Modern versus vintage CD players [Archive]

View Full Version : Modern versus vintage CD players

farflungstar

24-09-2017, 13:46

montesquieu

24-09-2017, 13:55

If you want vintage look I'd go audio research .. good performers too. Look hasn't changed much either since the original CD1 reference in the early 90s so plenty of options and price points.

I had a Pioneer Elite something or other that was very good but not sure I would put it up against my current audio note DAC ... the ARC would compete though I think.

Macca

24-09-2017, 13:56

Mostly they are fixable but you are still taking a chance. Asking prices for the rarer stuff doesn't really reflect that, unfortunately. That will change as CD continues to become a quaint relic from the 1990s. Despite that there will always be some residual value in the best players though; I mean you can't pick up a working Sony Elcassete machine or a Nakamichi Dragon for buttons and you probably never will.

As for sound, the improvement of digital since the 1980s has been mostly in the mind and the marketing departments, IMO of course.

farflungstar

24-09-2017, 14:05

I was thinking top of the Sony chain, not the es range. I too had an elite and agree Tom - not the ultimate but looked lovely.

Arkless Electronics

24-09-2017, 14:41

Often not repairable or very difficult sourcing the parts and getting increasing more so as tempus fugits... I'd avoid.

farflungstar

24-09-2017, 14:51

I guess even if it comes with a 12m warranty that doesn't mean most of that time won't be spent on the bench.

Yomanze

24-09-2017, 17:12

Often not repairable or very difficult sourcing the parts and getting increasing more so as tempus fugits... I'd avoid.

Agreed. Plus, there's a lot of modern budget DACs out there that'll outperform vintage CDPs, without the issue of failing transports - modern transports unfortunately probably won't last 20+yrs like the vintage stuff is / was.

smithie

27-09-2017, 20:00

Often not repairable or very difficult sourcing the parts and getting increasing more so as tempus fugits... I'd avoid.

spot on and so true....spare yourself the heart ache and cost :)

Minstrel SE

07-10-2017, 15:15

There is a small community after certain vintage players but they know what they are doing to service and restore them. They know what mechanisms they are looking for and often have spare parts to hand. The lampizator crew as I call them and a surprising number of people in Yorkshire :)

I was only interested in the first players for nostalgia. I soon got out when they were difficult to repair.

You would be far better putting your money towards the units currently produced

smithy

07-10-2017, 20:07

My Audio Research CD1 is still performing anybody else still using one?Think it cost me £300 a couple of years ago bin fodder when it fails though!

struth

07-10-2017, 20:16

Probably mid way player mine. 2003 I think. Can still get lasers although getting scarcer. Ive got a replacement and its got a new one in at moment. Plays pretty much anything that fits in drawer and sounds very good.

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/exemplar/hero%20.jpg

Macca

07-10-2017, 20:18

struth

07-10-2017, 20:24

Is there some law that I've missed which forbids anyone from repairing an old cd player?

I had a Sony that stopped reading discs. Several thousand hours on it, laser gone, right?

Wrong, it was failed a ribbon connector. Took the gadgee 5 minutes to fix it.

on mine there is a resistor on the minature laser board that goes. so small I wouldnt see it far less replace it. hell the laser board is fiddly enough

walpurgis

07-10-2017, 20:30

Dunno if my Meridian 507 would be regarded as vintage now. I bought it new about 2004. Excellent unit.

I do have a rather interesting transport built on a Pioneer platform and that's my Trichord Research Digital Turntable, Very nice it sounds too.

But there again, so do the couple of Pioneer PD-S505 Precisions I also have.

I use all these solely as transports these days (only one at a time though :)).

Macca

07-10-2017, 20:34

on mine there is a resistor on the minature laser board that goes. so small I wouldnt see it far less replace it. hell the laser board is fiddly enough

I'm not saying that there isn't stuff that can go wrong that can't be fixed. Just that if a player stops working don't automatically assume that's the end of the line and bin it.

JimC

08-10-2017, 10:59

I run a Pioneer PD-73 (1993), bought as not working from a Dealer we used to repair for after being dropped. After getting it going it hasn't missed a beat and I've not had the bonnet off since !
The Lasers are now no longer available however, but I managed to obtain a few before they became unobtainium and have also managed to get a complete working (just), player from ebay so I will be able to keep it going to last me out, hopefully.

