What makes a good CDP good?

[radiorog]

For my money a CD player needs to have a nice musical tone, but also the ability to process information and unravel complex strands of music.

The prevous CD player I had in my system was a NAD 515. The NAD had a lovely, smooth 'analogue' sound, which I really liked, but it struggled when the soundstage filled up and tended to sound cluttered and 'mushy', losing clarity and precision. This was a deal-braker for me. The first requirement of a source is that it has the ability to convey adequate levels of musical detail and after two months of ownership the NAD was therefore a 'fail'.

I went back to Richer sounds and road-tested a Marantz 6004 against a Cambridge 651C. The track I tested was the one that the NAD had particularly struggled with, 'Starship trooper' by Yes. The final section of that song starts with a single, heavily-flanged electric guitar playing a repetitive chord sequence. Other instruments are then gradually added into the mix: an acoustic guitar, hammond organ, drums, another electic guitar and so on. Halfway through, the NAD would give up trying to separate everything out and the sound became a congealed mess.

During an hour-long listening seesion at Richer (during which time I think they forgot about me!) both the Marantz and Cambridge were endlessly road tested against this track. I couldn't split them and in the end decided on the Cambridge purely on looks!

Compared with the NAD, I would say the Cambridge has a slightly 'clinical' sound; I pererred the NAD's more natural tone, but in terms of processing power the Cambridge is on a different planet. The Cambridge ROCKS and I reckon I would have to spend the thick end of £1,000 to buy anything meaningfully better. If I could have the natural sound of the NAD as well as the detail of the Cambridge that would be perfect. Since when do we ever achieve perfection though?

What does processing power mean?

All due respect but an hours listening at Richer Sound to 1 track is hardly extensive testing, some things are subtle and may only show up after extensive listening. I've seen so many reviews on here by users gushing praises on their new gear only to see they are changing it after a few months time.

and also the sound your getting from the CD player will be a combination of amplifier. , speakers , CD player dac and your room . I have been there myself buy a new CD player and think it's great but after 2-3 months it's not that great anymore but again it's one of those combinations that's normally the issue

I can testify having had the player for two years, to me it is faultless sonically. I don't think I've ever put a CD on and thought "I wish the CD player sounded more......." It impresses every time. Having had the previous incarnation, I can also say that the improvement sonically, is massive.

 

[Al ears]

For my money a CD player needs to have a nice musical tone, but also the ability to process information and unravel complex strands of music.

The prevous CD player I had in my system was a NAD 515. The NAD had a lovely, smooth 'analogue' sound, which I really liked, but it struggled when the soundstage filled up and tended to sound cluttered and 'mushy', losing clarity and precision. This was a deal-braker for me. The first requirement of a source is that it has the ability to convey adequate levels of musical detail and after two months of ownership the NAD was therefore a 'fail'.

I went back to Richer sounds and road-tested a Marantz 6004 against a Cambridge 651C. The track I tested was the one that the NAD had particularly struggled with, 'Starship trooper' by Yes. The final section of that song starts with a single, heavily-flanged electric guitar playing a repetitive chord sequence. Other instruments are then gradually added into the mix: an acoustic guitar, hammond organ, drums, another electic guitar and so on. Halfway through, the NAD would give up trying to separate everything out and the sound became a congealed mess.

During an hour-long listening seesion at Richer (during which time I think they forgot about me!) both the Marantz and Cambridge were endlessly road tested against this track. I couldn't split them and in the end decided on the Cambridge purely on looks!

Compared with the NAD, I would say the Cambridge has a slightly 'clinical' sound; I pererred the NAD's more natural tone, but in terms of processing power the Cambridge is on a different planet. The Cambridge ROCKS and I reckon I would have to spend the thick end of £1,000 to buy anything meaningfully better. If I could have the natural sound of the NAD as well as the detail of the Cambridge that would be perfect. Since when do we ever achieve perfection though?

What does processing power mean?

All due respect but an hours listening at Richer Sound to 1 track is hardly extensive testing, some things are subtle and may only show up after extensive listening. I've seen so many reviews on here by users gushing praises on their new gear only to see they are changing it after a few months time.

and also the sound your getting from the CD player will be a combination of amplifier. , speakers , CD player dac and your room . I have been there myself buy a new CD player and think it's great but after 2-3 months it's not that great anymore but again it's one of those combinations that's normally the issue

I can testify having had the player for two years, to me it is faultless sonically. I don't think I've ever put a CD on and thought "I wish the CD player sounded more......." It impresses every time. Having had the previous incarnation, I can also say that the improvement sonically, is massive.

