CD Audio

[DiverSpear]

How many of ya'll have noticed that after installing high end equipment that your CD's do not sound so good anymore. Right now I'm listening to some CD's (Happy Hour) I noticed that my speakers bring out the worst in my older CD's. By that I mean static in/static out. I have some classical CD's that the wife wife and I enjoy and we noticed the static. Newer CD's we do not hear it. It has probably always been there but my old speakers didn't reproduce it. I guess it might be time to find them (CD's) remastered.

Our iPOD's actually sound better and that music is compressed. I would expect a lesser quality from them not the CD's. Man it would be nice to have Blu audio.

[Beta Man]

Apparently you're not an audio enthusiast....... 2 channel CD/SACD is glorious. My Single-Disc CD Player (not even my SACD player, which I have also) cost me twice as much as my PS3...... and if not for my new SACD player, It'd still be used on a regular basis...... so basically you're probably looking forward to listening to Studio Recorded music with 7.1 sound..... you are mis-guided my friend......

And your I-Pod sounds better???? I don't even know where to begin with that..........

[ausamerika]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Apparently you're not an audio enthusiast....... 2 channel CD/SACD is glorious. My Single-Disc CD Player (not even my SACD player, which I have also) cost me twice as much as my PS3...... and if not for my new SACD player, It'd still be used on a regular basis...... so basically you're probably looking forward to listening to Studio Recorded music with 7.1 sound..... you are mis-guided my friend......

And your I-Pod sounds better???? I don't even know where to begin with that..........

Wow... elite much?

[DiverSpear]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Apparently you're not an audio enthusiast....... 2 channel CD/SACD is glorious. My Single-Disc CD Player (not even my SACD player, which I have also) cost me twice as much as my PS3...... and if not for my new SACD player, It'd still be used on a regular basis...... so basically you're probably looking forward to listening to Studio Recorded music with 7.1 sound..... you are mis-guided my friend......

And your I-Pod sounds better???? I don't even know where to begin with that..........

Actually I am. I am hearing so much more with the Martin Logans that I never heard before. I am in the market for a SACD player but in the mean time I'm stuck with a regular CD changer.

[musicman1999]

This is common when you start to buy good gear, as your system becomes more transparent it will show where the weakness is in your system and often it is from the source. Many cd's just do not sound good, in particular a lot of rock and pop. I noticed when i got my Focal front speakers and then it got worse when i got a Sim Audio disc player, whole sections of my cd collection are now unplayable but the good ones sound so much better.

bill

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Apparently you're not an audio enthusiast....... 2 channel CD/SACD is glorious. My Single-Disc CD Player (not even my SACD player, which I have also) cost me twice as much as my PS3...... and if not for my new SACD player, It'd still be used on a regular basis...... so basically you're probably looking forward to listening to Studio Recorded music with 7.1 sound..... you are mis-guided my friend......

And your I-Pod sounds better???? I don't even know where to begin with that..........

Can anyone spell Hypocrite for me? I'm not sure I spelled it right but it sure smells like it

[rarredoa]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Apparently you're not an audio enthusiast....... 2 channel CD/SACD is glorious. My Single-Disc CD Player (not even my SACD player, which I have also) cost me twice as much as my PS3...... and if not for my new SACD player, It'd still be used on a regular basis...... so basically you're probably looking forward to listening to Studio Recorded music with 7.1 sound..... you are mis-guided my friend......

And your I-Pod sounds better???? I don't even know where to begin with that..........

I have been curious, I am new to SACD and DVD-A, I love them both!... I used to be subscribe to the audio magazines in the past, and only recently have i started to read them again. I never owned one of those expensive CD-transports/players when i was younger, which brings me to my question... are the VERY high-end CD players capable of giving you better sound that relatively inexpensive SACD or DVD-A players?

[jsteinhauer]

For the first time today, I actually listened to some CDs, just to test things out on the best AV equipment I have ever owned. Sowing the Seeds of Love from Tears for Fears and Throwing Copper from Live were fantastic. I've never heard such detail. On the other hand, Oasis' (What's the Story) Morning Glory sounded very muddy. I'm not much into music, but I'm sure the quality of CD's varies quite widely, as does DVD and BD audio.

