Struggling to hear improvements with upgrades

[Andrew-C]

Hi All,

I've recently purchased a new CD player as my old one was jumping and skipping, (that was the excuse needed to go shopping)!

The thing is, after plugging in the new kit, and comparing it with my old player, I'm really struggling to hear a significant improvement in sound quality.

This is not a post to say that I'm unhappy with the sound of my system, quite the opposite. Its just a general muse as to why I'm struggling to hear the expected improvement.

My system is as follows:

Marantz CD63SE

Arcam Diva A85 Amp

Tannoy DC6T Speaker (biwired).

I purchased a Cyrus CD8X as a replacement, (ebay bargain!), and whilst I still thoroughly enjoy my system, I was a little disappointed not to hear a significant improvement.

Question is, should I give up on looking to improve my system any further, as my ears are obviously duff, or is the rest of my system not letting the new CD player, 'sing', to its full potential? Or lastly was the Marantz a bit of a gem that punched above its weight back in the mid 90's?!

Thanks in advance for any thoughts!

 

[Gazzip]

The CD63se, especially the KI Signature version, was and is still a very good player. Not withstanding that fact I don't think there is really a lot in CD playback when it comes to SQ. Once you get above bare bones budget most of the integral parts of a CDP are basically the same. You have to pay a lot more to hear any real difference and even then the law of diminishing returns applies. If you want to really hear a difference when switching components then concentrate on loudspeakers where there are significant improvements as you work your way up the various manufacturers ranges. Put it this way, a £200 CD player will sound significantly better through £2K loudspeakers than a £2K CD player will sound through £200 loudspeakers.

 

[Andrew-C]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, and glad that I'm not going mad!

As I said before, I'm very happy with the sound of my system, so I'm not looking to make any upgrades, (famous last words!), but considering I've moved to a much newer player costing 4 times the price, I was expecting to plug it in and and go WOW.

It's not a big deal as I needed to replace the Marantz, and the Cyrus was a billy bargain. However if I'd bought it new at full price, I think I'd have felt a little cheated.

 

[JoelSim]

I've never been a big fan of Cyrus, and would worry about how it would pair with an Arcam. Typically an A85 is a warm sounding amp, and Cyrus to my ears has always sounded hard and difficult to get immersed into.

Also, as stated above I think the difference just changing a CDP will be the smallest change of any component.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I'm very much of the opinion that CD players make little or no difference to the sound, though I'm sure they'll be plenty that disagree with me.

Speakers and amps make the difference, Cd players just read and send digital information.

 

[luckylion100]

was when I used mine as a transport only, running it digitally through the inbuilt dac on my Pioneer N-50. I didn't imagine the improvement, poor recordings were utterly terrible, the better CD's absolutely sung!

Perhaps a dac as a future upgrade?

 

[Vladimir]

I'm very much of the opinion that CD players make little or no difference to the sound, though I'm sure they'll be plenty that disagree with me.

Speakers and amps make the difference, Cd players just read and send digital information...

..untill they hit the embedded Digital To Analogue Converter inside the CDP and send analogue signal to the amplifier.

CDPs output digital signal through their optical or coaxial outputs, but analogue signal through the RCA/XLR outputs. The sound quality of a CD player will mostly depend how well this analogue section after the DAC is engineered. This is where Ken Ishiwata spends his time on improving Marantz players.

 

[steve_1979]

I'm very much of the opinion that CD players make little or no difference to the sound, though I'm sure they'll be plenty that disagree with me.

Speakers and amps make the difference, Cd players just read and send digital information.

+1

I was about to type exactly the same thing.

 

[Overdose]

The CD63se, especially the KI Signature version, was and is still a very good player. Not withstanding that fact I don't think there is really a lot in CD playback when it comes to SQ. Once you get above bare bones budget most of the integral parts of a CDP are basically the same. You have to pay a lot more to hear any real difference and even then the law of diminishing returns applies. If you want to really hear a difference when switching components then concentrate on loudspeakers where there are significant improvements as you work your way up the various manufacturers ranges. Put it this way, a £200 CD player will sound significantly better through £2K loudspeakers than a £2K CD player will sound through £200 loudspeakers.

