Stupid question

[gasolin]

Do you use the sound mode (sound ex) the sa cd8005 manual say nothing about the sound mode but it's there on the CD5005/6005

no I do not think so if your on about the Exit 1 & Exit 2 thing I had that on the cd6005 but I have looked for that on the cd8005 but does not seem to be on there . I have only had it for a day so far so I still kind of messing with the sittings still and still testing it with the irdac still setup on the auxiliary input and the analogue is setup on the cd input so kind of switching it between the 2 inputs but there is definitely a sound difference between the arcam irdac and the on board dac and my wife hearing the differences and she normally hopeless at noticeing stuff like that . No I no the sa8005 uses the same dac as the cd6005 now what I want to no is what makes 8005 different from the cd6005 apart from the dac . I no it has a different power supply now what would this do to sound ? Better transport , different display, a heavily built case then 6005 has . Why would marantz make 2 models of CD player with the same dac inside ones a budget CD player and the other a mid range model what would be the point in upgrading surely what makes this 2 models stand apart from each other surly it's not the sacd function that your paying for . Hopefully someone with component understanding will tell me as I am interested.

Tried it my self (marantz cd5005) i feelt one connection was a bit brighter ( i actually can't remember what i choose to use, the option that was brighter or more neutral) the biggest difference was the cable, not the same brand, optical was a danish brand (argon red) and the other i use atm qed performance graphite (analog), that may have had an effect on the sound.

Do you use cable from the same brand/model?

 

[gasolin]

Do you use the sound mode (sound ex) the sa cd8005 manual say nothing about the sound mode but it's there on the CD5005/6005

no I do not think so if your on about the Exit 1 & Exit 2 thing I had that on the cd6005 but I have looked for that on the cd8005 but does not seem to be on there . I have only had it for a day so far so I still kind of messing with the sittings still and still testing it with the irdac still setup on the auxiliary input and the analogue is setup on the cd input so kind of switching it between the 2 inputs but there is definitely a sound difference between the arcam irdac and the on board dac and my wife hearing the differences and she normally hopeless at noticeing stuff like that . No I no the sa8005 uses the same dac as the cd6005 now what I want to no is what makes 8005 different from the cd6005 apart from the dac . I no it has a different power supply now what would this do to sound ? Better transport , different display, a heavily built case then 6005 has . Why would marantz make 2 models of CD player with the same dac inside ones a budget CD player and the other a mid range model what would be the point in upgrading surely what makes this 2 models stand apart from each other surly it's not the sacd function that your paying for . Hopefully someone with component understanding will tell me as I am interested.

It's cheaper to make alot of the same part for many models(like wolksvagen does with vw,audi,seat,) if you then modify it you would get better SQ, like better cables,better shielding for lower noise,better power suply...

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Do you use the sound mode (sound ex) the sa cd8005 manual say nothing about the sound mode but it's there on the CD5005/6005?

 no I do not think so if your on about the Exit 1 & Exit 2 thing I had that on the cd6005 but I have looked for that on the cd8005 but does not seem to be on there . I have only had it for a day so far so I still kind of messing with the sittings still and still testing it with the irdac still setup on the auxiliary input and the analogue is setup on the cd input so kind of switching it between the 2 inputs  but there is definitely a sound difference between the  arcam irdac and the on board dac and my wife hearing  the differences and she normally hopeless at noticeing stuff like that . No I no the sa8005 uses the same dac as the cd6005  now what I want to no is what makes 8005  different from the cd6005 apart from the dac . I no it has a different power supply now what would this do to sound ? Better transport , different display, a heavily built case then 6005 has  . Why would marantz make 2 models of CD player with the same dac inside ones a budget CD player and the other a mid range model what would be the point in upgrading surely what makes this 2 models stand apart from each other surly it's not the sacd function that your paying for . Hopefully someone with component understanding will tell me as I am interested.

Because modern dac chips are pretty much identical and totally audibly transparent. If 'complete' component dacs are audibly different it is rarely the anything to do with the dac chip. There used to be scope for manufacturers to build their own filters, thus adding their own sound signature, but most modern dac chips include them and many have their analogue stages built in too.