A lot of 'vintage' players' Lasers now cannot be repaired due to the lack of Lasers and Spindle Motors and it will be these that will almost certainly be the cause of the problems they will have.
A lot of higher end players used either Sony or Philips Lasers, a few used Sanyo blocks. There were a few others but they were very few.

The older Philips Lasers (CDM-0, CDM-1) seem to be lasting forever. I have been repairing Hi-Fi now for nearly 30 years and I used to work for an independent Philips ASC and I have not once had to replace one of those Lasers! I'm not saying they cannot fail, but I have never seen a failed one. The CDM-2 for me was not quite so reliable. If the CDM-0/1 never failed why would anyone buy a new CD Player so ''...let's make them fail..'' (am I being too cynical!).
I can't say I ever had to replace the CDM-3 but then again I can't think of a player I know that uses it.
The CDM-4 again for me was not so reliable. A lot of other makes used these so maybe the percentages of players made to ones I saw actually make it pretty good, I don't know.
The CDM-9 and 9PRO were used very extensively in High End players and I think were pretty reliable.
All the above Lasers are now no longer available so buy a Player using them with care.

The CDM-12 and VAM range of Lasers were used extensively and I think I am right in saying they were the last dedicated CD Laser Philips made. These are available to buy as spare parts to you and me from people such as CPC. They often have what looks like a genuine Philips sticker on them but I have had some disappointments when using these. Some play really well, some don't. Some need their Platter Height adjusting when compared to the old Laser coming out. I am not 100% certain these are being made by Philips and don't have a way of finding out.

I won't go into the same amount of detail about Sony or Sanyo Lasers as there are soooo many Sony variants and I haven't studied them as much as I have the Philips ones (I'm a big fan of early Philips players).
There are several of the Sony Lasers now available from people like CPC but again, I am not sure they are genuine Sony Lasers as I don't think Sony make them any longer.
The KSS-210, KSS-213 and KSS-240 are available from CPC and I have had some success using them. A few have proved problematic but not many.
(The KSS-240 was a great Laser. Any Sony using this Laser would play anything round and shiny inserted into the player even with horrendous scratches which would cause other players to have a melt-down!!).

So, my advice is if you decide to look for a vintage player then try to find one where you can get a replacement Laser and Spindle Motor. You can check here.....(a great site for CD info)..
http://www.dutchaudioclassics.nl/philips_cdm_cd_mechanisme_list/

The CPC page for Lasers is here.......
http://cpc.farnell.com/c/audio-visual/av-spares/cd-dvd-laser-pick-ups

Of course there will always be electronic faults as well and consideration needs to be taken here also. A lot of the unique IC's used in early players will no longer be available from the manufacturers so a donor player from ebay for example would be needed to fix these faults. Generic IC's such as Motor Drive IC's again, may not be available from the manufacturer but I have often found them available in quantities on ebay. Here's one of the Motor Drive IC's for my Pioneer....
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2060353.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.XTA8410k.T RS0&_nkw=TA8410k&_sacat=0
OP-Amps and Power Supply IC's I think will always be available and also, there's a whole world of up-grading paths to be had here of course.

So, the point of my post is, don't be put off buying a vintage player but do some research first as to what is available, spare parts wise and also try to find a friendly Service Engineer who will be willing to undertake the necessary work for you or continue any work you have started yourself and got stuck.
There's a lot of expert advice to be had on Forums of course and especially the DIY Audio Forum although be wary of that one as they can be quite snobbish with people who aren't 'experts'.

Cheers,

Jim.

Spectral Morn

08-10-2017, 11:10

JimC

08-10-2017, 11:21

You would be in my view foolish not to include the likes of the Marantz CD85, CD94, CD94 mk2 + the CD80 in that list of desirable machines to look for, but I like these machines and never did like the likes of Sony or Pioneer but that's me.

Tweaked Philips internals so yes, definitely worth considering.
The CD-94 used the CDM-1 so will probably outlast us all ;-) And had the TDA1541A DAC chip so ....................... drool !!!!

swampy

09-10-2017, 12:30

I have a Copland 288. I used to have a Copland 289 and sold it for something newer from MF which was a bad move. The old Copland players, esp the 288 was reviewed as being too big and warm with little bite. Well I've heard newer players with bite and they can't touch the Copland for musicality and scale. Parts are very hard to find though for the mechanism so you need to check this when buying vintage. Gears wear out, go brittle and the laser may need replacing.

