Question CD Players

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

twinkletoes

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2021
94
61
120
Interested in opinions on a new CD player. Considering the Marantz 6007, the Rotel CD11 and CD14, also the Audiolab CD transport and using the DAC on my Yamaha RN803D. I noticed Rotel have a new CD14 out and the old version is reduced in price. Anyone views on the new versus old version? All opinions welcome!

Do not underestimate a "cheap" second-hand DVD player from 20 years ago or even Bluray players.

IF you're using it as a transport the drives used them are far higher quality than in most CD players used today.

Id recommend a pioneer BDP 320 70-100 quid all day long or if you want a DVD player a pioneer 656A but they are rather expensive these days.
 

shadders

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2009
441
294
19,270
Interested in opinions on a new CD player. Considering the Marantz 6007, the Rotel CD11 and CD14, also the Audiolab CD transport and using the DAC on my Yamaha RN803D. I noticed Rotel have a new CD14 out and the old version is reduced in price. Anyone views on the new versus old version? All opinions welcome!
Hi,
I personally would not purchase a CD transport. If you want to use the DAC in the Yamaha (ESS DAC - they get good reviews) then any CD or Blu-ray player with optical output will suffice - as others have said.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

manicm

Well-known member
May 1, 2008
1,396
413
19,570
Hi,
I personally would not purchase a CD transport. If you want to use the DAC in the Yamaha (ESS DAC - they get good reviews) then any CD or Blu-ray player with optical output will suffice - as others have said.

Regards,
Shadders.
Somewhat disagree. Both the CA and Audiolab being universally praised as transports, it's obvious that money has been spent in making them good transports, without having to worry about a mediocre DAC.

So if you have a good DAC, a transport is a no brainer.
 

shadders

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2009
441
294
19,270
Somewhat disagree. Both the CA and Audiolab being universally praised as transports, it's obvious that money has been spent in making them good transports, without having to worry about a mediocre DAC.

So if you have a good DAC, a transport is a no brainer.
Hi,
I would not state that CD transports are not well designed, but for the data stream, they make no difference.

Bits are bits, and if a cheap CD player with an optical output had an inferior performance compared to a CD transport, then you would be hearing pops and clicks. No one reports this, so there is empirical evidence that there is no difference.

If the OP is settling for their inbuilt DAC, then a cheap CD player with optical output is all that is needed.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

manicm

Well-known member
May 1, 2008
1,396
413
19,570
Hi,
I would not state that CD transports are not well designed, but for the data stream, they make no difference.

Bits are bits, and if a cheap CD player with an optical output had an inferior performance compared to a CD transport, then you would be hearing pops and clicks. No one reports this, so there is empirical evidence that there is no difference.

If the OP is settling for their inbuilt DAC, then a cheap CD player with optical output is all that is needed.

Regards,
Shadders.
That‘s where you’re totally wrong mate. Bits are not bits in a CD player where an inadequate transport can cause jitter. Just ask anyone who‘s knowledgeable on this matter. And some transports are definitely superior to others.

I experienced ‘clicks‘ with certain CDs on my old Technics player, where the CD had no scratches at all, and would play fine elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tinman1952

shadders

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2009
441
294
19,270
That‘s where you’re totally wrong mate. Bits are not bits in a CD player where an inadequate transport can cause jitter. Just ask anyone who‘s knowledgeable on this matter. And some transports are definitely superior to others.
Hi,
The jitter on the optical serial data link, unless severe, will have no effect on the DAC. The digital receiver in the DAC will determine the jitter on the digital receiver output to the DAC IC.

That is, if the DAC digital receiver has a jitter higher than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC digital receiver has a jitter lower than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC IC has its own clock NOT derived from the digital receiver in the DAC, then the final jitter experienced by the listener is the DAC IC clock.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

treesey

Well-known member
May 18, 2015
143
38
18,620
It seems that if using a separate DAC, a good transport is a no brainer as you say - but as Twinkletoes suggests, some of the old DVD players are apparently exceptional transports. If you have the time, wading through this (and all of his research) is an eyeopener.