So why do dacs sound different? Well, mostly they don't, among compedent designs anyway, so some manufacturers try to find ways to make their product 'stand out'. Boring though it might be, increasing the output slightly from the 2 volt standard is both the cheapest and most effective way of doing this, though some deliberately 'voice' the analogue stage to conform to a house sound.

There are other factors that can affect the performance of a stand alone dac, effective input stages, sometimes with reclocking, jitter reduction, noise isolation etc, etc. In many ways having the dac on board the CD player is the best option, eliminating the SPDIF interface (the data protocols by which digital data is sent from one digital component to another) is generally a good idea, as indeed are better (low noise) power supplies.

As is usual with hi-fi electronics, most differences are volume related, hence my (and others) insistence on level matching. 

Again with the level matching.....

A CDplayer is the sum of its parts it's not just a chip or a tray.....

As an example like a speaker - the sound from a drive unit can be improved by putting it in a box. That sound can be improved by adding a port, then further improved by placing it on a solid stand - the input to the driver remains the same but the differences are audible.

Frankly if one player offers better dynamics over another the perception would in most cases be considered to be it is louder......

 

[gasolin]

Do you use the sound mode (sound ex) the sa cd8005 manual say nothing about the sound mode but it's there on the CD5005/6005

no I do not think so if your on about the Exit 1 & Exit 2 thing I had that on the cd6005 but I have looked for that on the cd8005 but does not seem to be on there . I have only had it for a day so far so I still kind of messing with the sittings still and still testing it with the irdac still setup on the auxiliary input and the analogue is setup on the cd input so kind of switching it between the 2 inputs but there is definitely a sound difference between the arcam irdac and the on board dac and my wife hearing the differences and she normally hopeless at noticeing stuff like that . No I no the sa8005 uses the same dac as the cd6005 now what I want to no is what makes 8005 different from the cd6005 apart from the dac . I no it has a different power supply now what would this do to sound ? Better transport , different display, a heavily built case then 6005 has . Why would marantz make 2 models of CD player with the same dac inside ones a budget CD player and the other a mid range model what would be the point in upgrading surely what makes this 2 models stand apart from each other surly it's not the sacd function that your paying for . Hopefully someone with component understanding will tell me as I am interested.

Because modern dac chips are pretty much identical and totally audibly transparent. If 'complete' component dacs are audibly different it is rarely the anything to do with the dac chip. There used to be scope for manufacturers to build their own filters, thus adding their own sound signature, but most modern dac chips include them and many have their analogue stages built in too.

So why do dacs sound different? Well, mostly they don't, among compedent designs anyway, so some manufacturers try to find ways to make their product 'stand out'. Boring though it might be, increasing the output slightly from the 2 volt standard is both the cheapest and most effective way of doing this, though some deliberately 'voice' the analogue stage to conform to a house sound.

There are other factors that can affect the performance of a stand alone dac, effective input stages, sometimes with reclocking, jitter reduction, noise isolation etc, etc. In many ways having the dac on board the CD player is the best option, eliminating the SPDIF interface (the data protocols by which digital data is sent from one digital component to another) is generally a good idea, as indeed are better (low noise) power supplies.

As is usual with hi-fi electronics, most differences are volume related, hence my (and others) insistence on level matching.

What do you think about this? https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=28m26s

 

[Andrewjvt]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

 

[gasolin]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

 

[Andrewjvt]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

?

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

Wow

 

[ID.]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

In that case I think you've totally misunderstood what a transport is. There is no requirement for a DAC chip at all when using a CD player as a transport, and in fact you can buy transports (effectively a CD player without a DAC; i.e. only outputs a digital signal because there is in Digital to Analogue Converter to convert the digital signal to analogue...).

I'm rather fond of this one

Clicky

You'll notice that there's no analogue output (i.e. no DAC in it).

 

[lordsquirrel]

A CDplayer is the sum of its parts it's not just a chip or a tray.....

As an example like a speaker - the sound from a drive unit can be improved by putting it in a box. That sound can be improved by adding a port, then further improved by placing it on a solid stand - the input to the driver remains the same but the differences are audible.

