What`s the point in £1000 cd players!

[chebby]

.

 

[MajorFubar]

I know there's a few here that like their physical media. To me I think the question has changed, it's not "what's the point in a £1000 CD player" but now "what's the point in a CD player".

CDs will go the way of vinyl records, I don't use them, I don't buy them, I don't want them.

So out of interest, how do you acquire your music as CD-quality lossless audio? Is it that you are you content with MP3/AAC and YouTube videos?

 

[iMark]

A stand alone DAC, hard drive, subscription fee's (if you use a soft service) and time it takes to rip a cd is 'expensive'. I see a con actually.

It has been explained many times: it's all about error correction. When you rip a CD WITH error correction you will get the best quality rip, better than what any CD player can correct in real time. This is down to the technology of CDs.

And so the answer to the question from 6 years ago is negative. A cheap DVD player and a DAC won't sound better than an expensive CD player. However, properly ripped CDs played through a decent DAC will sound better than an expensive CD player.

IMHO investing in an expensive CD player is a waste of money. There are better ways now to get the best sound quality from your CDs, in fact they were there 6 years ago. No cons, just facts.

 

[MajorFubar]

Fair call, *thumbs up*

 

[Thompsonuxb]

A stand alone DAC, hard drive, subscription fee's (if you use a soft service) and time it takes to rip a cd is 'expensive'. I see a con actually.

It has been explained many times: it's all about error correction. When you rip a CD WITH error correction you will get the best quality rip, better than what any CD player can correct in real time. This is down to the technology of CDs.

And so the answer to the question from 6 years ago is negative. A cheap DVD player and a DAC won't sound better than an expensive CD player. However, properly ripped CDs played through a decent DAC will sound better than an expensive CD player.

IMHO investing in an expensive CD player is a waste of money. There are better ways now to get the best sound quality from your CDs, in fact they were there 6 years ago. No cons, just facts.

 

Are you typing that loud?

'Improving' on the original as in how? increase resolution.... Let's not go there.

The most you'll get from a rip is equal to CD. You can get worse though without much effort.

And your storage?

Well a cooling fan or...... Lol....it never ends. 'Properly ripped CD's' indeed.

I just play CD's without such concerns - makes no sense to me to add to what is a simple thing bonus is I get CD quality as standard.

But it matters not - some are happy with mp3 playback through £500+ speakers.

So what's to argue?

 

[MajorFubar]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

Hopefully we can keep this civil....

Ok Major when you talk of errors what are you talking about?

I have CD's of various quality regards their production - some poor others good a few outstanding.

There are no drop outs during playback, no hiss, crisp clear replay. I hear nothing on the quality discs that warrant concern.

For me the format delivers what it was advertised to do back in the day over vinyl.

No pops, clicks and such like.

So once my player 'reads' the disc and sends it on I hear no inconsistencies.

So what errors are you talking about?

 

[matt49]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

... and if Thompsonuxb wants to dig any deeper into how CDPs work and why they misread data, he can read chapters 9 and 10 of Jim Lesurf's excellent book "Information and Measurement".

 

[manicm]

To me the PC is still a dog's breakfast for replay, especially for high res audio, since you need to switch the bit rate etc and then back for optimum replay, so I would buy a dedicated streamer. Some would be put off by network streaming, and so I believe there's still a valid and health place for the cd player, although I wouldn't buy one anymore myself.

And the whole error correction thing is vastly overstated imo, otherwise all cd players would sound poo, and they certainly don't. And some cd players are definitely better than others.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

... and if Thompsonuxb wants to dig any deeper into how CDPs work and why they misread data, he can read  chapters 9 and 10 of Jim Lesurf's excellent book "Information and Measurement".

Matt49, how a CD player works is of no concern to me in this context.

Purely playback is my concern - what I hear from the speaker.

 

[iMark]

So what's to argue?

You obviously haven't got a clue how CD reproduction actually works. Try to understand 'error correction' in CD playback before posting all sorts of nonsense. Then read about bit perfect ripping of CDs.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

To me the PC is still a dog's breakfast for replay, especially for high res audio, since you need to switch the bit rate etc and then back for optimum replay, so I would buy a dedicated streamer. Some would be put off by network streaming, and so I believe there's still a valid and health place for the cd player, although I wouldn't buy one anymore myself.

And the whole error correction thing is vastly overstated imo, otherwise all cd players would sound poo, and they certainly don't. And some cd players are definitely better than others.

Agreed.

 

[lindsayt]

So what's to argue?

You obviously haven't got a clue how CD reproduction actually works. Try to understand 'error correction' in CD playback before posting all sorts of nonsense. Then read about bit perfect ripping of CDs.

I am not aware of anyone on this forum that does.

Not on a component by component basis, nuts and bolts, comprehensive understanding that they can put into laymans terms.

EG how do ADC's actually convert the analogue input into the digital stream that is saved on hard disk? What are the electronic components that do this? And how is the circuit working exactly?

How do DAC's convert the stream from the digital file into the analogue signal that is amplified by the analogue section?