 

manicm

Well-known member
May 1, 2008
1,396
413
19,570
Hi,
The jitter on the optical serial data link, unless severe, will have no effect on the DAC. The digital receiver in the DAC will determine the jitter on the digital receiver output to the DAC IC.

That is, if the DAC digital receiver has a jitter higher than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC digital receiver has a jitter lower than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC IC has its own clock NOT derived from the digital receiver in the DAC, then the final jitter experienced by the listener is the DAC IC clock.

Regards,
Shadders.
It seems that if using a separate DAC, a good transport is a no brainer as you say - but as Twinkletoes suggests, some of the old DVD players are apparently exceptional transports. If you have the time, wading through this (and all of his research) is an eyeopener.

The trouble with some old DVD players is that they had lousy DACs for CD playback.
 

Tinman1952

Well-known member
May 19, 2021
1,379
813
2,070
That‘s where you’re totally wrong mate. Bits are not bits in a CD player where an inadequate transport can cause jitter. Just ask anyone who‘s knowledgeable on this matter. And some transports are definitely superior to others.

I experienced ‘clicks‘ with certain CDs on my old Technics player, where the CD had no scratches at all, and would play fine elsewhere.
Agreed. Audiolab for example buffer the data read from the CD and re-clock the SPDIF output with a high precision clock. Clocks certainly make a difference. I remember not many years ago when people with excellent CD players were paying for femto precision clocks to upgrade those players and experiencing much better sound quality. Bits are not just bits........
 

Tinman1952

Well-known member
May 19, 2021
1,379
813
2,070
Hi,
The jitter on the optical serial data link, unless severe, will have no effect on the DAC. The digital receiver in the DAC will determine the jitter on the digital receiver output to the DAC IC.

That is, if the DAC digital receiver has a jitter higher than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC digital receiver has a jitter lower than the incoming optical data stream, the jitter seen by the DAC IC is that of the digital receiver in the DAC.

If the DAC IC has its own clock NOT derived from the digital receiver in the DAC, then the final jitter experienced by the listener is the DAC IC clock.

Regards,
Shadders.
Respectfully Shadders, I cannot share your confidence in the receiver chip not being affected by jitter. As you well know in a SPDIF signal the clock signal is embedded with the data and the receiver chip has to extract this clock signal.....so jitter 'upstream' has to affect this process.
 

shadders

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2009
441
294
19,270
Respectfully Shadders, I cannot share your confidence in the receiver chip not being affected by jitter. As you well know in a SPDIF signal the clock signal is embedded with the data and the receiver chip has to extract this clock signal.....so jitter 'upstream' has to affect this process.
Hi,
The DAC receiver chip is not affected by the upstream jitter (unless there is a fault condition). The DAC receiver chip will synchronise to the incoming data stream using its own PLL, or it will be clocked by its own clock based on a crystal oscillator.. It is that PLL or crystal clock that defines the DAC digital receiver IC jitter on the audio data output to the DAC IC, not the upstream transport.

If the jitter on the data stream is so poor, then there will be slippage, and an audio value discarded, or there will be loss of synchronisation and muted audio until resynchronisation occurs.

The DAC receiver chip has a buffer, else it would not be able to decode the data stream to extract the audio bits from the framing, synchronisation and information bits.

From here, the data is passed to the DAC IC, which may, or may not, have its own crystal oscillator based clock.

If the DAC IC chip uses the digital receiver IC provided clock, then the specification of the digital receiver IC defines the jitter of the DAC overall, experienced by the user.

If the DAC IC chip uses its own crystal based oscillator, then that oscillator jitter defines the jitter of the DAC overall, experienced by the user.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

abacus

Well-known member
Sep 24, 2008
776
467
19,270
Bits are bits, and anyone who says otherwise needs to get there old school text books out as this is fact.
Transfer of data on the other hand can vary and is why all good DAC design isolate themselves from these problems.
People need to check on the facts rather than the nonsense spouted on websites that are trying to sell you something. (If you don’t you are just making yourself gullible)

Bill
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS