cd player devaluation

[admin_exported]

Im looking for a new player. CD's being comparitively new technology when veiwed along side other sources, must be moving along in leaps and bounds?

I found this thread http://whathifi.com/forums/2/119682/ShowThread.aspx Where someone is asking about this very subject, but not specificly talking about cd players, which i would think is where the action has been for the last 10 years.

Im looking at the arcam 9 which is a full 10 years old. Thats about when i was last on the ball, and seems a safe bet without reasearch. On the thread ive posted is an opinion ive heard before. A chap states that a 10 year old £1000 player is now a £150 player off the shelf. On ebay there still fetching double that though.

Thats my question. Through evolution, just what is a 10 year old player now worth?

read on, but only if your bored

i have the 1995 5star whf rated pioneer pds703. It was paired with an a400 amp and homemade speakers based on audax parts from maplins. I swapped speakers for tdl t-line 3's bought mail order... mistake. Sounded like just the tweeters worked tbh, I was on the phone before the 2nd was even unpacked. Stuck with them, i went out and bought an arcam 8r amp as it was the only thing in my local shop that could tame the tdl's. (ive sent the tdl's to lockwood, but they say there fine n broke n tweeters. i had to buy more tweeters from them as they blamed me for there packageing. They also get dinted in the post. im not buying a 3rd pair for them to blame me for there inadequacys again, but i guess the tdl's are fine and just lack midrange now the bass has eventually started to work) Ive built some little transmission lines now based on morel parts. There 30s tweeter and a mw142 mid/bass. They sound much better than the metal domes of the tdl's and that fact alone is enough to push the tdl's aside. Im still finding the upper mids/tops thin sounding. I tryed my 1987 pioneer sa-970 amp which sounded much fuller than the arcam down below, but i think this thinness to my sound must be the cd player. I have tryed the arcam7se cd player many moons ago and it was much better in the tops, and was perfectly acceptable except it just wouldn't get up and boogie, and i do like dance beats. The tdl's wouldn't of helped ofcource.

Im thinking the 8r can move over for a 9 as the 8r is a bit shrouded. My pds703 can go first though. The 9 cd player hopefully sounding faster bown below than the 7se which wasnt exactly bad, i just wasnt going to swap it with my 703 which was faster. ive mellowed in my tastes somewhat now though.

 

[Anonymous]

It's worth, like everything else, what anyone is prepared to pay for it.

eBay prices are falsely high in my opinion, people will pay over the odds.

You are more likely to find bargains elsewhere, although some new stock goes for good prices on eBay, i.e. Arcam CD192.....

 

[Anonymous]

Erm... Thanks. I think.

Nobody have any facts or figures? Perhaps heard a newer cheaper player do better than your older one? I felt sure someone would attempt to address my question.

I might have to be rude and message the chap that said it... But not quite yet

 

[stephennic]

Hi, Interesting question.

Well I was trying to replace my aging Marantz cd63se with a new cd player - they were around 350 pounds new back in 1995. It took me quite awhile to find a replacement tried the cambridge 640c v2, nad c542, arcam cd73t even Marantz cd7001. Yes the new players were more refined and maybe more detailed but they were not as musical and sweet as my old Marantz - it was only when I moved up to a consonance cd120 linear did I get a decent replacement (600 pounds UK).

So what am i saying - some of the old cd players even by todays standards are more musical than some of the cheap current models sometimes you have to pay considerable more to replace the old ones. The only way is really to try them on your system first as i have made a mistake buying before you buy. Some Arcams tend to be a more warm sounding player, good for classical, jazz etc but not always good for rock they may lack a little bit of punch and sparkle.

Hope this helps.

Steve.

 

[Anonymous]

Thankyou Steven. Thats certainly food for thought.

I see the nad is the same price as your marantz was, so im presuming the others are also. It looks like the £1000 player of 10 years ago is not quite £150 as yet. I guess its still the same discs were spinning, using the same analogue stages. Only the digital bit has come along but until we get different discs we wont see any of the computational gains the digital age has bought along since our 16bit recording standard was drempt up. Ive been waiting far to long for that to happen though. I wont be chucking away my old discs when it does happen anyway, so i need to do something. The arcam 9 does upsampling which i presume is an instant bonus, but in 10 years i thought others would be doing that for £200 but it seems not.

I realise arcam is soft. My 8r amp certainly is. I tryed the 7se cd to, and found it lacking excitement as a combination. Both my pio 703 cd and my 8r amp need to go. I dont want to buy new though, which makes demo's hard work. That nad looked tempting though when i checked its price. I can see me getting drawn in again if im not carefull lol

I used to have the pio 703 with the pio A400 amp and that rocked, but i did build speakers around them to my taste. Unfortunatly i bought tdl's based on the reviews that there bass heavy, and had to let the amp go to tame there metal domes which was about all i could hear from them. I think my speakers were what i liked, not the electronics. It was time for them to go though. Audax 1" soft domes that are known to hide a bit of detail with some softening, and 3 of there yn25c yellow cones in each. Two of which were just subs in there own sealed compartment of miniscule dimensions so they hit hard n trim. I tryed the 3rd cone as just mids, but ended up with it covering bass aswell.

