what's your CD player?

[Eddie]

I am considering the NAD c542, Onix X88cd, and Pioneer 578 (decreasing order of pricing), running 340s off of some vintage NAD separates.

Was also looking at the Harman Kardon FL8385 which goes for around $100 refurb from Harman Audio on eBay.

Oh and the other one I'm sort of curious about is the Denon 2900.

Am wondering if anybody has had any experience with any of those 5 players and how much of a difference they hear when moving up on the price scale.

My current CDP is a Sony ES carousel, it made a noticeable improvement over my cheapie Panasonic DVD player which was a bit harsh sounding.

I am reading a lot of great feedback on the Pioneer, some are claiming it to be something of a giant-killer (common enough cliche in audio these days, lol).

I definitely want to keep my budget under $500, the lower it is the more I'll have left to put into a decent sub, my current JBL e150 is atrocious.

[curtis]

I went from a Pioneer 563 to a Denon 2900.

While their is a difference in sound, it is not night and day.

I think you would benefit much more by getting the 563 and putting what you have left into a good sub.

[bikeman]

I definitely want to keep my budget under $500, the lower it is the more I'll have left to put into a decent sub, my current JBL e150 is atrocious.

One thing to keep in mind. DAC's are a muture technology. There are no miracles in mature technologies. The low end is very competitive with the highest end. I have read the debates on rec.audio.tech and auditioned different players. There are definite differences between players. How these differneces translate into actual acoustic differences is a matter of debate. Right now, I don't hear much difference between any of the players I've heard and that includes one that sell for $50.
We can continue this discussion if anyone is interested.

David

[JohnnyCasaba]

Eddie,

Don't you have a Sony 222ES? Is there something you don't like about it? I heard it is a good CDP, some say it can sound analytical. You might want to look at the Cambridge Azur line too. The 640c, 540c, and the 540d. The 540d is a dvd player, but some say it is better than the 540c and you get DVD-Audio too. For the record, I have not heard any of these myself and of the ones you mentioned, only the 2900 was in my home for a demo. I use a Toshiba 3950 DVD player hooked up digitally to my AVR, no 2 channel only setup.

[Eddie]

bikeman,

yes please continue. I'm curious about which models specifically you've heard across the price spectrum.

The only high end CD player I've ever heard was the Audio Reference that Quinn has, it DID sound better than his Sony 400 Cd changer, but not 500% better like it cost...more like maybe 30% better.

My local Marantz dealer has agreed to let me bring in my Sony ES changer to do an A/B comparison with his NAD and Marantz CDPs, I'm eager to take him up on that.

[devwild]

I own the Onix XCD-88 (which is a clone of similar shanling/music hall players aside from the op amps Onix chose). It is an excelent CD player for the price, and in addition is relatively easy to modify aftermarket to improve it further, allowing it to compete with many high end decks in sound/dac quality. Onix is considering offering some of those modifications too, meaning you could send it in and not void your warranty (or learn how to solder). For excelent price now, and future possibilities, it's hard to go wrong.

It should be noted that I use this player for my headphone rig (dedicated headphone amp and mid-high end headphones), not usually with my ascends, since for my ascends I use digital sources to my receiver, making the difference in sound miniscule at best. For digital use I can't hear a difference on my ascends between the Onix and my PS2. For analog (line out) use I can say the Onix was a huge step up from $100 cd players, the difference in detail and control actually shocked me, and the sound signature is more balanced than most. The difference going up to higher end decks I have heard is significantly less.

Edit: The Ascend 340s are much more forgiving than quality headphones, so you may not hear as much difference as I have, and that is part of why people's opinion differ on how much gear quality matters (such as the dac comments above - quality dacs are amazing on quality equipment). Keep all your gear in mind and avoid missing the weakest link and feeling like you wasted money.

[devwild]

One additional comment regarding DAC quality and its consideration in buying a cd player - assuming a quality chip is used (many walmart specials and most stock computer sound cards use crappy cheap dac chips), the biggest difference isn't the dac itself, but the quality of the circuit design and components around it, such as the caps, resistors, and op amps in the output stage. There's also some arguement about the clock signal generator for the dac the though I won't get into that debate here, and I don't know enough to argue that detail anyway. These are, however, audible circuit differences similar to differences in buying a better quality amp/receiver.

[bikeman]

bikeman,

yes please continue. I'm curious about which models specifically you've heard across the price spectrum.

For my hypothesis to be true, it really dosen't matter what decent quality audio players we're talking about. It is also not part of my argument that the differences that people hear don't exist. I am reasonably certain that those differences exist. Where my argument differs from the norm is where those differences have their origin.
We have traditionally ascribed these audible differences to the technology. DAC technology has evolved over the last decade into a mature state. What's available at the low end is very similar to what's available at the high end. Yet the discussions have not changed in the slightless. We still hear these same audible differences that we heard when DAC's were in their infancy.
The answer as I see it is very simple and yet extremely complex. This tread that Aaron posted earlier today is a good example of what I'm talking about.

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/sho...1362#post11362

How we process sensory information in our brain is only now becoming a serious field of study in neuroscience and psychology. We use different parts of our brain when we listen, see, feel, touch or smell depending on a lotta factors. Even the information available to us changes which part of the brain is processing that information. When we use different parts of out brain to process information, the result is indeed different. What we preceive (hear in this case) is highly dependent on which internal process we used in the first place.
Any difference in the technology can be quantified. When the differences can't be quantified, there are other factors at play and identifiying those factors is well beyound the reach of audio discussion forums so we continue to ascribe these differences to the one part of the equation that we partly understand.
There is nothing wrong or un-manly about it all being in our heads. I find it pretty cool to have such a complex piece of equipment available to me whenever I need it. It's a feature, not a liability.

David

[Kurt C.]

I am considering the NAD c542, Onix X88cd, and Pioneer 578 (decreasing order of pricing), running 340s off of some vintage NAD separates.

Eddie et al,

I want to make sure that we are actually addressing your questions and not getting lost here. I assume that your vintage NAD preamp does NOT have digital or multichannel in capability?

That means that you will be using two channel (L/R) analog output from the CD player at home (and for all your comparions) and have no use for multichannel outputs like DTS, dolby digital, DVD-A or SACD?

[Mag_Neato]

I have an older Yamaha CDC-715 5-disc changer from 1992. I don't use it very often as the drawer has recently started to stick, and requires a tug to get it to open and a push to fully close. Plus there is no digital output, so it is strictly analog.

I usually use my Pioneer 563A DVD/CD/SACD/DVD-A/MP-3 player running through it's digital out(coax) into my Outlaw 1050. I have the CD input on the 1050 set to the same digital input as the DVD input, but set to 2-channel instead of surround so I don't need to change any settings.