Etc etc etc etc.

If anyone feels that they do have the required understanding, please feel free to educate the rest of us - in the sort of terms that anyone with an GCSE in Physics could understand.

 

[plastic penguin]

FWIW I don't have issues with any source regardless...

Technology will always evolve, but there'll always be the traditional sources: CDs and vinyl.

Embrace every format that is hi-fi.

 

[Andrewjvt]

All this cd players better than dacs?

It all depends on the cd player or the quality of the dac, surely??

If the cd player has a very good dac and transport it will sound better than a cheap dac. If the dac has a better quality dac chip and designed well it will also sound good if not better depending.

There is no right or wrong, however a good quality dac is better in my opinion as its more flexible. Playing all your discs on shuffle or random beats putting in a cd every few min any day.

 

[steve_1979]

... and if Thompsonuxb wants to dig any deeper into how CDPs work and why they misread data, he can read chapters 9 and 10 of Jim Lesurf's excellent book "Information and Measurement".

That is a most exellent book. Highly recommended.

We should have a new forum rule where no one is allowed to post in a digital audio thread until they've read that book first.

(that was a joke BTW )

 

[steve_1979]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

... and if Thompsonuxb wants to dig any deeper into how CDPs work and why they misread data, he can read chapters 9 and 10 of Jim Lesurf's excellent book "Information and Measurement".

Matt49, how a CD player works is of no concern to me in this context.

Purely playback is my concern - what I hear from the speaker.

Then why do you keep commenting on a subject that you don't understand?

This isn't a dig at you in any way. It's a genuine question.

 

[BigH]

I get CD quality as standard.

Theoretically, you get inconsistent quality a standard. Once a CD has been ripped 'bit perfectly', arguably the most inconsistent and error-prone part of the process has been dispensed with. Don't get me wrong though I'm not even nearly going to suggest I can reliably hear the difference between a ripped CD and a 'live' CD (from a CD player) playing through the same DAC. But still, the argument stands that ripping them removes one of the variables for good. I did once have a stupid "directional cable" moment where I thought I could tell the difference between two rips of the same CD from different drives. But that was twaddle as well (I proved it, in a thread on here).

... and if Thompsonuxb wants to dig any deeper into how CDPs work and why they misread data, he can read chapters 9 and 10 of Jim Lesurf's excellent book "Information and Measurement".

Matt49, how a CD player works is of no concern to me in this context.

Purely playback is my concern - what I hear from the speaker.

What is the matter with you? So how a cdp works and misreads is no concern, only playback. Maybe you can see a connection?

 

[iMark]

It's a bit weird that some members of the forum post all sorts of statements without checking up on some basic facts. And when the facts are presented to them, they choose to ignore those facts. I often wonder why these people visit these forums if they don't want to learn new things but rather broadcast their own peculiar views.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Some of you guys are really odd.

In the context of listening to music via vinyl, CD, ripped CD, streaming what has how it works got to do with anything?

I simply say CDquality is the standard by which all these formats are judged.

Error correction and the like has no bearing in this context - I don't know what you think I've said.

If a ripped CD cannot improve on an original in terms of resolution, info on the disc and can only do a bit perfect copy......what's your argument.

What, now we must read a book to turn on, insert lean back and enjoy music?

You guys are so strange.

 

[iMark]

If a ripped CD cannot improve on an original in terms of resolution, info on the disc and can only do a bit perfect copy......what's your argument.

You really don't have a clue, do you? And I don't get the idea you have any desire to learn something.

Why don't you read something about 'error correction' before writing more uninformed rubbish?

 

[RobinKidderminster]

I don't think I can post without a gif anymore.

Try it sometimes.since some here may find it completely unnecessary, rude and irritating.

I find, when I have nothing to say, I say nothing.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

If a ripped CD cannot improve on an original in terms of resolution, info on the disc and can only do a bit perfect copy......what's your argument.

You really don't have a clue, do you? And I don't get the idea you have any desire to learn something.

Why don't you read something about 'error correction' before writing more uninformed rubbish?

Please explain what you're so mad about?

what clue do I need and why do I need to read something about error correction to listen to music?

Please clarify.

 

[iQ Speakers]

ohhh this is a bit of a thread hey? I have not read it all so will probably go completly off ****. No decided not to comment until after I have had somthing to eat. Been a long tough day and had a few cans of Red Stripe Keep it going guys. keep it civil.

 

[matt49]

If a ripped CD cannot improve on an original in terms of resolution, info on the disc and can only do a bit perfect copy......what's your argument.

You really don't have a clue, do you? And I don't get the idea you have any desire to learn something.

Why don't you read something about 'error correction' before writing more uninformed rubbish?

Please explain what you're so mad about?

what clue do I need and why do I need to read something about error correction to listen to music?

Please clarify.

No-one has suggested you need to read stuff in order to listen to music. That's a red herring. What's been suggested is that you should learn a bit more before making statements on this forum about things you don't understand, e.g. the difference between playing a CD and ripping one.