I reckon im right to swap the 8r amp for the 9 amp, but if the 9 cd player has the same tonal qualities as the 7se then i need to perhaps look around more. Maybe get something new... The shop told me i would like the naim stuff, but they had none

 

[stephennic]

Hi,

The nad and arcam on my system were to warm sounding, warmer than my marantz cd63se, the cambridge 640c v2 (250 pounds) will certaitly add some sparkle and punch - its on the lean brighter side, but can sound a bit cold and clinical on the wrong equipment - I ended up geeting the consonance cd120 linear the most balanced.

The naim cd5i are a nice machine very musical and expressive but more expensive, rega apollo have a lovely top end, the creek evo i found better than the marantz cd7001 or Arcam cd73t for a similar price. The cyrus are popular too, fast and detailed.

Probably given you too many choices.

All the best.

Steve.

 

[Anonymous]

thats a very constructive post. Nice one pal

I heard the marantz beside my pio and thought it a little lacking in most areas for my taste back them. cultured, not banging. Im not fond of forward tops though so i tend to compromise the bass to keep the tops in check. I would of happily owned one but preffered the brighter pioneer and tailored my speakers to tame it. Im dissapointed to hear the nad was warmer following the 'banging bass' review. I hoped it was clean cut. The arcam i guess is no surprise. The cambridge sounds interesting though. your cd120 even more so.

I reckon i will get an arcam 9 amp and see how it fairs. Its not going to be a costly move as my 8r is mint condition. Even the box is mint. The swap will stand me around £40 perhaps. If that gets me closer to the brittle pio cd sound I will know the 9amp is capable of what i want. The 8r does get a comparitively poor rating and i do like its presentation. Its just needs to be a bit cleaner cut. I can run it off down the demo rooms then and see how this cambridge sounds though it

niiiice

 

[stephennic]

Hi,

The consonance cd120 linear is part of the cd player in the consonance ping review in what hifi online. It is quite analogue sounding as it dispenses with the digital filter. It is natural and vivid sounding and smooth with a good 3d soundstage it especially shines in the midrange where most of the voices and instruments are - there are plenty of reviews see opera audio website including cd player of the year in hifi +, tnt review, hifi world review, stereo times etc. For its price very good. I like Naim too except its a bit more expensive.

Have you tried different speaker leads or interconnects?

Regards,

Steve.

 

[Anonymous]

I need to do some back peddling. Although my cd player is to thin in the mids and tops, and my tdl's to forward to stand for it, its my amp thats killed the system. All it does is cover up the shortfalls of the speakers. yes, tdl's do go low but these are balanced with an equally excessive hf performance that needs to go. Ive been satisfied with the forward cd and laid back amps midrange combination of detail. The oodles of deep bass gave a great masage too. Its just not me though. I only just put it all together. Its why i vanished for a day.

I was sat there quite un-moved by some hard house. The bass deep, but ponderous and slow. This was using my morels as the tdl's are no longer even in the lounge. I knew it was not the cd player, and doubted a 145mm cone could sound slow. This led me to get up and wire in an old pioneer i keep between friends as a spare. well... it wouldn't let me sit back down again. I stood by the hifi for half a cd, or should i say i bounced by the hifi for half a cd. The deep ponderous bass was gone. The smooth enjoyable midrange was gone. My smile was back though. The cd absolutly flew. I didnt want to listen, i wanted to dance. and i did....and i listened to the music plough along in a manner i had forgot despite having had the cd many years. While this 1980 pioneer sa-970 amp does not have the level of midrange refinement that i can live with, its pace pushes the idea of the arcam 9 amp out the window. Just a bit faster will not be enough. While i love the smooth mids and tops that never agrevate, the bassline is absolute pants. Lots of it, but on the old pio im now using ive actually turned the bass down a bit. quantity cant come before quality. While the arcam is great to relax to, it just dont get my foot tapping.

Im now shot to pieces and dont know which way to turn. I guess the cd player is going to have to wait while i get a more neutral sounding amp for my morels. As i say, the arcam was only ever to tame the metal domes of the tdls. I should of just sold them the minute they arrived and kept my A400. Thats main order stupidity though hay...

Thanks for all your help pal. Its all been taken on board and means as much to me now as before i realised my amps a bigger problem than i imagined. For now though i need to shelf my cd player ideas till i get the rest in good shape.

cheers steve

Richard

edit: the flying cd is hard house euphoria mixed by lisa lashes. second disc, second half. You can hear fluff under the needle track after track with the arcam, but it hardly matters on the lively pio amp. track 15, lisa lashes 'unbelieveable' flys like a rollercoaster at the fairground. Deffo a good test track

 

[drummerman]

stephennic:
Hi, Interesting question.

