Expensive CD players - worth it?

[Marco]

A good EE can fix most stuff, and I know a few; not that I need one, as the Sony has performed faultlessly for the 20 years I've had it, and it was second-hand when I bought it! You can't beat bombproof engineering

However, I agree with your basic point. The days of great CDPs (new) are over, and have been for some time.

Marco.

[Pigmy Pony]

Hmm, a lot more to CD players than I thought... Marco, I take your point about many of the more expensive players having better build quality. Just how much effect that will have on sound quality will no doubt be measurable, but whether that difference is audible will be up to the user. You can tell with your bat's ears, but probably not me.

Of course nothing lasts for ever, so it would be up to the individual user to decide whether the nth degree of sound improvement is worth the potential future pain of expensive parts being scarce or even impossible to find.

I suppose my question should have been: should I get the competent and relatively low cost Marantz player fixed, or get the Densen (which to be fair uses a readily available and inexpensive Sony laser mechanism) repaired.

Sod it, I'll get them both fixed, so I then have a spare player. And maybe with further plays the Densen will reveal why it should cost six times that of the Marantz.

[Marco]

I don't think the Densen, although a good player, is sufficiently special to show up the difference of what's possible. Therefore, I'd choose the player you like the look of the most and use that

Marco.

[Barry]

Most CD players, even some of the most expensive will use a fairly basic Philips laser mechanism. If you want the best find a player that uses a laser disc reader designed for CD juke boxes. They were designed to be in use for hours at a time, and hence are robust enough to have long-term reliability.

I forget the type number of the reader, save to say my Levinson ML 390 player uses the same.

After that it is all down to the electronics: how much oversampling is done; the size of the buffer and speed of input/output. That is what makes the biggest difference to the sound quality; and as others have said, the technology has probably already reached optimum quality.


I've just checked - the Levinson ML 390 uses a Philips CD12 IND disc reader, having a substantial die-cast chassis, metal swing arm guide rails and glass (not plastic) lenses. It was designed to be used in CD juke boxes amongst others.

[Idlewithnodrive]

Hmm, a lot more to CD players than I thought... Marco, I take your point about many of the more expensive players having better build quality. Just how much effect that will have on sound quality will no doubt be measurable, but whether that difference is audible will be up to the user. You can tell with your bat's ears, but probably not me.

Of course nothing lasts for ever, so it would be up to the individual user to decide whether the nth degree of sound improvement is worth the potential future pain of expensive parts being scarce or even impossible to find.

I suppose my question should have been: should I get the competent and relatively low cost Marantz player fixed, or get the Densen (which to be fair uses a readily available and inexpensive Sony laser mechanism) repaired.

Sod it, I'll get them both fixed, so I then have a spare player. And maybe with further plays the Densen will reveal why it should cost six times that of the Marantz.

I inhabit very much the mid-fi habitat and find that the few hundred quid I pay for anything can bring large differences in SQ. My CDP of choice at the moment is a mid range, mid 90's Sony ES. It is built like a tank, is a joy to use and, to my ageing ears, sounds lovely.

The very large upside to mid range ES kit of this era is that it uses the cheap, ubiquitous KSS-213B Mech, so is easy to repair should it ever go wrong, and I don't imagine it will. If I were looking for a new CDP now, that is where I would be putting my money.

[Marco]

Most CD players, even some of the most expensive will use a fairly basic Philips laser mechanism. If you want the best find a player that uses a laser disc reader designed for CD juke boxes. They were designed to be in use for hours at a time, and hence are robust enough to have long-term reliability.

I forget the type number of the reader, save to say my Levinson ML 390 player uses the same.

After that it is all down to the electronics: how much oversampling is done; the size of the buffer and speed of input/output. That is what makes the biggest difference to the sound quality; and as others have said, the technology has probably already reached optimum quality.

PSU arrangements also make a big difference, Barry, with the very best CDPs having dedicated (over-specced) linear ones for different parts of the circuit, reducing noise, and also where the detrimental effects of vibration (a big issue with CDPs) has been addressed.

Marco.

[Pigmy Pony]

A good EE can fix most stuff, and I know a few; not that I need one, as the Sony has performed faultlessly for the 20 years I've had it, and it was second-hand when I bought it! You can't beat bombproof engineering

However, I agree with your basic point. The days of great CDPs (new) are over, and have been for some time.

Marco.

Is that Martin's basic point? Have you seen or heard his CDT? It's all you could ever need imo, complete with the peace of mind that brand new (hopefully) brings. I have no plans to spend big on a player, but if I was, that's where my money would be going. Because regardless of how good your EE is, he can't fabricate a replacement for an obsolete mechanism from nothing.

[Marco]

No, that's true, but he (or she) can replace like for like components, such as caps and resistors of the same value, which is often what needs replacing. As I said, I've had my Sony now for 20 years, and it continues to perform faultlessly to this day. The 'battleship' CDPs of old tend to last, IME.

No, I haven't heard Martin's CDP, but have no reason to assume it's not excellent. The point I was making, and I think Martin was too, was that hi-end CDPs of today are mostly built from cheap parts, so there's no point in buying one, unless the badge attracts, whereas 20 years ago, you got what you were paying for; where it matters, under the hood!

Marco.

[Pigmy Pony]

Fair point. On a related note, I've just stuck a CD on, and the bloody Densen is skipping already! So it looks like I will be vinyl-only until I get off my arse and have these players seen to.

I had noticed though, that the familiar-to-me Cranberries CD sounds rather hot in the higher frequencies (and not in a good way), compared to how I remember the Marantz being last week...

[Macca]

I suppose my question should have been: should I get the competent and relatively low cost Marantz player fixed, or get the Densen (which to be fair uses a readily available and inexpensive Sony laser mechanism) repaired.

Sod it, I'll get them both fixed, so I then have a spare player. And maybe with further plays the Densen will reveal why it should cost six times that of the Marantz.

The problem with your Marantz is just the draw playing up? If so it's probably just needing a new belt. Sometimes the cogs fail but you can get replacements for those too now. So should be a cheap fix, just the cost of the belt (about a fiver) if you're up to doing it yourself.

Densen's always been one of those brands to me which charge a lot for something that's nothing special in a fancy case. That's true of pretty much any CD player from the boutique brands.