Reliable cd player

[jackiesolo]

Hi looking for some advice on a problem I am having with my cd player. A few months ago I bought a Marantz cdp from Richer Sounds but found that on about 10-20% of my discs the player would encounter a problem with either skipping or sticking. Giving the disc a good clean made little or no difference. I contacted Richer Sounds who agreed to exchange the Marantz for a Denon but this made no difference to my problem. The most frustrating thing is that my dvd player,bedroom cd player and portable cd player have no difficulties in playing the same discs my Denon is unable to play. Richer Sounds told me this was due to the Marantz and Denon players being so sophisticated that it couldn`t play the discs my cheaper and presumably less sophisticated players can play effortlessly. So can anyone recommend a quality player that can play the discs my Denon can`t and my cheaper ones can ?

 

[Leeps]

Can I ask, are these CDs that you've ripped yourself that you're experiencing problems with?

I've read of Cyrus and Naim CD owners who've experienced problems reading certain discs, but not Marantz.

 

[jackiesolo]

Hi thanks for replying. No in all cases these are proper cds.

 

[cheeseboy]

maybe try taking some of the offending cd's in to the shop to test with some other equipment?

 

[Covenanter]

There is something else going on here! Whatever you think of their sound Marantz CD players are some of the best sellers and that wouldn't be the case if they had major issues with playing CDs! I've owned several and have never had a problem that wasn't cured by cleaning the CD or the tray when dust got into it.

Which CDs are giving you problems? Is there anything unusual about the room? Very dusty or maybe very humid? Is it cold or hot? (Humidity in a cold room can cause issues when the air isn't warm enough to carry the moisture and it condenses on cold surfaces like the laser lens.)

Chris

PS Denon and Marantz are the same company so the mechanisms might be identical.

 

[davedotco]

This is a common issue, with some players being more prone to misreading than others.

Leaving aside sample variations, the explanation I have heard, and the one alluded to above, is error correction.

Inexpensive players are often lightly built and mechanically less sound, the error correction is working hard pretty much all the times and the result is a poorer playback quality that goes unnoticed in a less capable setup.

Better players are intended for better systems so the error correction is set up in a way that has minimal effect on the sound quality, but will not handle discs that require more error correction than normal.

This explanation and slight variations of it has been told to me by several CD player manufactures/distributers and has a degree of logic and credibility, on the other hand it could be complete BS.

 

[iMark]

Whenever I've had trouble with offending CDs, I could rip the CD to my computer and then burn a CD-R that would play fine on equipment that rejected or didn't properly play the original CD.

It might take a while (up to an hour) ripping the CDs with error correction (and the ripping will make very awkward sounds) on but it will almost certainly work. I only have one CD with a serious production error that simply won't rip one track.

The error correction while ripping CDs is one of the main reasons why lossless ripped files sound better than the original CD played on an expensive CD player. The files are error free and don't rely error correction in the player. They are also a very good source for burning your own CDs.

 

[Electro]

Do the skipping Cd's have many surface marks and scratches that are visible when the playing surface is held to the light ?

If so this could be the cause of the problem , as already said some of the more expensive Cd players can be far more sensitive to the condition of the disc .

One tip I can give you is to polish the discs with car metalic 'T' cut that can be found at you local Halfords or similar outlet , it will remove all light surface defects and reduce deeper scratches and will probably allow the disc to play , I have cleaned and repaired literally hundreds of second hand Cd's this way .*smile*

http://www.amazon.co.uk/T-Cut-Metallic-Colour-Restorer-375ml/dp/B003ZDFXCY

For general regular cleaning ( grease and fingermarks etc ) of Cd's Servisol disc cleaner is by far the best imo .

http://www.rapidonline.com/Mechanical-Fastenings-Fixings/Servisol-Computer-Care-Disc-Cleaner-Cd150-200ml-87-1162/?source=googleps&utm_source=googleps&IncVat=1&gclid=Cj0KEQiAuf2lBRDW07y3z6f96awBEiQA0IngJriSXQHc3KOyz5-62GBmI78vBnB4mmf7OgJGyH67yjAaAs2V8P8HAQ

 

[dim_span]

Recently, I had the same problem with my old Marantz CD63 MKII K1 signature cdp after 10 years of very good service ...

with regret, I ended up selling the CD player on ebay but I bought a better CD player ...

I doubt that it's the disks .... it's the disk laser thingy ... all my cd's now work on my new CD player

 

[BigH]

It is true Marantz do seem more picky than many other players. I did many demos about 20 months ago, the only player that would not play 2 discs was a Marantz Pearl Lite and my old Marantz 63SE, about 10 other players had no problem, car, computer etc plus Creek, Audiolab, RK, MF, Rega, Arcam. Scratched discs often won't play on the Marantz but I can always play them on the computer. If you want a cheap player maybe try Teac or Pioneer or Onkyo.