False analogy. Those features of a speaker directly affect the sound waves you hear in a way that most features of a cd player beyond the DAC don't.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Do you use the sound mode (sound ex) the sa cd8005 manual say nothing about the sound mode but it's there on the CD5005/6005

no I do not think so if your on about the Exit 1 & Exit 2 thing I had that on the cd6005 but I have looked for that on the cd8005 but does not seem to be on there . I have only had it for a day so far so I still kind of messing with the sittings still and still testing it with the irdac still setup on the auxiliary input and the analogue is setup on the cd input so kind of switching it between the 2 inputs but there is definitely a sound difference between the arcam irdac and the on board dac and my wife hearing the differences and she normally hopeless at noticeing stuff like that . No I no the sa8005 uses the same dac as the cd6005 now what I want to no is what makes 8005 different from the cd6005 apart from the dac . I no it has a different power supply now what would this do to sound ? Better transport , different display, a heavily built case then 6005 has . Why would marantz make 2 models of CD player with the same dac inside ones a budget CD player and the other a mid range model what would be the point in upgrading surely what makes this 2 models stand apart from each other surly it's not the sacd function that your paying for . Hopefully someone with component understanding will tell me as I am interested.

Because modern dac chips are pretty much identical and totally audibly transparent. If 'complete' component dacs are audibly different it is rarely the anything to do with the dac chip. There used to be scope for manufacturers to build their own filters, thus adding their own sound signature, but most modern dac chips include them and many have their analogue stages built in too.

So why do dacs sound different? Well, mostly they don't, among compedent designs anyway, so some manufacturers try to find ways to make their product 'stand out'. Boring though it might be, increasing the output slightly from the 2 volt standard is both the cheapest and most effective way of doing this, though some deliberately 'voice' the analogue stage to conform to a house sound.

There are other factors that can affect the performance of a stand alone dac, effective input stages, sometimes with reclocking, jitter reduction, noise isolation etc, etc. In many ways having the dac on board the CD player is the best option, eliminating the SPDIF interface (the data protocols by which digital data is sent from one digital component to another) is generally a good idea, as indeed are better (low noise) power supplies.

As is usual with hi-fi electronics, most differences are volume related, hence my (and others) insistence on level matching.

What do you think about this? https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=28m26s

. I was interested in this I have balanced inputs so does this issue affect me in anyway ? i started with technics amp yeas ago a sux 600 i think that what it was called but it was years ago now i thought it was a good amp what ever happen to technics the company ?

 

[Blacksabbath25]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

In that case I think you've totally misunderstood what a transport is. There is no requirement for a DAC chip at all when using a CD player as a transport, and in fact you can buy transports (effectively a CD player without a DAC; i.e. only outputs a digital signal because there is in Digital to Analogue Converter to convert the digital signal to analogue...).

I'm rather fond of this one

Clicky

You'll notice that there's no analogue output (i.e. no DAC in it).

yes i did no its like a cd player but without the dac on board that's how i used the cd6005 by using the irdac instead of the onboard dac

 

[davedotco]

What do you think about this? https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=28m26s

. I was interested in this I have balanced inputs so does this issue affect me in anyway ? i started with technics amp yeas ago a sux 600 i think that what it was called but it was years ago now i thought it was a good amp what ever happen to technics the company ?

Firstly the video. This is a well known issue and has been covered many times on here, Vlad went to some lengths to explain this, along with amplifier input sensitivity in a long post a month or two back, try searching Vladimir's posts if you have time.

Short version, modern equipment (the video is pretty old) has had more than thirty years to sort this out and has largely done so. However some manufacturers, Marantz being one, still make their amplifiers with ridiculously sensitive inputs, in this case (PM6005) 200mv.

This means that the 2 volt output from a dac or CD player is driving the input stages very hard, this can cause distortion and compression that the amplifier design 'manages' and uses to produce an exciting and 'musical' sound signature.

It also means that the amplifier volume control tends to 'get loud' very quickly, typically around 8 o'clock for modest levels, 10 o'clock being pretty loud. This impresses the average buyer who thinks the amplifier much more powerful than it actually is, when the reality is that it is already clipping peaks at 10 o'clock and is in 'hard' clip and on the edge of damage before 12 o'clock.