+1

Upgrading all but the most basic of CD players to gain sound quality improvements, is more often than not, a complete waste of time and money.

Focus on speakers and the means to drive them, or cut straight to the chase and seek out some actives.

 

[davedotco]

I have a somewhat different view.

Firstly the system, both new and old, contains the usual selection of well regarded but determinedly mid fi components. Neither the system's resolution nor musical ability is of a particularly high level and swapping inexpensive CD players at random is not going to make much difference.

I appreciate that the system has served the OP well and that he likes the results but he did ask the question, and as someone who knows these products pretty well (if not the exact combination), I offer this as my explanations of what he is hearing.

But then, as some of you know, my views rarely accord with the mainstream and I do believe CD players make a big difference, particularly transports,

 

[Jota180]

The difference between digital front ends is measurably much, much narrower than the difference between speakers. Doesn't matter what people say because scientific equipment can analyse the difference with an accuracy far greater than anyone's ears.

Most decent, modern amps wont have a huge difference between them either. An amp shouldn't really 'sound' like anything. It's not meant to. It's function is to amplify a signal and in the process introduce as little distortion as possible.

 

[antskip]

The difference between digital front ends is measurably much, much narrower than the difference between speakers. Doesn't matter what people say because scientific equipment can analyse the difference with an accuracy far greater than anyone's ears.

Most decent, modern amps wont have a huge difference between them either. An amp shouldn't really 'sound' like anything. It's not meant to. It's function is to amplify a signal and in the process introduce as little distortion as possible.

most people do use their ears and not scientific equipment to listen to music, whether live or recorded. if indeed what you hear is what matters to you, then you can only listen and judge for yourself if there is any change when swapping equipment. some people seem to not find any change; others do. vive le difference.

 

[ID.]

Hmm, maybe you need to try some new power cables *crazy*

(Hopes nobody digs out my old post where I detail how my new power cable improved the bass and gave the music a blacker background).

 

[davedotco]

Two thoughts.

There are (measurable) differences that matter and differences that do not. The fact that the differences in speakers are obvious does not mean that they are important, particularly when comparing models of a comparable standard.

If you concentrate on 'presentational' differences then this makes things difficult as the sound of the speaker will vary from room to room and position to position.

CD transports are often said to 'simply read the bits' but that is simply not true in my experience. Sure I am a little out of date but differences were clearly audible and in some cases made a big difference to the quality of the reproduced music. I put that down to the ability of the mech to accurately read the disc (in real time remember) and the implementation of the error correction.

On the other hand, I am reasonably convinced that modern dacs are, efectively transparent, unless deliberately 'voiced' to sound different.

 

[Covenanter]

I'm very much of the opinion that CD players make little or no difference to the sound, though I'm sure they'll be plenty that disagree with me.

Speakers and amps make the difference, Cd players just read and send digital information.

I used to agree with this but my current player is much better than my old CD6004, much more detail revealed.

Chris

 

[Andrew-C]

Wow, thank you for all the replies! Some very interesting reading, and as always on the net, some difference of opinions!

I'm vey happy with the synergy and sound of my system, (I always was), so I'm not complaining, and not looking to change my amp or speakers for a while yet. Young children have reduced disposable income somewhat. Indeed I feel lucky to have put together the system I have now!

Time to stop listening to the hi-fi, and start listening to the music!

 

[davedotco]

I'm very much of the opinion that CD players make little or no difference to the sound, though I'm sure they'll be plenty that disagree with me.

Speakers and amps make the difference, Cd players just read and send digital information.

I used to agree with this but my current player is much better than my old CD6004, much more detail revealed.

Chris

I was never really a 'detail' kind of listener, though I know many are.

How do you feel the extra detail enhances the listener experience, for you anyway? I have a good idea what differences are important to me but I am always interested in finding out what works for others.

As an aside, I am (in my seemingly never ending quest to 'understand' jazz) listening to Live - Evil. A Miles Davis recording featuring among others, John McLaughlin and Kieth Jarret. There is an awful lot going on, very free flowing, but to me rhythmic integrity is what reproducing this is all about, without it I think it would be unlistenable.