Minstrel SE

10-10-2017, 18:29

I know the Marantz CD-94 is one the gang are looking for. The CDM-1 mechanism is a thing of beauty. Its a fine example of "they dont build them like that anymore" I had one on the bench fairly recently and its just a shame that Philips cocked up the soldering with the other processing boards on some early players.

I really dont like these plastic looking mechanisms and cogs now...ok they do a job but for how long? Ive read that I have the Vam 2200 series which is the last cd only laser assembly Philips produced and has lasted 14 years with lightish use. I wont know exactly whats in there until I need to look for possible replacement

I would have thought they would have carried on with a CDM-1 build in a premium transport because its functionally superb with its magnetic swing arm and solid looking glass laser assembly. High read speeds are not needed for audio use and a single beam swing arm would be fine

I also have a problem with the use of the word vintage to describe my twenties and thirties :)

Johnny nocash

10-10-2017, 19:09

Despite worrying whether I remembered the sound of a Helios Stargate through rose tinted ears I gambled on buying one about 18 months ago. It's brilliant, But when it goes, probably tomorrow (about 20 years old now) I'm fooked. Well worth it though. I'd probably still try & get hold of another one. Yep, I'm an idiot.

Haselsh1

10-10-2017, 19:24

Back around 1989 I bought a Cambridge Audio CD2 that lasted for a year or so. Reliability was crap and the sound wasn't all that brilliant either. I would so rather have what I use now to anything from back then.

Scooby

10-10-2017, 19:47

I think it depends on the player and your tastes. For instance, I wouldn't give house room to any Marantz I've ever heard, old or new. However a Naim CDI would be preferable to any newer players I've heard. Not quite in the same league but the mk1 Rega Planet is also another player that makes the sort of music that the vast majority of players I've heard can't dream of. That includes modern Rega players too.

There's also build quality and aesthetics to consider. Again, personal preference will play a huge part. Whatever you choose, buying used can allow you to try a few bits until something hits the spot.

Minstrel SE

14-10-2017, 17:27

montesquieu

14-10-2017, 17:52

Well yes personally Im after a modern top loader or cd transport as a nod to the first top loader I had in 1984.

Im not taking part in the search for a vintage cd player but I would fancy the first CD63 or Philips 100 is they werent going for £500+ each and needing a full service. Not many of them will be fully working now. I do get driven by nostalgia which can be a dangerous and money wasting thing.

Im just sort of interested in what vintage players others are looking for and how the prices hold up. I heard the 14 bit oversampling fairly recently and it sounded nicer than I ever remember it. It worked briefly after a warm up and then we got it working but we couldnt diagnose a full board of failing joints and earth griplets. The person helping me wasnt really interested in doing me a favour for next to nothing (fair enough) so it ended up playing but in mono so I sold it on to the expert restorers.

So although others are looking I am letting the past go.

I've had an Audio Note CDT2 / II - top loader - for about five years now and it's excellent. Redbook only but both RCA/SPDIF and AES/ABU. Highly recommend it I had a Shigaraki transport then a Wadia something or other before that and this beats both. Though the Shigaraki sounded pretty good despite basic functionality. Audio Note also do a range of one-box CD players in the same case.

I have huge regard for Audio Note source components whether that's cartridges, tonearms or digital ... less so for their amps and speakers never really floated my boat.

Pete The Cat

17-10-2017, 10:57

I've been using a Linn Karik for about 5 years, I believe the model was originally introduced in 1992 so I assume that as a 25 year old design it counts as vintage. After a while I added a Numerik DAC and later following a recommendation by an AoS member a couple of Roxburgh mains filters, so the Karik has a bit of upgradeability if you want to take these worthwhile steps. The sound is so "right" that I've no desire to change it, warm unlike other CD players that I've experienced. Ignoring the dated (retro ?) display the construction oozes quality - the loading tray is so robust you get the impression you could stand on it and the mechanism is smooth and quiet. I'm busy stocking up on spare Hitachi lasers for the inevitable day...

Pete

Haselsh1

17-10-2017, 11:38

I wouldn't give house room to any Marantz I've ever heard, old or new

Good job I only use mine as a transport then isn't it ?