This is all pretty well understood but the buyers are known to like it like that, the subjective impression is one of power and exciement. It is no coincidence that amplifiers, known for their more refined and relaxed character, such as an Arcam, have input sensitivity that is much lower, around 1 volt in fact.

Balanced inputs are not relevant in this case. A balanced interface will have two output stages per channel, so 2 times 2 volts output or 4 volts, it will also have 2 input stages each handling 2 volts, so there is no real difference in this respect. Balanced interfaces have their advantages, but that is a very different discussion.

 

[ID.]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

In that case I think you've totally misunderstood what a transport is. There is no requirement for a DAC chip at all when using a CD player as a transport, and in fact you can buy transports (effectively a CD player without a DAC; i.e. only outputs a digital signal because there is in Digital to Analogue Converter to convert the digital signal to analogue...).

I'm rather fond of this one

Clicky

You'll notice that there's no analogue output (i.e. no DAC in it).

yes i did no its like a cd player but without the dac on board that's how i used the cd6005 by using the irdac instead of the onboard dac

so what you meant was the opposite of what you said, and you actually meant to say external DAC rather than internal DAC?

 

[Blacksabbath25]

So if this has already been said or covered i apologise but i just want to rant about what i think.

First if your happy with the new cd player im glad etc.

I just wanted to get the point across that if you stuck with the irdac then technically you should not get an improvement in sound as the irdac is doing the same job it already doing for the original lower budget cd player you already had and the cd player is being used only as a transport. So a waste of money in my opinion.

So if youve ditched the dac well done. If you kept it in the loop youve wasted your money.

Id also say there should be no difference in sound using the irdac no matter which cd player used.

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

In that case I think you've totally misunderstood what a transport is. There is no requirement for a DAC chip at all when using a CD player as a transport, and in fact you can buy transports (effectively a CD player without a DAC; i.e. only outputs a digital signal because there is in Digital to Analogue Converter to convert the digital signal to analogue...).

I'm rather fond of this one

Clicky

You'll notice that there's no analogue output (i.e. no DAC in it).

yes i did no its like a cd player but without the dac on board that's how i used the cd6005 by using the irdac instead of the onboard dac

so what you meant was the opposite of what you said, and you actually meant to say external DAC rather than internal DAC?

I was talking about both the internal dac inside the player and then talking about the external dac which is the arcam irdac . Which one was serving me best and I think the internal dac does inside the marantz sacd player . But some of the people's feelings are saying that cd6005 player is using the same internal dac as the 8005 is so if I got this right ? They believe that the cd6005 will give me the same sound quality as the 8005 player does

 

[Blacksabbath25]

What do you think about this? https://youtu.be/JhuWuTDZiuI?t=28m26s

. I was interested in this I have balanced inputs so does this issue affect me in anyway ? i started with technics amp yeas ago a sux 600 i think that what it was called but it was years ago now i thought it was a good amp what ever happen to technics the company ?

Firstly the video. This is a well known issue and has been covered many times on here, Vlad went to some lengths to explain this, along with amplifier input sensitivity in a long post a month or two back, try searching Vladimir's posts if you have time.

Short version, modern equipment (the video is pretty old) has had more than thirty years to sort this out and has largely done so. However some manufacturers, Marantz being one, still make their amplifiers with ridiculously sensitive inputs, in this case (PM6005) 200mv.

This means that the 2 volt output from a dac or CD player is driving the input stages very hard, this can cause distortion and compression that the amplifier design 'manages' and uses to produce an exciting and 'musical' sound signature.

It also means that the amplifier volume control tends to 'get loud' very quickly, typically around 8 o'clock for modest levels, 10 o'clock being pretty loud. This impresses the average buyer who thinks the amplifier much more powerful than it actually is, when the reality is that it is already clipping peaks at 10 o'clock and is in 'hard' clip and on the edge of damage before 12 o'clock.