 

[Covenanter]

Perhaps I'm unusual but my CDs never skip. I say never but actually I had one quite recently that did. I couldn't see anything on the surface but I cleaned it with one of those lens cleaning wipes, the ones you use for glasses and camera lenses, and it was fine. Other than that I haven't had a CD skip in the last 10+ years.

Chris

 

[dim_span]

It is true Marantz do seem more picky than many other players. I did many demos about 20 months ago, the only player that would not play 2 discs was a Marantz Pearl Lite and my old Marantz 63SE, about 10 other players had no problem, car, computer etc plus Creek, Audiolab, RK, MF, Rega, Arcam. Scratched discs often won't play on the Marantz but I can always play them on the computer. If you want a cheap player maybe try Teac or Pioneer or Onkyo.

the old Pioneer stable platters (like the PD7700 , PD9700 etc ) seem very robust and read disks that other 'finiky' CD players have difficulty with... and they sound good aswell

 

[iMark]

IMHO seperate (expensive) CD players are antiquated and a waste of money. Our ripped CDs through an Airport Express and a DAC sound better than any CD player I've ever heard. And no more worries about error correction.

If you don't want to stream you might as well use any DVD or Bluray player as a transport and plug it into to a separate DAC. All digital components, including your TV, sound better through the DAC.

 

[jackiesolo]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I have built up my cd collection steadily since the 80s so yes some do have minor scratches but I`m reasonably careful when I handle the discs so the worst that can happen is finger smudges which can be cleaned off quite easily. However I do intend to buy the cleaning products you mention and hopefully that will help.

Thanks again for your response.

 

[jackiesolo]

There is something else going on here! Whatever you think of their sound Marantz CD players are some of the best sellers and that wouldn't be the case if they had major issues with playing CDs! I've owned several and have never had a problem that wasn't cured by cleaning the CD or the tray when dust got into it.

Which CDs are giving you problems? Is there anything unusual about the room? Very dusty or maybe very humid? Is it cold or hot? (Humidity in a cold room can cause issues when the air isn't warm enough to carry the moisture and it condenses on cold surfaces like the laser lens.)

Chris

PS Denon and Marantz are the same company so the mechanisms might be identical.

It`s a mixture of cds that give me a problem so can`t see a trend there. As far the room environment is concerned I would have thought any problems there would give the dvd player the same difficulties but it can play everything I ask it to. The last cdp I had was a Cambridge Audio which gave up the ghost after many years of flawless service so perhaps my mistake was to go for something else but was swayed by the very good reviews the Marantz and Denon received.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[Pistol Pete1]

Funnily enough I had a demo in Richer Sounds before Xmas. The Marantz CD6005 and Cambridge Audio Azur 351C.

Using the same disc, the CA played it flawlessly, but the Marantz didn't, and got stuck half way through a tune.

I say no more.......

 

[andyjm]

This is a common issue, with some players being more prone to misreading than others.

Leaving aside sample variations, the explanation I have heard, and the one alluded to above, is error correction.

Inexpensive players are often lightly built and mechanically less sound, the error correction is working hard pretty much all the times and the result is a poorer playback quality that goes unnoticed in a less capable setup.

Better players are intended for better systems so the error correction is set up in a way that has minimal effect on the sound quality, but will not handle discs that require more error correction than normal.

This explanation and slight variations of it has been told to me by several CD player manufactures/distributers and has a degree of logic and credibility, on the other hand it could be complete BS.

Dave, I am afraid you have been fed BS.

The electronics that control the laser - the servo system - are independent of the error correction of data retrieved from the disc. The better the servo system, the more able the player is to track dirty, warped and damaged discs.

Error correction is something else, and is done using a 'reed solomon' self correcting encoding technique which allows a certain number of errors to be corrected in each data block. If the error correction system is swamped, then the system will interpolate between the last known good sample and the next. If the samples are too far apart, the system will mute.

This is all specified in the 'red book' - there is no 'error correction working harder' nonsense. Disc spinners are commodity items. I can only assume that for whatever reason the more expensive players are using worse spinners (perhaps using previous generation spinners as they don't use many?)

Using a ripping program is different again. Typically it will retry a disc read if an uncorrectable error is detected. This isn't error correction in the 'reed solomon' manner, but similar to the way the internet corrects errors by asking for data to be sent again. The mechanical servo drive is not perfect and by retrying a seek and read and shaking everything up, it is possible that the laser will end up in a slightly different position relative to the disc and be able to extract more data - thereby allowing the reed solomon error correction to retrieve the correct data.

 

[davedotco]

This is a common issue, with some players being more prone to misreading than others.