In my experience the drawer construction comes second to the longevity of the laser mechanism. It is no wonder both of the best transport mechanisms appear in top- loader designs. I am led to believe some of the slot-loading designs are rather good.

Apart from the mechanism itself it is the quality of the DAC that makes a difference along with power supply. Having said that there is a difference between 1 bit and upsampling dacs.

 

[Gazzip]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

 

[unhalfbricking]

For my money a CD player needs to have a nice musical tone, but also the ability to process information and unravel complex strands of music.

The prevous CD player I had in my system was a NAD 515. The NAD had a lovely, smooth 'analogue' sound, which I really liked, but it struggled when the soundstage filled up and tended to sound cluttered and 'mushy', losing clarity and precision. This was a deal-braker for me. The first requirement of a source is that it has the ability to convey adequate levels of musical detail and after two months of ownership the NAD was therefore a 'fail'.

I went back to Richer sounds and road-tested a Marantz 6004 against a Cambridge 651C. The track I tested was the one that the NAD had particularly struggled with, 'Starship trooper' by Yes. The final section of that song starts with a single, heavily-flanged electric guitar playing a repetitive chord sequence. Other instruments are then gradually added into the mix: an acoustic guitar, hammond organ, drums, another electic guitar and so on. Halfway through, the NAD would give up trying to separate everything out and the sound became a congealed mess.

During an hour-long listening seesion at Richer (during which time I think they forgot about me!) both the Marantz and Cambridge were endlessly road tested against this track. I couldn't split them and in the end decided on the Cambridge purely on looks!

Compared with the NAD, I would say the Cambridge has a slightly 'clinical' sound; I pererred the NAD's more natural tone, but in terms of processing power the Cambridge is on a different planet. The Cambridge ROCKS and I reckon I would have to spend the thick end of £1,000 to buy anything meaningfully better. If I could have the natural sound of the NAD as well as the detail of the Cambridge that would be perfect. Since when do we ever achieve perfection though?

What does processing power mean?

All due respect but an hours listening at Richer Sound to 1 track is hardly extensive testing, some things are subtle and may only show up after extensive listening. I've seen so many reviews on here by users gushing praises on their new gear only to see they are changing it after a few months time.

This was three years ago and I still own and enjoy the Cambridge! My assessment of it was fairly nuanced (I preferred the NAD's analogue tone) so I would hardly call it 'gushing'.

 

[Al ears]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

 

[keeper of the quays]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

 

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

 

[nopiano]

My first CDP was a Marantz, the top loading one that Meridian later tweaked. CD63 I think it was.

I would still look at one of their beefier models, or a Yamaha, maybe. Accuphase and Audo Research at higher end. But I'd want to investigate better streamers first, as that seems to be the future, even though I still like physical media.

Dread to think what my Krell would cost today. It was overpriced in the UK when I bought it, but apart from one service has never missed a beat in eighteen years I still think it sounds great. Contemporary review here:- http://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/638/#dV64xIrHKXKuGWCW.97

More skeptical view here, though note the huge discrete component count:-

http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/REFERENCES/krell%20cd300/Krell%20CD300.html

 

[manicm]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

It's got nothing to do with being a slot-loader, it's the laser/transport itself. My Arcam Solo Mini is a slot-loader too, and it's still perfect after 7 years.

 

[Al ears]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

I'd disagree. If it takes more than one attempt to play a CD I know to be good then it's a no-go for me. I have had a large number iof CDPs in my time, including Cyrus, which didn't last long, and none has every decided not to play a known good CD from the off. If it does then it's suspect. Slot loader, tray, or drawer it doesn't matter. Sound quality is subjective and irrelevant in this situation. Would I buy a turntable that only played an LP at the second attempt? The answer is no my friend, no matter how good it sounded.

 

[keeper of the quays]

Well it's a slot loader..not my choice I like platter loading..and when what hifi remarked in their review of the Cyrus they had some difficulty playing discs..they didn't see this as too much of a problem...i think it's a very sensitive bit of kit. Nowt wrong with laser..best cd player I have ever heard!