 

[Vladimir]

With one of the coolest cover art and booklets ever made.

Artist: Mati Klarwein

A lot of Mclaughlin prana + psychodelia + chaos, a bit of Miles street cool jazz funk, Cobham trying to follow their mess (successfully), Ron Carter taking it easy and no Jarrett making man-suffering-on-toilet noises. Shorter and Zawinul somewhere in there. I didn't pay attention.

 

[Vladimir]

Oh sweet! Herbie, Holland, DeJohnette and Chick all in there as well. I'm giving this album a second go. I remember finding ti a bit too awake and profane on the first listen.

 

[davedotco]

With one of the coolest cover art and booklets ever made.

Artist: Mati Klarwein

A lot of Mclaughlin prana + psychodelia + chaos, a bit of Miles street cool jazz funk, Cobham trying to follow their mess (successfully), Ron Carter taking it easy and no Jarrett making man-suffering-on-toilet noises. Shorter and Zawinul somewhere in there. I didn't pay attention.

Well you should, an amazing and inovative album. If you had you would have heard Jarret making his trademark 'noises' on Sivad. Some of McLaughlins playing is devine, far better than much of his later stuff.

And you are right, the drumming is superb, but it is Jack DeJohnette doing the honours, Billy Cobham barely features.

Production wise it is interesting too, not just the trademark mix of live and studio tracks but the combination of live and studio recordings into the same tracks.....!

Edit. Just for interest, this is the kind of stuff I really like.......*dirol*

 

[relocated]

Wow, thank you for all the replies! Some very interesting reading, and as always on the net, some difference of opinions!

I'm vey happy with the synergy and sound of my system, (I always was), so I'm not complaining, and not looking to change my amp or speakers for a while yet. Young children have reduced disposable income somewhat. Indeed I feel lucky to have put together the system I have now!

Time to stop listening to the hi-fi, and start listening to the music!

You are happy with your hifi, which sets you apart from so many on here. If they are happy at the moment chances are they won't be five minutes later. As you say, you got a bargain when you HAD to get something new and it hasn't reduced the pleasure in your system for you, so it's win-win. Enjoy.

 

[Vladimir]

Wow, young DeJohnette is superb on this one. I though there was only one drummer here, Billy. When I listened to this album the first time it was on two burned TDK CD's copied from a friend, no booklets or anything. I remember I ripped a big stack of his CDs (50-ish) and did a rush job going through them at home the following month.

 

[Vladimir]

Listening to What I say on CD 1.

 

[Jota180]

The difference between digital front ends is measurably much, much narrower than the difference between speakers. Doesn't matter what people say because scientific equipment can analyse the difference with an accuracy far greater than anyone's ears.

Most decent, modern amps wont have a huge difference between them either. An amp shouldn't really 'sound' like anything. It's not meant to. It's function is to amplify a signal and in the process introduce as little distortion as possible.

most people do use their ears and not scientific equipment to listen to music, whether live or recorded. if indeed what you hear is what matters to you, then you can only listen and judge for yourself if there is any change when swapping equipment. some people seem to not find any change; others do. vive le difference.

What I was saying is the difference between digital front ends these days is minute, bordering on insignificant. This can be and is demonstrated by accurate measuring equipment.

 

[Jota180]

Two thoughts.

There are (measurable) differences that matter and differences that do not. The fact that the differences in speakers are obvious does not mean that they are important, particularly when comparing models of a comparable standard.

If you concentrate on 'presentational' differences then this makes things difficult as the sound of the speaker will vary from room to room and position to position.

CD transports are often said to 'simply read the bits' but that is simply not true in my experience. Sure I am a little out of date but differences were clearly audible and in some cases made a big difference to the quality of the reproduced music. I put that down to the ability of the mech to accurately read the disc (in real time remember) and the implementation of the error correction.

On the other hand, I am reasonably convinced that modern dacs are, efectively transparent, unless deliberately 'voiced' to sound different.

The differences in speakers I was referring to was distortion and not the 'house sound'. Distortion in the rest of the hifi chain is too small to hear unless you're using vinyl or valves.

If anyone is concerned about transport accuracy the solution is simple - stream.