Remember Jerry there is more than the Dac, it eventually becomes an analog signal so analog implementation in a cdp or stand alone dac is as important as the dac used.
That's literally what DAC means... Digital to Analog Converter.
If you are talking about the aplifier on the DAC output; that's one of the reasons I tend to recommend doing DAC in the AVR; for one thing it's nice to keep the signal digital as long as possible and for another the pre-amp in the AVR is generally better than in your CD player.
The better Schiit Dac offered the best sound while a budget $25 24/192 dac was the worst, with the bdp in the middle.
I assert that there's no audible difference between a competent AVR's DAC and the DAC of your choice unless yours is coloring the sound.
Let's follow the rabbit hole a bit, shall we?
We have ~40 years of DAC building.
We have a massive price differential.
Which of those two affects sound?
If it's price: then get an expensive CD player from 5 years back at pennies on the dollar and get that sweet premium DAC.
If it's time, perform regular upgrades on your cheap player to stay ahead of the curve.
In neither case is the wise choice spending $400 on a current high-end CD player.
Unless you will be buying new $400 CD players every year (and the fact that this poster hasn't upgraded his player from the 80s suggests he will not); you are either just as served by a used one, or your new one will be "sounding bad" within a couple of years relative to the new ones.
The new Yamaha cdp is a very fine unit. The OP likes the new Yammie because his old player is dying and it matches his receiver
Even if you *do* think there's a difference in DACs (and see my previous comment as even more damning than this one); Yamaha made the DAC in the AVR... why not go ahead and use it rather than the DAC in the Yamaha CD player?