CD/DVD players and sound quality increase

[Vancouver]

Not sure the best way to ask this question, so I will ask it two ways.

1. when it comes to sound quality in a system and if you were going to place a % on what each contributes to overal sound quality what % would be placed on the quality of a DVD player. i.e. 50% speaker quality, 30% reviever and 20 source (cd/dvd player in this case.

2. Assuming you have a good quality reciever and speakers what would actualy happen or what should be expected to happen by purchasing an extreemly good CD/DVD player. Does it take a lot of dollar in this area to get minimal sound quality enhancements.


I ask this becuase I have a Rotel reciever and B&W speakers with an old Denon 800 dvd/cd player and am very happy with the sound. So happy I wouldnt be replacing the DVD player if I didnt have to but its dying. I was considering looking into a Rotel DVD/CD player or buying a Naim CD player and regular DVD player becuase I have an external video processor which does well for video. Should I expect major sound quality increases by spending big money on this part of my system?

 

[Nick250]

To start off let me say I think speakers and room acoustics account for about 95% of what you hear. If you are using a digital connection from your DVD player to your receiver then I would suggest that the DVD player would have about 0% effect on the sound. If you are using the analog connection from the DVD player to the receiver and you are using the DVD players DACs it may have 3% or 4% effect on sound..... maybe. There is a good chance I will be in the minority with my views. You could buy a new DVD player and see if you can do a blind test with assistence of a friend and return the new one if you can hear no difference. I would be interested in hearing the results of such a experiment.

 

[Pyrrho]

I agree with Nick250. I doubt you will hear any difference at all.

 

[Vancouver]

To start off let me say I think speakers and room acoustics account for about 95% of what you hear. .

personally I agree with you. Assuming the room accoustics are a constant and you start changin equipment i find that a difference in recievers can make a MUCH bigger difference in sound quality, but thats just my opinion.

I had a feeling CD players and DVD players play a very little part in over all sound quality.

 

[Privateer]

Vancouver, you will have to demo some equipment and see if you can hear a difference.

 

[tbewick]

I'd recommend going along with the idea of system matching and buy your CD player accordingly. If your the rest of your system is top-end, then get a top-end CD player.

I'm not so sure how much you can rely on just using double-blind tests to compare things. For example, Dolby say that Dolby Digital has been shown to sound exactly like original studio masters. This was probably a double-blind test. In my experience however, DTS sounds quite different to Dolby Digital. I once read an article in the New Scientist on how scientists tend to produce results they want to produce. This is not to dismiss DBT's as useless, but to treat their results with a little caution.

CD players do have different designs, some of which are better than others. It's difficult to know whether higher quality designs sound better or not. As some people on this forum have mentioned in previous threads, various tests have shown that they don't make any difference to perceived sound quality.

Getting a good quality CD player won't do you any harm, especially if you listen to lots of CD's. Also a well-made, more expensive CD player, will last longer than a cheaper, less well-made one.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Vancouver, you will have to demo some equipment and see if you can hear a difference.

But, what about the bias factor??? How will that hinder his perceptions? Maybe it is a waste of time? Or, not a maybe.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I'd recommend going along with the idea of system matching and buy your CD player accordingly. If your the rest of your system is top-end, then get a top-end CD player.

Below you say you cannot rely on DBt, industry cold standard. How can he rely on this suggestion? It is based on nothing.

I'm not so sure how much you can rely on just using double-blind tests to compare things.


Why is that? You rely on DBT protocol for medicines? Other human testing?? and most everything in science?
Why not in audio?
Maybe the answer is not apetising?

For example, Dolby say that Dolby Digital has been shown to sound exactly like original studio masters. This was probably a double-blind test. In my experience however, DTS sounds quite different to Dolby Digital.

Oh, it may, especially when apple and an orange is compared. But, that is not the fault of the DBT protocol itself but what was compared and technically how.


I once read an article in the New Scientist on how scientists tend to produce results they want to produce. This is not to dismiss DBT's as useless, but to treat their results with a little caution.

