Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (
More info?)
On 1/10/05 8:24 PM, in article crv9t601mmf@news1.newsguy.com, "Chung"
<chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
> B&D wrote:
>> On 1/9/05 3:42 PM, in article crs5060282@news1.newsguy.com, "chung"
>> <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It's possible that a $5K CD player may sound different than a $500 one.
>>> However, the difference may be due to the $5K one being intentionally
>>> (or sometimes unintentionally, too) made to be less accurate. Like using
>>> tubes, for instance
>>
>> Or, perhaps, that the power supply design was done more carefully, the
>> transport selected was capable of resisting jitter and the overall design
>> was made to prevent digital timing errors.
>
> You believe doing those things right cost $4.5K more?
>
> The transports used in the $$$ players are just the same as those used
> in players that cost an order of magnitude less. (In some cases grossly
> inferior transports were used, like the belt-driven ones.) The DAC chips
> used are often the same or even older than the ones used in the
> mass-manufactured players. Not that you are likely to hear the
> differences resulting from different DAC's used.
Instead of talking in theory - can you give me a concrete example of a $5k
player that sounds "as good" as a $500 one?
My detailed experience has been with less lofty CDP's - my personal
experience between the NAD C541i, Arcam CD192, Bel Canto DAC-2, Sony SCD-2
and Ayre CX-7 showed good differences and gradations in price.
Again, to *which* $5k player are you referring?
>
>
>> Also use of digital techniques
>> to extract more information, lower the effective noise floor, a DAC that is
>> state of the art, as well as a well thought out analog stage with the
>> compromises made to be minor.
>
> Do you seriously believe that the boutique makers can do a better job?
A good engineer who is aiming for good sound reproduction will do a better
job than an engineer who is engineering for minimal performance for less
than $10.
> We are talking about a CD player, and companies like Sony have been
> making CD players for 20 years. Don't you think they understand how to
> design CD players so that the errors are inaudible?
Sure they do - but you have to ask if they choose to do that if it will mean
something costs $0.01 more than their price target. Sony and the other big
guys know perfectly well how to design SOTA stuff - they don't always, and
usually because of cost.
>I read that some
> high-end CD players even eliminate the anti-alias filters. That should
> tell you a lot about the design talent you find in some high-end labels.
That particular (misguided) technique was developed in Japan with full
knowledge of what they were doing. It does not indicate anything but the
desire to expeiment and see what will happen.
> You are simply repeating the myths perpetuated by high-end marketing.
Actually if the big guys were interested in building truly high end gear
(performance high end) they would do so, and the price tags would reflect,
though be a relative bargain. Sony does this every so often, and their $500
SE SACD/CD players will blow just about anything out of the water until you
get to about $1500-2000. Their high end SACD player (first the SCD-1, and
now the 3000ES) for $3k just about kills anything else out there, especially
on SACD. The Intergra, Marantz and others are showing the value the
dedicated R&D departments and manufacturing prowess of these organizations
have to bring to the table.
What the "high end marketing press" has got right is that much of the mass
market is more interested in presenting something for "cheap" and less
because it performs well. I have found this to be true, and hate spending a
lot of money, but will spend it if there is value. When the mass marketers
put their mind to it, they do really well and can offer things much cheaper
than the boutiques. *If* they do this is another story.
I hear a lot of mass marketing saying that MP3's are "CD Quality" - but
listening the the CDP's by some of them, it might just be true.