Originally Posted by
Haselsh1
I know my old Cambridge CD2 used the infamous TDA1541 chipset but when I replaced it with a two box Meridian, the Meridian showed just how bloody awful the CD2 was. It really summed up early compact disc in that it was incredibly brash and aggressive. The gear I have now is just so damn polite in comparison.
But were those early players really 'bright and harsh'? Or was it the systems they were plonked in, systems voiced to add a bit of edge to an essentially warm and cuddly vinyl front end or the gently compressed sound of compact cassette?
The only first generation CD player I have heard is the Sony CDP1, it was not bright and harsh. I've also had three Technics SLP1200 players, all different configurations, none of them were bright and harsh either, although I grant you they are not strictly first gen machines, but they do date from 1987 which was still early days for digital.
Why would a format with effectively zero distortion and a ruler flat frequency response be responsible for a sound that is bright and harsh? It makes no logical sense. I'm not disputing want anyone hears, I have heard it myself, plenty of times. But it was always the result of the partnering equipment.
That's not to say that you can't buy a cd player that sounds genuinely poor, regardless of the system. I've heard a couple but they were bargain basement plastic fantastic efforts, not serious hi-fi components.
Current Lash Up:
TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.