CD Players with Audiophile Sound

[lovinthehd]

Correct.

But the more universal optical disc players do that as a great option. Buying a cd-only player I think is just stupid.

 

[Squishman]

As was mentioned, don't bother. They're all audiophile level pretty much, has to be a really bad cd player not to provide great audio via either analog or digital outputs. Yours is likely just fine. Monobloc as usual is focused on involvement of high costs to equal high audio quality, which is largely nonsense of course. Now if your current player lacks in some playback features/ergonomics you'd like to change....

The features are actually quite good on the Teac. Except for the fact that it only has one digital output option. What as far as functionality, it does a lot more than you'd think. You can even record MP3's from a CD on to a USB drive, i've never used that feature. It has ipod control , which is pretty cool.

 

[lovinthehd]

The features are actually quite good on the Teac. Except for the fact that it only has one digital output option. What as far as functionality, it does a lot more than you'd think. You can even record MP3's from a CD on to a USB drive, i've never used that feature. It has ipod control , which is pretty cool.

What are your particular pre-amp/integrated/receiver/amp options for digital input? Only Mp3 can be recorded, no other codec?

 

[Squishman]

What are your particular pre-amp/integrated/receiver/amp options for digital input? Only Mp3 can be recorded, no other codec?

I have an Onkyo RZ50. It has one each optical and coax. The optical is antenna TV audio, tomorrow the cd player will be connected to the coax using an optical to coax converter.

 

[lovinthehd]

I have an Onkyo RZ50. It has one each optical and coax. The optical is antenna TV audio, tomorrow the cd player will be connected to the coax using an optical to coax converter.

I've usually had at least two digital input options, hopefully more.

 

[m. zillch]

Just thought to point out that people who run out of digital inputs on their gear can address that issue with an inexpensive solution too, if they didn't know. [Once again, I'm linking to an example I stumbled upon in a quick search on Amzn, merely because we all know them, but I suspect if you shop around either it, or one like it, can be had for even less.]

 

[m. zillch]

But the more universal optical disc players do that as a great option. Buying a cd-only player I think is just stupid.

Universality makes complete sense to me.

When DVD players came out (1997 in the US) I stopped buying CD players. (Because DVD decks played both.)

When Blu-ray decks came out I stopped buying DVD players.

When UHD decks came out I (pretty much) stopped buying anything lesser.

Isn't everyone's goal to have the most advanced and most versatile system, for the least money, in the most compact form possible? Well, it is for me at least.

[For brevity's sake I've omitted the exceptions of at times using recorders/burners, SACD, and multi-region video capabilities during my long upgrade journey.]

The notion "But universal machines ares an audible compromise" (paraphrased) is a longtime, standard marketing lie used to try to sell each mark consumer as many boxes as possible.

 

[Squishman]

Of course I knew that DVD players play CD's, but I didn't even think of that before I posted this thread. DVD player is a run o' the mill Sony. DVPSR510H.

 

[m. zillch]

My only reservation about bare bones ones like that is that they force you to have a TV set turned on to show even the most basic info like "current track number"—and without the remote in hand no track changing capability either?—but as far as sound quality goes my bet is it fits the bill as "competent" as per my first post, hence audibly as good as they get. [I would have to see a detailed technical review to verify that though.]

If the lack of features bugs you that's certainly a valid reason to seek out a new machine of some kind or at least not consider it as your player for CD use.

 

[Squishman]

My only reservation about bare bones ones like that is that they force you to have a TV set turned on to show even the most basic info like "current track number"—and without the remote in hand no track changing capability either?—but as far as sound quality goes my bet is it fits the bill as "competent" as per my first post, hence as good as they get. [I would have to see a detailed technical review to verify that though.]

If the lack of features bugs you that's certainly a valid reason to seek out a new machine of some kind or not consider it as your CD player.

It's fine. I play a dvd only once in a blue moon.

 

[TLS Guy]

It's fine. I play a dvd only once in a blue moon.

