Should I just get a better CD player?

[Nick250]

What makes a CD or CD player "redbook"?

 

[Tomorrow]

I like Cool Edit 96. It's shareware but has full functionality, and has lots of toys like noise reduction, tone generator, *flanger, real-time FFT etc..

I know the *word from guitar playing...but it always reminded me of something teenage kids do after nose picking..... (I know...gross.)

Nick, Redbook is the set of standards for the CD and CD-ROM formats. It's so named because the standards come bound in red books. (Doh.) Phillips owns the rights, I believe.

 

[jonnythan]

Red book is just the technical specification for the arrangement of bits that make up an audio CD. It specifies the bitrate, sampling frequency, etc. All red book CDs have 44,100 thousand samples per second, at 16 bits per channel, into two channels. It also specifies the physical characteristics of the disc as well, including data layer depth, track width, sector size, etc. In short, only a standard audio CD is considered a red book CD. The name comes from the fact that the original books published and distributed containing the full audio CD specification from Philips were red.

SACD is not red book because it's a different standard. Many newer CDs aren't even red book compliant as they use various copy protection mechanisms.

 

[indcrimdefense]

bassman,

glad to hear that you found an upgrade for a good price

 

[Nick250]

Red book is just the technical specification for the arrangement of bits that make up an audio CD. It specifies the bitrate, sampling frequency, etc. All red book CDs have 44,100 thousand samples per second, at 16 bits per channel, into two channels. It also specifies the physical characteristics of the disc as well, including data layer depth, track width, sector size, etc. In short, only a standard audio CD is considered a red book CD. The name comes from the fact that the original books published and distributed containing the full audio CD specification from Philips were red.

SACD is not red book because it's a different standard. Many newer CDs aren't even red book compliant as they use various copy protection mechanisms.

I figured it was something along these lines, but with no sense of where or how it might be applied. Thanks for the explanation.

Nick

 

[mtrycrafts]

I figured it was something along these lines, but with no sense of where or how it might be applied. Thanks for the explanation.

Nick

I believe that initially and perhaps still, those specs were published in a red covered spec book and that name stuck.

 

[Jake71]

I know you guys may have indirectly answered this question earlier, but I was hoping to get a clear answer to something I am considering that is along the same line as this conversation. I am in the process of buying a new receiver (Yamaha RX-V661) and am debating getting a new CD player. I currently have a Denon DCM-360 that is about 10 years old. It only has the basic analog red-white RCA output jack. My debate is whether it would worth investing in a new CD player that has optical outputs (such as the newer version of the DCM-360s). Do you think there would be a material difference in sound quality due to [1] having optical vs. analog output [2] the newer CD players sound better? Thanks for any feedback.

 

[pbarach1]

not all CD players sound the same

I have several different machines on which I've compared CD quality. I use a headphone amp and a pair of Sennheiser HD650 headphones that I can move rapidly from one machine to the next, and the differences between all 3 of my machines are obvious on CD's. I have a Sony SACD/DVD player DVPNS755V, which I think sold for less than $200. Compared with the Denon 3910 universal player, the Sony produces CD sound with much less impact and clarity. You can almost feel the bow bite into the cellos in a classical symphony CD on the Denon, but on the Sony you just hear a slightly accented attack. I also have a Marantz CD-67 SE-II CD player, probably a decade old, with an original list price of, I'm guessing, $400-$450. It sounds nearly as good as the Denon; the sound is a bit warmer, probably more than it should. Among these three machines, it would be the one I'd use for some of the early and edgy digital recordings.

I haven't heard the Cambridge or Rotel units you mentioned, but I am absolutely persuaded that there are audible differences in quality among CD players.

 

[Toyboy]

Hmmm, if you're using a DVD player to listen to CDs via analogue phono outputs then I believe a dedicated CD player could make a worthwhile difference.

I thought this thread could do with some balance!

Si

Of course it will make a difference, but the rest of the system has to match, quality-wise.

 

[tbewick]

In case mtrycrafts is too busy:

Masters, Ian G 'Do All CD Players Sound the Same?' Stereo review, Jan 1986, pg 50-57.

Pholmann, Ken C. '6 Top CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Dec 1988, pg 76-84.

Phollmann, Ken C. 'The New CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Oct 1990, pg 60-67.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 75, Jun/Jul 1999.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 74, Apr/May 1999.

He said these tests showed little audible difference between units unless, if I remember correctly, the player dipped in frequency response somewhere. He also pointed to this Spanish set of tests:

http://www.matrixhifi.com/pruebasciegas.htm

 

[pbarach1]

He said these tests showed little audible difference between units unless, if I remember correctly, the player dipped in frequency response somewhere.

I don't have golden ears, but I will affirm again that there **are** audible differences between CD players. What measured variable will correspond with the audble differences, I don't know. Once difference that's easily noticed in some machines is a kind of "grainy" sound to sustained passages of string playing in classical music. I don't know what aspect of the sound wave causes this kind of distortion, but it's really obvious on some players and inaudible on others.