Well I was trying to replace my aging Marantz cd63se with a new cd player - they were around 350 pounds new back in 1995. It took me quite awhile to find a replacement tried the cambridge 640c v2, nad c542, arcam cd73t even Marantz cd7001. Yes the new players were more refined and maybe more detailed but they were not as musical and sweet as my old Marantz - it was only when I moved up to a consonance cd120 linear did I get a decent replacement (600 pounds UK).

So what am i saying - some of the old cd players even by todays standards are more musical than some of the cheap current models sometimes you have to pay considerable more to replace the old ones. The only way is really to try them on your system first as i have made a mistake buying before you buy. Some Arcams tend to be a more warm sounding player, good for classical, jazz etc but not always good for rock they may lack a little bit of punch and sparkle.

Hope this helps.

Steve.

Oddly enough, I just read a technical review of the said consonance, done
by another mag. The bench results say it has pronounced early
treble roll off, higher than normal distortion and more jiiter than what can be achieved these days. I am not knocking your player in any way. It seems that the product has clearly been engineered with a certain sound in mind but I also think its a clear departure from neutrality, hence the 'musical' sound. Just like the old Marantz CD63's. Nice to listen to, probably. Accurate, probably not.

 

[stephennic]

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes I read that review - but I let my ears do the listening not necessary measurements. Did you read what they said about the sound (sounded like vinyl). To my ears one of the most natural sounding cd players for its price range which i would call accurate. A lot of cd players these days are very clean and precise sounding but also can sound cold and digital (produced) not natural. The voices on the consonance sound like real voices with all the emotion intacked, the instruments have a real vivid natural timbre sound.

I would agree the consonance has weaknesses like the top end is a little rolled off - but a cymbal sounds like a cymbal not a harsh wack (actually the treble on it is quite atmospheric and detailed). Read the hifi + review, stereotimes or tnt review. I also think the bottom end could be punchier on the consonance but it has a nice full rounded bass. A good interconnect also helps to balance a couple of these areas out too.

Thanks again for the feedback.

Regards,

Steve.

 

[stephennic]

Hi Richard,

Im glad you found what component was causing the problem - the amp. Its about enjoying the music its sounds like you got that back. Yes the A400 pioneer amp was a good one. All the best.

Have a good day.

Cheers

Steve.

 

[Anonymous]

I like a rolled off treble. not the best jitter has to be somebodys job, but rounded bass.... that needs to be heard really.

Im ofton found hanging components off the back of crossover posts and covering peoples car tweeters with my hand. Im so not fond of treble. I think they call it british? lol

perhaps i want an active crossover and more speakers, so i can have both my amps doing what there good at

 

[drummerman]

friendly1_uk:

Im ofton found hanging components off the back of crossover posts and covering peoples car tweeters with my hand. Im so not fond of treble. I think they call it british? lol

They must love you in their cars and those components must love you

 

[Anonymous]

lolol

electrical components. i forgot where i was

People like me sorting there car sounds out. most need at least 3db off the tweeters as there stuck in the dash, and the cones are playing to there shin. First you cover them over to different degree's to get the volume right regardless of the lowered quality playing through your hand/gaffer tape/tissue. Then add a few ballast resistors to make it permanent. I go a bit further with my household crossovers.

Are you not going to share which £150 players you feel sound better than the £1000 ones of 10 years ago?

 

[stephennic]

Hi,

One thing i forgot to add the consonance times well - got good prat not slow but has your feet tapping, in comparison the nad and arcam, marantz seemed slow. Like a good NAIM times well.

Regards,

Steve.

 

[drummerman]

We all listen to things differently so I can't make a sweeping statement. What I would say is that something like Nads baby player (forgot the model #) sound quite decent in the greater scheme of things and compared to an old Marantz or something like that. More money buys more refinement, better focus etc but the rewards are not always commensurate with the additional expense. Its all relative. If you have a high resolution system you dont want any constricting links in the chain so spending more is (usually) a good idea but even there, differences can be profound.

These days, the electronics to build a very good player are not much more expensive than the ones used in cheaper products. DAC's are dirt cheap, transports are usually similar, a couple of toroids and smoothing caps hardly add more than twenty quid so it really is more the implementation and output stage that makes the difference. I think it would be quite easy for most companies to build/sell their top range players for fifty quid more than the entry level ones. Does'nt quite work that way though. That's why I think that something like AVI's actives are outstanding value for money.

 

[stephennic]

Hi,

Also system synergy is important. For example: on bright speakers the arcams could be fine but on warm speakers they may be to dull - system matching is so important. What may work in one system may not work so well in another.

Regards,

Steve.