 

[MajorFubar]

Well it's a slot loader..not my choice I like platter loading..and when what hifi remarked in their review of the Cyrus they had some difficulty playing discs..they didn't see this as too much of a problem...i think it's a very sensitive bit of kit. Nowt wrong with laser..best cd player I have ever heard!

Without wanting to seem unfairly critical of Cyrus or take this thread off the rails, I can buy a CD ROM for £7.49 off eBay which probably will play anything I throw at it. Cyrus have zero excuse really when the price of their players is hundred times greater and then some. May as well have a sports car that's potentially great to drive but starting it each day is pot luck.

 

[keeper of the quays]

Well it's a slot loader..not my choice I like platter loading..and when what hifi remarked in their review of the Cyrus they had some difficulty playing discs..they didn't see this as too much of a problem...i think it's a very sensitive bit of kit. Nowt wrong with laser..best cd player I have ever heard!

Without wanting to seem unfairly critical of Cyrus or take this thread off the rails, I can buy a CD ROM for £7.49 off eBay which probably will play anything I throw at it. Cyrus have zero excuse really when the price of their players is hundred times greater and then some. May as well have a sports car that's potentially great to drive but starting it each day is pot luck.

yes my friend is irritated by this..you have a good point for something so expensive it's surprising! But the sound is so nice.one can't help but forgive it's pickiness over playing cds!

 

[Al ears]

Well it's a slot loader..not my choice I like platter loading..and when what hifi remarked in their review of the Cyrus they had some difficulty playing discs..they didn't see this as too much of a problem...i think it's a very sensitive bit of kit. Nowt wrong with laser..best cd player I have ever heard!

Without wanting to seem unfairly critical of Cyrus or take this thread off the rails, I can buy a CD ROM for £7.49 off eBay which probably will play anything I throw at it. Cyrus have zero excuse really when the price of their players is hundred times greater and then some. May as well have a sports car that's potentially great to drive but starting it each day is pot luck.

yes my friend is irritated by this..you have a good point for something so expensive it's surprising! But the sound is so nice.one can't help but forgive it's pickiness over playing cds!

Well I cannot. The point of owning a CDP is to play CD s surely? If a brand new machine will falter at some CDs, that play quite happily on other machines, then it is not for me irrespective of supposed sound quality.

 

[BigH]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

It's got nothing to do with being a slot-loader, it's the laser/transport itself. My Arcam Solo Mini is a slot-loader too, and it's still perfect after 7 years.

Cyrus had a lot of trouble with that transport thats why they stopped using it and since then made their own.

 

[Al ears]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

It's got nothing to do with being a slot-loader, it's the laser/transport itself. My Arcam Solo Mini is a slot-loader too, and it's still perfect after 7 years.

Cyrus had a lot of trouble with that transport thats why they stopped using it and since then made their own.

It would appear that Cyrus need to firm up their quality control. Note latest review comments on their phono stage, vague buttons on a £1900 bit of kit. No tah! It's not as if it's the first bit of kit they have ever made.

 

[BigH]

Who builds high quality CDPs these days? I don't mean dCs exotica, but something sanely priced?

Cyrus do...as do quad.

That would depend on what you consider 'sanely priced' to be.

That would depend on whether being able to read half your CD's is a pre-requisite.

If it can't read them then the laser mechanism is shot. Simple as.

my friends Cyrus is somewhat temperamental to say the least regarding reading cds...the what hifi review said much the same thing..its slot loading! Usually two attempts to get a cd to play..but when it eventually plays a cd? It's brilliant! Defo worth the trouble...

It's got nothing to do with being a slot-loader, it's the laser/transport itself. My Arcam Solo Mini is a slot-loader too, and it's still perfect after 7 years.

Cyrus had a lot of trouble with that transport thats why they stopped using it and since then made their own.

It would appear that Cyrus need to firm up their quality control. Note latest review comments on their phono stage, vague buttons on a £1900 bit of kit. No tah! It's not as if it's the first bit of kit they have ever made.

Maybe, I don't know as I don't use any Cyrus gear, I don't think they did themselves any favours with the cd problems. No doubt they lost dealers and customers.