Haselsh1

17-10-2017, 11:42

Haselsh1

17-10-2017, 11:44

So although others are looking I am letting the past go.

:thumbsup:

Macca

17-10-2017, 12:09

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.

smithie

17-10-2017, 13:14

had plenty of cambridge cd2 and 3...killer machines sound wise,iffy displays and build on the cd 2 for sure but saying that the first one i had lasted 15 yrs before the display gave up....my sony top of the range sacd1 lasted 13months before the laser packed up and had a hell of a fight with sony to get it repaired for free because it was out of warrenty!!
think you really need a high resolution system to really hear this old stuff at its best and to judge,i still rate the old cambridges,lack detail by todays standards and a slight tubbiness to the bass for sure,but that can be a big help with some of this modern stuff that passes as good new hifi.
alot of this applies to plenty of other classics,and never forget those old cd mechs make killer transports if they have a digital output,even if they dont its not usually rocket science to tap or add one.
its just back to the laser and mech gubins at the end of the day that is the make or break aspect to these things if they cant be sourced.
ive had plenty of different cd players from day one when introduced,and theres been a very small amount that i would call sterile/hard or cold,alot less then the cd medium they played at the time...some of those early cds really sucked:lol:
and then theres tweaking and modding...that can really turn some players around sound wise!!
just saying.....:D

Haselsh1

17-10-2017, 13:26

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.

Don't know to be honest Martin because back then, around 1987, I was using an Incatech Claymore integrated amplifier that I soon replaced with a Musical Fidelity A100 class A biased amp. I was also using the early version of the Musical Fidelity MC4 loudspeakers, with the transparent bass drivers. Things were so much better when I bought the Meridian two box setup. Huge difference in cost of course.

walpurgis

17-10-2017, 13:33

Good job I only use mine as a transport then isn't it ?

Players sound different from each other even used as transports. Some good some less so.

smithie

17-10-2017, 13:47

Players sound different from each other even used as transports. Some good some less so.

that they do.
its a shame,i always loved the early philips transports that philips/marantz and various other makes used,but the digital output was pretty crap on those players....so not ideal for a transport,even though the mech is....still,plenty of mods to sort that problem out now.
the sonys had good mechs to(early ones),they also had alot better digital outputs if it came with a coax output,trouble is sony early lasers and mechs are real hard to source these days.
i do miss the cdp glory days,and the killer battleship builds of yesteryear!!

eisenach

18-10-2017, 21:20

Just stumbled across this thread as I'm listening to an early CD pressing of DSOM on my resurrected Philips CD100 / Primare Pre32 / ATC 20 active towers. Sounds bloody good to me. The CD player was my first foray into CD, got put away for "better" players when the transport strated making a whistling noise, but recently got it serviced by a bloke in Ludlow. There were lots of dry solder joints. It looks cool in the sitting room system and sounds really good. Do things really get that much better ? Just hype ?

Mikeandvan

18-10-2017, 23:22

I wouldn't spend too much on a vintage CDP, thing is they go wrong and it can be hard to know why. Saying that I recently got a Pioneer PD 8700 which was mint and only £60, so far so good. Mind you I see some nice Sony cdps such as the 338ES, which have me hovering over the bid now button...........

Yomanze

19-10-2017, 08:54

Players sound different from each other even used as transports. Some good some less so.

Yup, CD transports frustratingly make a difference especially with older or more minimal DACs. Probably the one HiFi component that irritates me the most!

walpurgis

19-10-2017, 09:08

Yup, CD transports frustratingly make a difference especially with older or more minimal DACs. Probably the one HiFi component that irritates me the most!

Even digital interconnects have varying effects. I'm fussy about them as they can sound awful. And I keep well away from Toslink optical connections, never found them as good. Having tried a few digital cables (some rather expensive) with variable results, I now assemble my own and get great sound.

Marco

19-10-2017, 10:48

Yup, CD transports frustratingly make a difference especially with older or more minimal DACs. Probably the one HiFi component that irritates me the most!

Lol... I've never quite understood that concept. Why worry about something, if using it causes an obvious and worthwhile improvement? Just enjoy the improvement and its positive effect on your favourite music! ;)

Marco.

Spectral Morn

19-10-2017, 11:06

What frustrates me is folks saying they don't make a difference. Anyone sitting in my listening room hearing me switch from an Esoteric P3 to P5 would have to have been dead not to hear the massive difference between the two transports. Same cabling was used, including power leads.