[emm7th]

By the way guys, which is the best SACD player in the market today?

[Big Daddy]

Originally Posted by emm7th

By the way guys, which is the best SACD player in the market today?

There are SACD players in the market for $5,000 to $10,000. However, as far as value is concerned, Oppo Digital DVD/SACD/DVD-A players are the best. They are highly rated and most of them are priced below $200. Read the following two threads. They have links to players and music.

A Guide to SACD: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=41991

A Guide to DVD-A and DualDisc: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=42473

[welwynnick]

I think it's fair to say that the Oppo players are highly rated for their DVD playback, as their MPEG II decoding performance is closer to ideal than most other players. This relates to decompression of lossy compressed video.

Audio playback is another matter, and I don't believe they are better than other universal players. I've heard several videophiles say they got an Oppo for the DVD performance IN SPITE of their audio performance. Other "good" DVD players such as certain well-known Philips and Arcam models are invariably considered better with audio, whether analogue or digital output.

Audio performance is more straightfoward in some ways, as the decoding and replay process is not lossy, which is the specific process where Oppo shine. That, and de-interlacing to a lesser extent.

Really, I don't think anyone can expect top-drawer performance from a 200 buck player, even if you're only using the spdif output. I'm not so sure about SACD performance, but in my experience you need to have a very good SACD player to beat the best CD players.

There are lots of really great CD players out there, but none of them play DVDs or Blu-rays as well. My vote for "best" would probably be the EMM Labs combo.

regards, Nick

[richteer]

Originally Posted by emm7th

By the way guys, which is the best SACD player in the market today?

That is arguably the Esoteric P-01 transport and their D-03 DAC, clocked using Esoteric's G-0Rb master clock generator.

[JimPullan]

Originally Posted by DiverSpear

Actually I am. I am hearing so much more with the Martin Logans that I never heard before. I am in the market for a SACD player but in the mean time I'm stuck with a regular CD changer.

Want extremly high quality CD reproduction? Investigate Arcam fmj CD-36 . Find info on it at:
http://www.audiophilesystems.com/pro...=9&sname=ARCAM I have this and it's the finest CD player I've ever owned. [Jim]

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by HDJK

Can anyone spell Hypocrite for me? I'm not sure I spelled it right but it sure smells like it

Not sure how that makes me a hypocrite....... I'm no audiophile, but I do believe 2-Channel Audio is still king, and my turntable is the "cadillac" of my system. I guess I'm a hypocrite for trying to tell someone that just because some format is capable of 7.1 or 7.2 or 12.5 for that matter, doesn't make it "better" CDs are engineered to be reproduced with a 2 channel system.

Also, certain speaker manufacturers, which are quite nice, such as Thiel's don't make subwoofers for a reason...... and there's a reason B&W makes speakers that retail at $70,000 for a pair, custom made, yet they don't make a center channel to match them.

Like I said, I don't consider myself an audiophile, this is true, but I-Pod sound won't hold a candle to CD until music is intentionally produced by sound-engineers for I-Pod, compressed MP3/what-not Playback.... and I don't think you're ever gonna see that happen.

I wasn't trying to be an audio snob..... Crackin', Jim Pullman, and others here have probably learned, and forgotten more about audio than I could ever hope to know in my lifetime......

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by JimPullan

Want extremly high quality CD reproduction? Investigate Arcam fmj CD-36 . Find info on it at:
http://www.audiophilesystems.com/pro...=9&sname=ARCAM I have this and it's the finest CD player I've ever owned. [Jim]

I passed up on one of these on Ebay (because ebay scares me to tell you the truth) but it was a bargain at $1,100 I have heard nothing but good things about the Arcam line.

[MacDaddyOJack]

Originally Posted by JimPullan

Want extremly high quality CD reproduction? Investigate Arcam fmj CD-36 . Find info on it at:
http://www.audiophilesystems.com/pro...=9&sname=ARCAM I have this and it's the finest CD player I've ever owned. [Jim]

Why would you need one of these??? A nice CD player that costs far less can still send a digital signal to your reciever. I thought that with digital signals there was relatively zero signal loss in the player so why is it beneficial to spend $1200+ on a cd player?