This is all pretty well understood but the buyers are known to like it like that, the subjective impression is one of power and exciement. It is no coincidence that amplifiers, known for their more refined and relaxed character, such as an Arcam, have input sensitivity that is much lower, around 1 volt in fact.

Balanced inputs are not relevant in this case. A balanced interface will have two output stages per channel, so 2 times 2 volts output or 4 volts, it will also have 2 input stages each handling 2 volts, so there is no real difference in this respect. Balanced interfaces have their advantages, but that is a very different discussion.

he was talking about burn in that he thought that this was important to get the final sound . I have only had the player running 8 hours of play so far so if this chap is right I would not have my final sound yet with the sacd 8005 player . Your thoughts please on burn in

 

[MajorFubar]

Don't waste your time. It's a long slippery slope to nowhere and does nothing but wear out your keyboard and your fingers. To repeat what I've said elsewhere, what some people do is drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Though I remain very happy that BlackSabbath now has a system he enjoys. That's the primary important thing.

 

[ID.]

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

Sorry, it's gotten confusing with the way parts have been automatically snipped for length, but I was actually refering to this statement by gasolin, which is either him having no idea whatsoever or having expressed himself very badly.

Burn in for electronics, on the other hand, will either take 0 hours or up to 300 hours, depending on which manufacturer you listen to. I tend to believe that it is more one getting used to the sound so likely to be 0 hours.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Don't waste your time. It's a long slippery slope to nowhere and does nothing but wear out your keyboard and your fingers. To repeat what I've said elsewhere, what some people do is drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Though I remain very happy that BlackSabbath now has a system he is happy with and enjoys. That's the primary important thing.

I am interested in this subject because it makes sense but are modern hifi's the same as it was back in the day of the 80s,90s to do with this inputs ? If so were do I buy the inline connecter things that hook up on your analog leads

 

[davedotco]

Have heard that a big part to get good sound using a cd player as a transporter, is to use a cdplayer with a good internal dac, because it will have an effect if what comes out of the cdplayer is good or not so good.

Sorry, it's gotten confusing with the way parts have been automatically snipped for length, but I was actually refering to this statement by gasolin, which is either him having no idea whatsoever or having expressed himself very badly.

Burn in for electronics, on the other hand, will either take 0 hours or up to 300 hours, depending on which manufacturer you listen to. I tend to believe that it is more one getting used to the sound so likely to be 0 hours.

Yep, burn in is largely b*ll*cks. Any effect will be tiny, completely swamped by the way the ear/brain adapts to sound over a period of time. It is a device that dealers and manufacturers use to stop the buyer reacting to his first instincts, which are often more accurate than a long term view.

Optimum temperature, 'warming up' is something else. The performance of some components vary with temperature, this is a measurable fact. If the components give the correct spec at 40 degrees they may not do so at 15 degrees, so the sound is 'off'.

Whilst this sounds sensible, amplifiers use negative feedback, which should account for any variation and why does the brain equate a physically warm amplifier with a warm sound, which it invariably does...*unknw*

 

[gasolin]

Don't waste your time. It's a long slippery slope to nowhere and does nothing but wear out your keyboard and your fingers. To repeat what I've said elsewhere, what some people do is drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Though I remain very happy that BlackSabbath now has a system he is happy with and enjoys. That's the primary important thing.

I am interested in this subject because it makes sense but are modern hifi's the same as it was back in the day of the 80s,90s to do with this inputs ? If so were do I buy the inline connecter things that hook up on your analog leads

Is it something like this your thinking of? (i know it's not a cable)

http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/attenuators.html

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rothwell-RCA-In-Line-Attenuators/dp/B00B7383F8/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447411151&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=rotthwell

Here is one where you can choose from 3 different levels http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stageline-21-2840-Passive-Level-Attenuator/dp/B0057G44WM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1447411262&sr=8-2&keywords=RCA+In-Line+Attenuators

 

[gasolin]

I so this video https://youtu.be/FwEfOIpF1kw?t=10m35s as fare as i can hear, what he say is the marantz cd-63 doesn't sound good used as a transporter, because of the internal dac is not good enough to make his external dac sound up to it's standard

So if the dac inside of the marantz cd-63 would have been better the overall sound from the external dac would have been much better?