Always been the same any time I have compared transports, digital cables do make a big difference as well.

Marco

19-10-2017, 11:09

It's an established fact Neil, that in hi-fi, ingrained scientific dogma can often induce selective deafness! ;)

Marco.

struth

19-10-2017, 11:13

A lot of folk dont hear the differences much though. I could hear differences the wife couldnt and Gazza and Brian can hear differences I cant, so its not a level playing field

Marco

19-10-2017, 11:33

A lot of folk dont hear the differences much though.

Yes, but there's a marked difference between not hearing differences because you can't, and 'not hearing' them because you don't *want* to! ;)

Marco.

struth

19-10-2017, 11:35

Yes, but there's a marked difference between not hearing differences because you can't, and 'not hearing' them because you don't *want* to! ;)

Marco.

true, but hard to prove

Marco

19-10-2017, 11:52

I think it's fairly obvious to most folks, from the evidence of certain types of behaviour, so doesn't really need proving.

It's like with cables, and those who somewhat 'conveniently' claim that expectation bias only works one way, which is when you're 'expecting' to hear a difference, because you WANT there to be one, but somehow miraculously doesn't apply when you DON'T want to hear a difference, perhaps due to being brainwashed in that way by an (often blinkered) objectivist belief system.

The fact is, you can 'imagine' that you've NOT heard it, just as much as 'imagine' that you have! ;)

Marco.

struth

19-10-2017, 12:14

Svend N

20-10-2017, 01:47

I'm toying with the idea of buying a digital source and am interested in the cream of the cream of Sony, Pioneer from the 80s. But, are they fixable if anything goes wrong, and do they really lose out on sound
quality? I'm talking the best of the best from that era - so not cheap even now.

Any thoughts...

Hi Adrian,
I recently had my early '90s era Teac VRDS-10 player modified, and it completely transformed the sound. I not able to compare it's present sound to that of a new machine, as my experience hearing anything new of reasonable quality is limited to a Naim machine costing about C$3500, and that at a dealer and not my system. But I can honestly say I was not impressed by the sound of the Naim in that system (caveat :)). OTOH, the sound of the Teac in my system is now outstanding. There is far better depth and breadth to the soundstage and better imaging; smoother, warmer sound; much more bass and greatly improved bass definition..... I could go on...but in short, it was improved in every way possible. Well worth the effort and expense.

By comparison, the Teac's sound pre-mod was flat and uninspiring, dry character, 2-dimensional sound stage.... I would say it was good sounding, but nothing special. And the Teac was not a shabby machine in it's day. If you Google it, you will see that the VRDS line of machines have somewhat of a following today. The VRDS-25 seems to be most coveted.

To your original question, I think you could take a high quality vintage machine with a solid drive and good electronics and transform it into something special. But I my humble advice would be to do it only if: (A) you had the support of a really good tech; (B) the manufacturer has a known reputation for supporting legacy products with basic wear-and-tear parts (belts, lasers, motors); and, (C) the cost of buying the unit and modding it was much less than that of a new machine (assuming the new machine would give equal or better sound quality).

FYI, the mods on the Teac cost ~C$600, parts and labour. The mods included: replace the on-board clock chip with a Tent Labs discrete low jitter clock board; replaced the output op-amps with NewClassD discrete op-amps; upgraded selected capacitors (this is where a good tech is worth gold, who can ID the best caps to replace for actual sonic gains); upgraded the power supply; disabled the output muting transistor; replaced the power cord with a shielded fattie. We have owned the player since new, for 20+ years, so the upgrade cost was easy to justify. But I would think twice if I had to buy a used machine and then pay to have it modded. Further along that train of thought, having heard what a modded player sounds like compared to stock, I would never be happy using a vintage machine stock without also adding the mods. Just my opinion, having experienced the before and after.

I might suggest you do some web research on this to see what others have done. You could start by searching for low jitter clock board and discrete op amp mods -- there are several companies offering such boards for a whole range of machines:

http://www.net-audio.co.uk

http://www.audiotuning.de/english/index.html?1-55-digital.html

http://tentlabs.com/index.html

https://www.bursonaudio.com

I hope this helps. If you have any questions re. the Teac mods, feel free to ask.

Regards,
Svend