No, DBt has no mind of its own and certainly not psychic to know what the tester wants.
However, in science, replication is everything. If others can replicate the results, what then? Another excuse?, or a valid result? Same applies to audio.

CD players do have different designs, some of which are better than others.

Maybe yes, maybe no. And, maybe the differences are not audible. The specs will show it.

It's difficult to know whether higher quality designs sound better or not.

Actually, it is very simple to find out and easy to know. One must want to know though. Many don't want to know as if there is no audible difference, why buy the expensive sugar???
Yes, real sugar has different prices in the store. Have you noticed? Do you buy the more expensive sugar?


Getting a good quality CD player won't do you any harm, especially if you listen to lots of CD's.

Well, not a physical one Maybe to the pocket book?

Also a well-made, more expensive CD player, will last longer than a cheaper, less well-made one.

Maybe. Or, you can replace the cheaper one more for less overall

 

[miklorsmith]

2c

I'm with tbewick. Ear-based audioheads think CDP's make a considerable difference. Trust your ears, not theory. Speakers and acoustics are probably the biggest difference-maker, probably 70% of the total. As to the rest, I can hear a significant difference in output devices from a digital stream. The music does start at the source and an amplifier can only magnify what it's given. So. . .

 

[shokhead]

CD/DVD player 2%
Receiver 20%
Speakers and Acoustics 75%
User 3%

 

[j_garcia]

CD/DVD player 2%
Receiver 20%
Speakers and Acoustics 75%
User 3%

How can the receiver make a 20% difference and the player make 2%? That makes NO SENSE at all. They are both electronic devices in the chain, and each has an influence on the sound. If the player is hooked up via analog, the weight would shift to the player, because the receiver isn't doing anything but amplifying. I wouldn't go so far as to say considerable difference between similar player, but it IS a factor.

I do agree completely though, speakers, setup and your room are the single biggest factor in your sound.

 

[Pyrrho]

I'm with tbewick. Ear-based audioheads think CDP's make a considerable difference. Trust your ears, not theory. ...

Yes, they often do, but they also often believe they hear differences when someone claims to change something but does not really change anything. People believe they hear differences when it is absolutely certain that there are no differences at all. That is why it is unwise to trust your ears without considering the fact that you are human, subject to the limitations and faults inherent in human nature. That is why double blind tests are essential for having any reliability at all.

 

[Pyrrho]

I'd recommend going along with the idea of system matching and buy your CD player accordingly. If your the rest of your system is top-end, then get a top-end CD player.

I'm not so sure how much you can rely on just using double-blind tests to compare things. For example, Dolby say that Dolby Digital has been shown to sound exactly like original studio masters. This was probably a double-blind test. In my experience however, DTS sounds quite different to Dolby Digital.

When you purchase a DVD, the DTS and Dolby Digital tracks are totally independent from each other. There is NO REASON to believe that they were produced from the same master, or if they were, you have no way of knowing what additional processing each might have undergone that may be different from the other one. To do a proper test, you would need to know that both were produced from the same master tapes, with no additional processing in each, and then you would have to level match them during playback. (DTS is slightly louder in playback with the same volume setting on home equipment, and as you should know, being slightly louder will subjectively sound "fuller", with more bass and it will be easier to hear distinct details. The reason is that human hearing is not linear; as you turn down the volume on your system, the bass and treble seem to diminish faster than the midrange, which is why so many receivers in the olden days had "Loudness Compensation" switches to boost the bass and treble for low level listening. Of course, you hear more detail when something is slightly louder because the softer parts are louder and easier to hear.) Without that, you have no basis for a comparison at all between the formats.

I once read an article in the New Scientist on how scientists tend to produce results they want to produce. This is not to dismiss DBT's as useless, but to treat their results with a little caution.

CD players do have different designs, some of which are better than others. It's difficult to know whether higher quality designs sound better or not. As some people on this forum have mentioned in previous threads, various tests have shown that they don't make any difference to perceived sound quality.

Getting a good quality CD player won't do you any harm, especially if you listen to lots of CD's. Also a well-made, more expensive CD player, will last longer than a cheaper, less well-made one.

So you propose that one ignore double blind tests, and instead substitute no protocol at all? If you get the results you want in double blind tests (though you haven't shown this to be the case), what do you think you will get when you make no effort to prevent bias from influencing the results?

Scientists often get the results they want because, being human, they often do not properly conduct double blind tests. This is one reason why it is useful for testing to be repeated by others, to catch mistakes that people make.

 

[shokhead]

How can the receiver make a 20% difference and the player make 2%? That makes NO SENSE at all. They are both electronic devices in the chain, and each has an influence on the sound. If the player is hooked up via analog, the weight would shift to the player, because the receiver isn't doing anything but amplifying. I wouldn't go so far as to say considerable difference between similar player, but it IS a factor.

I do agree completely though, speakers, setup and your room are the single biggest factor in your sound.

What influence does a DVD/CD player have when hooked up digitly? Of course the player will be more of the % when hooked up via the analog.

 

[miklorsmith]

Testing

The very testing that is so highly touted here conflicts with my lifetime of experience. And, my "bias" is such that I have been disappointed with things I've bought and made, contrary to what I expected and wanted.

So, I posit the testing is inadequate. Let's not make this another DBT/ABX argument, I'm just stating there's another side.

 

[MDS]

So, I posit the testing is inadequate. Let's not make this another DBT/ABX argument, I'm just stating there's another side.

DBT/ABX testing is only inadequate when one refuses to accept results that conflict with what they expected. My problem with the 'other side' is the argument is always the same:

1. If a blind test fails to show any statistically meaningful differences, then the testing was inadequate or flawed.
2. Proponents of DBT/ABX methodology should have an open mind and accept that there could be differences that are just not revealed by the testing procedure. That's all well and good and yet the other side WILL NOT practice what they preach and be open minded to the possibility that the differences are all in their head (which is what most testing has shown to be true).

 

[j_garcia]

What influence does a DVD/CD player have when hooked up digitly? Of course the player will be more of the % when hooked up via the analog.

You didn't specify digital. Even via digital, the overall quality of the components used in the player will still have a slight effect on the signal before it is passed, though between two similar quality players I'd say the difference is very minimal, so your assessment would be reasonable.

I believe my ears too.

 

[tbewick]

Hello mtrycrafts,

I would agree with you that double blind tests are very useful, but can sometimes produce results that are unclear. For example, in that article I mentioned earlier from the New Scientist, it said how statistical evidence for supernatural phenomena was as good as that for many new medicines. Once a lecturer at the University I'm at joked how those academics working in the social sciences get excited by a 60% statistical correlation. The same result in the physical sciences would be quite poor, with correlations normally nearer 90% or over.

Placebos have in the treatment of depression been shown to be sometimes more effective than real drugs. I suppose this could be likened to expensive CD players over cheaper ones.

Anyway, I still don't see what harm getting an expensive CD player would be. There are certainly design factors that may warrant the additional price, and other things as I said before, like build quality and finish.

 

[Privateer]

But, what about the bias factor??? How will that hinder his perceptions? Maybe it is a waste of time? Or, not a maybe.

Bias factor? He is the one who will be demoing the equipment.



Weither you believe that a DVD/CD player can sound different while running in a digital mode is one thing but there is a HUGE difference in the quality of the video.

 

[Vancouver]

Bias factor? He is the one who will be demoing the equipment.



Weither you believe that a DVD/CD player can sound different while running in a digital mode is one thing but there is a HUGE difference in the quality of the video.

I agree with the video difference, but I am not too concerned with that because I have an very good external processor, so I only need a dvd player that will ouput a 480i signal. As far as I know there arnt huge differences in dvd players when producing 480i.


I guess I starting asking the question becuase I see that very reputable companies like Naim, Rotel and Classe make Seperate CD players (not dvd/cd) and they sell for so much cash! the rotel is 1,500 ( in my budget) the Naim sells for 6k and the classe may sell for double that!