Advice on buying used CD Players

[khewa]

Ideal CD Player - Part II

My ideal CD Player system would consists of a CD-ROM drive as a transport, hooked up to a universal decoder (SACD, DVD-AUDIO, MP3, DTS, Dolby, etc..) and then to the DAC. The decoder and DAC should be in the same box and the connection to the CD transport should be via firewire. The DSD data should be sent over the firewire and not converted to PCM first. The decoder should reside in software so that new formats can be easily downloaded from the web. Today's DSP chips should be fast enough for that, else we can always buffer the data with today's cheap memory.
The transport would have a few versions, with the basic version supporting single disc and the deluxe jukebox version supporting 10 discs or more.

Currently a few AVRs, namely Pioneer and Yamaha supports this concept to a degree. However, their Universal DVD player is still not cheap enough yet, in my opinion. The players can made cheaper if the decoders are removed out of the DVD player box. After all, the AVR already has a decoder, so we are paying for duplicate function.

I've had a second thought on this. If the DAC is removed and the PCM data is fed directly to a digital amp, we will get beautiful sound with a system costing less than $1000. High end DACs are expensive, so getting rid of the DAC will reduce a large part of the cost.
Total system costs is further reduced by using firewire connections throughout. None of these expensive interconnects with pure silver wires blessed by the pope and shaken 1000 times for ultimate fidelity.
Digital is the way to go to reduce cost. Maybe that's why the high end equipment manufacturers are still holding on to analogue.

Heck, if one day the wireless bandwidth can reach 100Mbps, we can even eliminate the firewire cable cost. The cost of the wireless transmitter can be shared with the in house PC network system.

 

[tbewick]

Hi khewa

I know that this is a divergence from the original topic posted, but I don't think that digital audio equipment is used only because it's cheaper. High quality digital equipment is much cheaper than analogue equipment and is essentially transparent in the audio chain. The was true even with the first generations of digital studio equipment, which were regarded as being significantly better than the replaced analog gear.

As for your point about removing the DAC from the system, the data would still have to be converted into analog, only this time at the digital receiver.

From what I've read the standard digital interface in pro audio equipment was (in 1994) the AES/EBU interface. You would need a system that could code the digital audio data so that it was suitable for the firewire interface.

 

[khewa]

Digital Amp, no DAC needed

Hi khewa

I know that this is a divergence from the original topic posted, but I don't think that digital audio equipment is used only because it's cheaper. High quality digital equipment is much cheaper than analogue equipment and is essentially transparent in the audio chain. The was true even with the first generations of digital studio equipment, which were regarded as being significantly better than the replaced analog gear.

As for your point about removing the DAC from the system, the data would still have to be converted into analog, only this time at the digital receiver.

From what I've read the standard digital interface in pro audio equipment was (in 1994) the AES/EBU interface. You would need a system that could code the digital audio data so that it was suitable for the firewire interface.

With a digital amplifier, no DAC is needed anywhere in the chain. You can check out this site.
http://www.puredigitalaudio.org/digitalamplifiers/index.shtml

 

[khewa]

An actual product

With a digital amplifier, no DAC is needed anywhere in the chain. You can check out this site.
http://www.puredigitalaudio.org/digitalamplifiers/index.shtml

and for an actual produt that exists in the market:
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/robert01.htm

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

What we need is some good DAC design to come out of the Far East, get it produced for a low cost and we will all enjoy high end audio at low end prices.

The thing is that good, or more acurately "great", DACs have been standard equipment on inexpensive CD players for 20 years now. Paying thousands of dollars to obscure companies won't really get much "better", just "different". Seriously, less than 1% diffrent overall. Of course there are hundreds of other things that can go wrong in a cheap player......

Your money would be much better spend on loudspeakers, room treatments, an amp with more headroom, more media, a nicer equipment rack, etc etc etc........

 

[buckyg4]

and for an actual produt that exists in the market:
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/robert01.htm

You can go one step further and buy digital speakers from Meridian... But you know I think all of this technology is too new. I wouldn't go with the TacT and the Class D amp.. I think you are paying too much for a newer technology.

 

[buckyg4]

I am thinking of the Musical Fidelity A3-24 DAC. I've seen some good reviews on this but have not heard it.

I've heard other Musical Fidelity equipment and it sounded great. I'm sure you couldn't go wrong with it. How much are they going for on the used market?

 

[K-man]

Big Bucks not equal to big Sound???

So in otherwords your saying.......................
It's not between your ears..ie tech, design, etc. that matters

""IT'S IN YOUR EARS""

 

[tbewick]

Hello khewa,

What exactly is the advantages of a digital amplifier, compared to a traditional one? I thought most amplifiers nowadays were good. I could understand the need to spend $10k on a couple of monoblocks to power a real cinema, but what's the point of this digital amplifier?

 

[khewa]

And now the real benefit of the digital amp

Hello khewa,

What exactly is the advantages of a digital amplifier, compared to a traditional one? I thought most amplifiers nowadays were good. I could understand the need to spend $10k on a couple of monoblocks to power a real cinema, but what's the point of this digital amplifier?

the real benefit of the digital amp is the low cost
http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Product_Id=4032232&JRSource=google.datafeed.PAN+SAXR55-K

for slightly more than $200, you get a decoder, DAC, preamp and a power amp all in one box. I haven't audition the receiver yet, but there's a lot of people out there that says it's on par with equipment costing $1000 to $3000 price range. Since everything is digital, there is no loss in translation from digital to analogue, the only time the conversion occurs is at the last stage when the signal leaves the receiver to the speakers.
This is a new paradigm that gives us low cost equipment with high end sound. No more costly cables, costly tubes and costly heavy heat sinks. Of course I don't think it will last as long as the Krell, but at this price, who cares, I can always upgrade every few years. Imagine what it will cost on the used market, ...peanuts !!!
now all I need is a DVD-ROM drive with firewire interface to hook up to the digital receiver. That should be $80 for the DVD-ROM drive and for something below $300, we have a complete solution for home theatre and fantastic multichannel sound. How's that for a good deal ? This is just the start, down the road, when the technology matures, we will have digital components that will Krell a run for their money.

 

[tbewick]

Thanks for clarifying that.

I'm not really sure about there being no loss in digital to analog conversion, since you will still need a high-pass filter, which won't be absolutely perfect. It probably isn't really that important though. I've certainly been pleased with my Denon A/V digital receiver.