[Chuey]

Originally Posted by richteer

That is arguably the Esoteric P-01 transport and their D-03 DAC, clocked using Esoteric's G-0Rb master clock generator.

I agree 100%.

[JimPullan]

Originally Posted by MacDaddyOJack

Why would you need one of these??? A nice CD player that costs far less can still send a digital signal to your reciever. I thought that with digital signals there was relatively zero signal loss in the player so why is it beneficial to spend $1200+ on a cd player?

The standard CD is 48,000 samplings per second - 16 bit out. For many of us, we have a vast collection of them. We hear people rave about SACD and DVD-Audio, the detail and the broad sound stage, be it two channel or multi-channel.

The real benefit of the Arcam fmj CD-36 is that it "upsamples" regular CD's, using four Wolfsen DAC's per channel, re-sampling at 192,000 samples per second - 24 bit out. This is equivalent to the audio experience with SACD and DVD-Audio, "without" having to re-purchase new discs. It's like giving a shot of steroids to every CD in your collection. For me, having over 1,800 CD's this CD player made sense. Some of the artists I have on CD have passed away, like Arthur Rubenstein, cannot ever be recorded in SACD Direct Stream Digital. Of that pianist alone I have 80 CD recording, that now sound amazing through the Arcam CD-36.

I do own a Pioneer Elite DVD Player that can play SACD's, DVD-Audio's and regular CD's. It is good, but my Arcam is 'excellent', a true audiophile product. [Jim]

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by MacDaddyOJack

Why would you need one of these??? A nice CD player that costs far less can still send a digital signal to your reciever. I thought that with digital signals there was relatively zero signal loss in the player so why is it beneficial to spend $1200+ on a cd player?

I doubt I have as much info as Jim P, and others, but from my understanding it is this.....

Audio is compressed on a CD.... the higher end players decompress, and transfer the signals more efficiently, and thus at a better sound quality.

Sort of the way "progressive scan" dvd players played the same dvd with a better image/audio quality than that of conventional players back in the day. I still have a Toshiba DVD player purchased in 1996..... if you want to get a feel for what type of image quality it can produce from a standard DVD, go out and buy a $20 APEX/ACME/MAYTAG whatever DVD player, and it's probably comparable to the DVD player I got 12 years ago (and paid way too much for)

Again... I could be WAY OFF.... but also the components, resisistors, capacitors, etc. in the higher end player are better, and transfer data more efficiently.



******EDIT************** Jim P jumped in with a lot better explanation in the time it took me to type this!!!!!

[bluseminole]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Not sure how that makes me a hypocrite....... I'm no audiophile, but I do believe 2-Channel Audio is still king, and my turntable is the "cadillac" of my system. I guess I'm a hypocrite for trying to tell someone that just because some format is capable of 7.1 or 7.2 or 12.5 for that matter, doesn't make it "better" CDs are engineered to be reproduced with a 2 channel system.

Also, certain speaker manufacturers, which are quite nice, such as Thiel's don't make subwoofers for a reason...... and there's a reason B&W makes speakers that retail at $70,000 for a pair, custom made, yet they don't make a center channel to match them.

Like I said, I don't consider myself an audiophile, this is true, but I-Pod sound won't hold a candle to CD until music is intentionally produced by sound-engineers for I-Pod, compressed MP3/what-not Playback.... and I don't think you're ever gonna see that happen.

I wasn't trying to be an audio snob..... Crackin', Jim Pullman, and others here have probably learned, and forgotten more about audio than I could ever hope to know in my lifetime......

I'll expand on this a little, if you don't mind.

CDs are engineered for 2-channel playback, so yes, stereo is king. But would you agree that ultimately a source should be played back in the same format it was recorded in?

For instance, if an orchestra is recorded in 11.2 channels (however overkill and pointless it may be), would it not be most preferable to play the recording back in 11.2 rather than having the engineers go through and cut a stereo master?

For stereo music, stereo is king. But I must say I disagree that stereo is king when a disc becomes available that was mixed in 5.1. Then 5.1 playback is necessitated.

I think multichannel music has a lot to offer, and its benefits have never been fully exploited. Personal opinion.