 

[avaserfi]

If you have a good multi-disc player there is likely not an audible difference between it and a stand-alone cd player. Any heard differences are most likely placebo affects.

 

[tbewick]

I don't have golden ears, but I will affirm again that there **are** audible differences between CD players. What measured variable will correspond with the audble differences, I don't know. Once difference that's easily noticed in some machines is a kind of "grainy" sound to sustained passages of string playing in classical music. I don't know what aspect of the sound wave causes this kind of distortion, but it's really obvious on some players and inaudible on others.

Hi

I haven't read the articles that mtrycrafts spoke of but I just thought it was worth mentioning. I think I'd have a fair chance of picking out my DVD player versus the digital converter in my A/V amp, but my DVD player's quite a basic unit. I would have thought that top-quality CD/DVD players would sound very similar to each other, but I've never had the chance of listening to any such units

 

[Toyboy]

If you have a good multi-disc player there is likely not an audible difference between it and a stand-alone cd player. Any heard differences are most likely placebo affects.

That's most certainly true if the rest of your system is low/medium end. Only when you go high end with ALL of it do you hear and appreciate the difference.

I have 3 CD players, Marantz CD63-SE, Lyngdorf CD1 and Musical Fidelity KW DM25 Transport/DAC. In a blind test, I can tell which one is playing every time, on any CD. Pre-Amp is MF KW Hybrid, main Amp is MF KW750, speakers are PMC 1B1's. If you can't hear the difference between Lo-Fi and Hi-Fi, then don't waste your money. Stick to Wi-Fi/MP3, it's still fun.

PS. I don't have any expensive cables, now that would be placebo(llox).

 

[avaserfi]

That's most certainly true if the rest of your system is low/medium end. Only when you go high end with ALL of it do you hear and appreciate the difference.

I have 3 CD players, Marantz CD63-SE, Lyngdorf CD1 and Musical Fidelity KW DM25 Transport/DAC. In a blind test, I can tell which one is playing every time, on any CD. Pre-Amp is MF KW Hybrid, main Amp is MF KW750, speakers are PMC 1B1's. If you can't hear the difference between Lo-Fi and Hi-Fi, then don't waste your money. Stick to Wi-Fi/MP3, it's still fun.

PS. I don't have any expensive cables, now that would be placebo(llox).

How exactly was your blinded study done? I have compared high end cd players to high end universal players and have never heard a difference. On occasion I will do a blinded test with friends who are over and still have yet to have one person here a difference.

What exactly in a stand alone disc player makes it so much better than a universal?

 

[Toyboy]

How exactly was your blinded study done? I have compared high end cd players to high end universal players and have never heard a difference. On occasion I will do a blinded test with friends who are over and still have yet to have one person here a difference.

It's easy, you put the same CD copy into each player, synch them up, then wire a switch in to enable to switch between players, but get you missus to to the switching and you (with your eyes closed) have to 'guess' which CD you're listening to.

What exactly in a stand alone disc player makes it so much better than a universal?

that would be the way it SOUNDs

But I must admit, you do have to know what to listen for by having a ceratin amount of ear training. You sing better with a trained voice. You listen better with a trained ear.


Could you please name these 'high end cd players and high end universal players'

 

[avaserfi]

The Denon 2930CI, Oppo 981HD, Sony SCD-C2000ES/B and lastly a Marantz model cd player I cannot quiet remember. While not top tier waste of money thousands of dollars they are all good pieces of equipment and the only time any differences were noticed between units was when lower end players were added to the mix.

 

[WmAx]

I have 3 CD players, Marantz CD63-SE, Lyngdorf CD1 and Musical Fidelity KW DM25 Transport/DAC. In a blind test, I can tell which one is playing every time, on any CD. Pre-Amp is MF KW Hybrid, main Amp is MF KW750, speakers are PMC 1B1's. If you can't hear the difference between Lo-Fi and Hi-Fi, then don't waste your money. Stick to Wi-Fi/MP3, it's still fun.

If your CD players can be identified in a blind test, then either (1) your blind test methodology is flawed [or] (2) one or more of the units are poorly/ignorantly designed [or] (3) one ore more of the units are broken/defective.

In any case, one can measure the units and determine if an audible difference should be expected(by correlation to human auditory perception research).

Most devices measure in such a way as to be expected to be transparent(not identifiable from one another in a properly conducted DBT). This even extends to decent portable CD players.

-Chris

 

[avaserfi]

If your CD players can be identified in a blind test, then either (1) your blind test methodology is flawed [or] (2) one or more of the units are poorly/ignorantly designed [or] (3) one ore more of the units are broken/defective.

In any case, one can measure the units and determine if an audible difference should be expected(by correlation to human auditory perception research).

Most devices measure in such a way as to be expected to be transparent(not identifiable from one another in a properly conducted DBT). This even extends to decent portable CD players.

-Chris

I think the real problem is there will always be some people who can hear something different with their new cables, cd player, amp etc... No matter what logic or anything else dictates. There is of course a reason people spend 1k+ on speaker wires or buy audiophile grade paper etc...