Leaving aside sample variations, the explanation I have heard, and the one alluded to above, is error correction.

Inexpensive players are often lightly built and mechanically less sound, the error correction is working hard pretty much all the times and the result is a poorer playback quality that goes unnoticed in a less capable setup.

Better players are intended for better systems so the error correction is set up in a way that has minimal effect on the sound quality, but will not handle discs that require more error correction than normal.

This explanation and slight variations of it has been told to me by several CD player manufactures/distributers and has a degree of logic and credibility, on the other hand it could be complete BS.

Dave, I am afraid you have been fed BS.

The electronics that control the laser - the servo system - are independent of the error correction of data retrieved from the disc. The better the servo system, the more able the player is to track dirty, warped and damaged discs.

Error correction is something else, and is done using a 'reed solomon' self correcting encoding technique which allows a certain number of errors to be corrected in each data block. If the error correction system is swamped, then the system will interpolate between the last known good sample and the next. If the samples are too far apart, the system will mute.

This is all specified in the 'red book' - there is no 'error correction working harder' nonsense. Disc spinners are commodity items. I can only assume that for whatever reason the more expensive players are using worse spinners (perhaps using previous generation spinners as they don't use many?)

Using a ripping program is different again. Typically it will retry a disc read if an uncorrectable error is detected. This isn't error correction in the 'reed solomon' manner, but similar to the way the internet corrects errors by asking for data to be sent again. The mechanical servo drive is not perfect and by retrying a seek and read and shaking everything up, it is possible that the laser will end up in a slightly different position relative to the disc and be able to extract more data - thereby allowing the reed solomon error correction to retrieve the correct data.

Ahh, Andyjm, I was hoping you would turn up.

I kind of thought it was BS, but posted it as an example of the kind of rubbish that circulates through the industry and is still repeated by, in this case, a dealer.

There is so much of this kind of stuff around, it sounds kind of 'logical', so is widely believed.

For example, if a transport has 'better' servos, it gets more data from the disc, the error correction makes fewer interpolations so the signal is 'more accurate' and therefore sounds 'better'.

More BS I am sure, losing a few bits should not inpact on sound quality in the usual analogue sense, but you can kind of see why it is believable to anyone without detailed understanding of how these things work.

I think digital audio is like quantum mechanics, if it sounds logical and you think you understand what is going on, you are almost certainly wrong......*dash1*

 

[Electro]

This article is very interesting and may (or may not ) answer some questions about error correction performance .*smile*

http://www.digital-recordings.com/ded/sensnd01.html

 

[Happy_Listener]

"Richer Sounds told me this was due to the Marantz and Denon players being so sophisticated that it couldn`t play the discs my cheaper and presumably less sophisticated players can play effortlessly."

That comment is total b.s. and the sales person who told you that should be reprimanded by the manager or Richer Sounds should better teach their employees.

 

[andyjm]

This article is very interesting and may (or may not ) answer some questions about error correction performance .*smile*

http://www.digital-recordings.com/ded/sensnd01.html

Thanks for posting - interesting and well written article. Makes you wonder why mags don't write articles like that now - or maybe I am just reading the wrong mags....

 

[andyjm]

Ahh, Andyjm, I was hoping you would turn up.

I kind of thought it was BS, but posted it as an example of the kind of rubbish that circulates through the industry and is still repeated by, in this case, a dealer.

There is so much of this kind of stuff around, it sounds kind of 'logical', so is widely believed.

For example, if a transport has 'better' servos, it gets more data from the disc, the error correction makes fewer interpolations so the signal is 'more accurate' and therefore sounds 'better'.

Like most hifi claims, there is a grain of truth underneath it. If, for a contrived example, a damaged CD was right on the edge between fully correctable errors and just tipping over to the point that the error correction was swamped and the player was having to occasionally interpolate, then arguably a more able spinner could lower the error rate and result in an 'improvement' in sound quality (probably not audible).

The irony is that in the example in this thread, the cheaper spinner seems to be more able to cope with badly damaged discs than the expensive one, and is therefore likely to be better at extracting data from marginal discs at a lower error than the more expensive spinner. This means the cheaper player would be less likely to get into interpolation territory than the fancy up-market player.

...but then again, you might be tempted to play worse quality discs on the cheaper spinner as it will still read them, getting you back into interpolation territory....

I guess the real answer is don't scratch your CDs, or stream.

Just as a FWIW, I generally have looked after my CDs, but they do have the odd scratch. Of the couple of hundred CDs I ripped, only one failed the CRC check on dBPoweramp - meaning it had errors that were uncorrectable by the CD spinner and would have therefore required interpolation by the player. When I looked at it, the CD was pretty beat up. I think it been rattling around the glovebox in the car out of its case. I was ripping using a £20 Sony CD drive in my PC.