DVDs are old school also. You need to be able to play CD, DVDs and Blu Ray discs as well as CDs.

The HDMI switch recommended by zillch is god solution for you. I used one of those back in the day when HDMI ports were much more limited than they are now.

A good universal player is a good idea though. If you don't have any SACDs you don't need that feature.

 

[Squishman]

DVDs are old school also. You need to be able to play CD, DVDs and Blu Ray discs as well as CDs.

The HDMI switch recommended by zillch is god solution for you. I used one of those back in the day when HDMI ports were much more limited than they are now.

A good universal player is a good idea though. If you don't have any SACDs you don't need that feature.

I do not have any blu-rays either. I don't have a player that will play SACDs but that might be something I'd want to do in the future. I'm way more interested in sacd than I am Blu-ray. Not saying I am interested in sacd it's just that I'm open to the possibility in the future.

 

[Squishman]

That converter arrived. The coax cable it came with just looks like a run-of-the-mill cheap flimsy single channel RCA with no markings to indicate that it is a coax.. I don't think I'm going to use that one. I have a Belkin coax cable I'll use instead

 

[Squishman]

I've usually had at least two digital input options, hopefully more.

I do have two. But only one of each.

 

[TLS Guy]

I do not have any blu-rays either. I don't have a player that will play SACDs but that might be something I'd want to do in the future. I'm way more interested in sacd than I am Blu-ray. Not saying I am interested in sacd it's just that I'm open to the possibility in the future.

SACD is as good as dead. It should never have seen the light of day. I don't think there have been any SACD editing desks still in use for decades. So all DSD recordings are converted to PCM and then back to DSD. That has been one of the most pointless codecs ever.

 

[Squishman]

SACD is as good as dead. It should never have seen the light of day. I don't think there have been any SACD editing desks still in use for decades. So all DSD recordings are converted to PCM and then back to DSD. That has been one of the most pointless codecs ever.

Interesting

 

[m. zillch]

My only use for SACD was for the 5.1ch. encoded discs. I never bought a single 2ch. disc (although somebody gave me one once). I never really got into it though.

 

[Squishman]

So I got the DCC CD today and it sounds fabulous. I like this new hook-up. Thx @m. zillch for the recommendation on the converter. I am hearing new sounds on this very familiar album. This is an album that deserves audiophile treatment, btw.

 

[TLS Guy]

So I got the DCC CD today and it sounds fabulous. I like this new hook-up. Thx @m. zillch for the recommendation on the converter. I am hearing new sounds on this very familiar album. This is an album that deserves audiophile treatment, btw.

View attachment 79673

Not sure what audiophile treatment is, as it often denotes pointless waste of money on a massive scale. Its advocates are usually the most technically ignorant and therefore gullible.

 

[Squishman]

Not sure what audiophile treatment is, as it often denotes pointless waste of money on a massive scale. Its advocates are usually the most technically ignorant and therefore gullible.

Digital Compact Classics are Audiophile CD's. If I have an album that is a mediocre pressing and I know of a much better version, whether that LP, CD or 8-track (kidding) and I can find one for my collection.... MY collection... how is that a waste of money? I paid like $21 for it! Hardly a waste of money if you ask me. There are 12 of this title listed on Discogs right now from $42 to $94 not including shipping. Besides I like DCC CD's. I only have 6. I wish I had more. My favorite solo Beatle record is Ringo Starr's "Ringo". I don't have that one on DCC CD because it costs up to $239. My two LP's copies are both great, so I'm not getting that one.
Many MoFi's are way overpriced and not always the best version. Acoustic Sounds are usually great. I picked up a couple Steely Dan recently that just destroy my OP's of the same titles.
By "audiophile treatment", I just meant a re-issue that is better by a long shot than an OP. Not a waste of money if you like that kind of thing. Heck, I didn't need a $750 cart either. Primo pressings go real nice with a primo cartridge.