditorium recorded below the actual music. you will not listen to it, but you will feel it, just like you hear murmures and coughs from a good live recording. Its all about the ability of your speakers and system to reproduce those frequency ranges, so that they add to the experience.

And so what? Well i i happen to be a bit more suceptible to lower frequencies, so i care and i feel it. Therefore, i want the best experience i can get out of it. that's what.

 

[zhimbo]

Well i i happen to be a bit more suceptible to lower frequencies, so i care and i feel it. Therefore, i want the best experience i can get out of it. that's what.

Wait a minute...the message you were responding to specifically talked about FR being flat to 10Hz. Are you really saying that being flat at sub-10Hz frequencies is an important consideration?

 

[tbewick]

Think of it as the law of deminishing returns gone mad.

The audiophile players (or for that matter anything tagged "audiophile") generally tout specs "improvements" that cannot be perceived by human hearing. Once you get outside the range of human perception, it does not matter how far out you are, it will not matter.

For instance, all else being equal, a player that has flat FR between 10Hz-25KHz will sound no less flat than a player that has flat FR between 1Hz-100KHz, or all else being equal, for the same power at same frequency, 0.001% IMD will sound no worse than 0.0001%. But to achieve the respectively latter specs, the players will be orders of magnitude more expensive.

Also, there is a lot of BS going around in the AV review world. A $50000 "CD Transport" MUST SOUND BETTER than the $2500 "CD Player". A $1000/ ft "Speaker Interconnect" must sound better than a "$0.50/ ft "Speaker Wire".

You can even end up getting less performance for more money. I remember an old Audio Critic issue which looked at an expensive CD player/DAC. It had been badly designed. If I remember correctly, it had a gradual (i.e., not sharp, like most CD players) FR roll-off towards 20 kHz.