That's what i i feel he is saying when watching this video

That's why i said what i did, not out of personal experience, if some doesn't agree with that they are free to give there own personal opinion,experience to what i said,the video

 

[ID.]

I so this video https://youtu.be/FwEfOIpF1kw?t=10m35s as fare as i can hear, what he say is the marantz cd-63 doesn't sound good used as a transporter, because of the internal dac is not good enough to make his external dac sound up to it's standard

So if the dac inside of the marantz cd-63 would have been better the overall sound from the external dac would have been much better?

That's what i i feel he is saying when watching this video

That's why i said what i did, not out of personal experience, if some doesn't agree with that they are free to give there own personal opinion,experience to what i said,the video

No, that's not what he is saying at all. He is saying that a lot of the sound signature comes from the digital transport parts - i.e. the parts other than the DAC, so that sound signature is carried over even when an external DAC is used because it comes from the parts other than the internal DAC chip.

Now his views are arguable, and many would insist that jitter should have a negligible effect on sound and that the transport has very little impact. Personally I haven't played around with CD players and external DACs. I did find running a computer or using an iPod as a digital transport running into my Esoteric RZ-1 sounded almost exactly the same as the CD player in the RZ-1. Certainly close engough that I couldn't be bother spending 30-60 minutes switching back and forth trying to convince myself that maybe I did/didn't hear a difference.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

I so this video https://youtu.be/FwEfOIpF1kw?t=10m35s as fare as i can hear,what he say is the marantz cd-63 doesn't sound good used as a transporter, because of the internal dac is not good enough to make his good external dac sound up to it's standard

So if the dac inside of the marantz cd-63 would have been better the overall sound from the external dac would have been much better

That's how i feel when watching this video

That's why i said what i did, not out of personal experience, if some doesn't agree they are free to give there own personal opinion,experience to what i said,the video

he is saying that the internal dac is rubbish inside the 63 player that's why he is useing a better external dac to improve the sound and this is why I got the arcam irdac in the first place to improve the sound on the setup I had pm6005 , cd6005 , Dali 3 book shelf speakers and the irdac did improve the sound with that setup I think the issues I had with that setup was my speakers I had at the time but when I got the pm8005 it had a different sound too it different from pm6005 had and then when I got my new floor standing speakers they improve the sound even more so getting the sacd player was the final touches to a matching components

 

[Covenanter]

The DAC chip is the same in the SA8005 and the CD6005. I don't know if they have implemented it in the same way.

I was very sceptical about getting any improvement moving from my old CD 6004 to the SA8005 but there was a marked difference. I know all about the subjective stuff but there are CDs that I didn't play as they were dull which I now play because I am getting much more from them.

The "Sound Mode" control is on the remote. It cycles through the various layers.

"Burn in" in electronic components, cables, etc is mainly nonsense IMO. Mechanical components will undoubtedly change with use for good or bad.

Chris

 

[davedotco]

Don't waste your time. It's a long slippery slope to nowhere and does nothing but wear out your keyboard and your fingers. To repeat what I've said elsewhere, what some people do is drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Though I remain very happy that BlackSabbath now has a system he is happy with and enjoys. That's the primary important thing.

I am interested in this subject because it makes sense but are modern hifi's the same as it was back in the day of the 80s,90s to do with this inputs ? If so were do I buy the inline connecter things that hook up on your analog leads

Is it something like this your thinking of? (i know it's not a cable)

http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/attenuators.html

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rothwell-RCA-In-Line-Attenuators/dp/B00B7383F8/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447411151&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=rotthwell

Here is one where you can choose from 3 different levels http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stageline-21-2840-Passive-Level-Attenuator/dp/B0057G44WM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1447411262&sr=8-2&keywords=RCA+In-Line+Attenuators

I am sure that this is what was meant and they do work, 20dB should be enough.

But, by reducing the signal the input stages of your PM8005 will no longer be 'overdriven' in the way that they are now and the sound signature might change.

In fact, it is possible that the 'Marantz sound' that you paid a lot of money to get will change, possibly quite significantly and you might not like the results.