Any CD player advice ?

[Mark Walberg]

My old pedestrian Sony CD player seems to be crapping out, rejecting my Freddy Hubbard CDs.
I can't have that.
So, I started looking at CD players.
Wow, are they ever expensive.
I'm guessing that CD players are probably going the way of turntables, but I have a lot of good CDs.
I have nice RDL speakers and a pretty good amp.
Does the quality of sound vary much from one player to another?
Hoping to spend in the hundreds, not thousands.
The net reviews seem to like the Marantz player that costs about $700+,
and the Cambridge one seems to be liked at about half that.
I don't need any frills. I just will use it to play CDs.
Any good advice on this ?

[rmplum]

I'm currently using an older Denon DVD-1800BD player as my "CD player". Old enough mid to higher end players like this one have analog RCA outputs if you can find one. If your amp has an optical input that further widens your options for using a DVD player.

Ryan

[alexstar]

I bought a Yamaha four years ago to replace my 25-year-old Denon. So far, so good at $200.

[Peter Polack]

Buy a used unit off craigslist. Used units are likely in very good condition as people have steered away from CDs toward data files. Locally, I see a Phillips, Sony, and a Kenwood player, each for sale for under $75.

If you want to buy new, and that $700 is a shock (I agree), try Yamaha or NAD. I value reliability and have had positive experiences with both.

There's no difference in sound quality. Usually you're paying for the name, or for bells and whistles. Don't bother with multi-disc players/changers. More complexity, slower access times, rarely used. Most people would probably stream from a data device if they wanted that much continuous music. I have one and would gladly swap it for a single player.

[sk_tle]

As said earlier if your amp has optical in and the laser of the player works without skipping quality won't differ between models as there isn't such things as a difference in quality between zeros and ones. If you are using RCA the internal DAC matter but I am not sure you would be able to spot quality difference in a blind test between 2 players of reputable brands.

+1 about buying used in that case.

[rec head]

Rip the CD's and never worry about them again.

[davids]

I'm currently using an older Denon DVD-1800BD player as my "CD player". Old enough mid to higher end players like this one have analog RCA outputs if you can find one. If your amp has an optical input that further widens your options for using a DVD player.

Ryan

I'm going to emphasize and expand on this. Your CD player has two jobs: (1) spin the CD and read the digits off the platter in a smooth, comprehensive and accurate manner, and (2) convert that stream of digital info into an analog waveform that gets sent on to your amplifier. This is the digital-to-analog converter (DAC) job.

If your amp can accept the digital stream and has its own DAC all your player needs to do is that first step. The amp will do the second. In my experience step #2 is a lot more difficult, fraught, and important. That's where you'll hear a real difference.

So if your amp is doing that second step, don't sweat the CD player too much. If it ain't, well, NAD, Marantz and Cambridge Audio get good reviews.

And you won't avoid the need for a DAC by either ripping your CDs to a massive hard drive or moving to streaming. Those are just difference digital sources and you've got to convert digital to analog before you'll have music. Schiit makes excellent inexpensive DACs if you want to go that way.

[Mark Walberg]

Thanks to all for the great advice.
CR is a good idea I think.
I'm guessing that my amp does not do DAC, given that I bought it in the 1990s. I'll look it up.
I hadn't thought much about ripping the CDs to a hard drive. I've not a clue how, but could figure it out. Of course, I'd need a CD player to do it.
Also, then I'd have to figure out how to play music from a hard drive.
I'm still stuck in the 20th century.

[rec head]

Ripping CDs is easy but can be a big undertaking depending on how many you have. 100 = not that bad. 1000 = it might not be worth it. Maybe you have mentioned your setup before but worrying about the quality of DACs and such only makes a difference if the rest of your gear is nice and where you are listening is quiet. If this is for the garage while you're working then just get something off Craigslist and you're done.

[davids]

Thanks to all for the great advice.
CR is a good idea I think.
I'm guessing that my amp does not do DAC, given that I bought it in the 1990s. I'll look it up.
I hadn't thought much about ripping the CDs to a hard drive. I've not a clue how, but could figure it out. Of course, I'd need a CD player to do it.
Also, then I'd have to figure out how to play music from a hard drive.
I'm still stuck in the 20th century.

Mark,

Get the NAD 538. Enjoy your music.

When and if you get interested in streaming, I'm here for you.

[9tubes]

Or get Apple Music. $5/mo for CD-quality, $10/mo for "lossless" uncompressed quality. Unlimited catalog, no effort to rip CDs, no need to purchase a CD player.

Or Spotify, Tidal, or whatever service that floats your audio boat. They have different emphasis in music. For example, I tried Tidal a couple of years ago. The available music library is full of hip-hop and rap. I see no way to tell it not to. There is so much of this that the library is useless. For example, there is a new music section but there’s nothing in it but rap and pop for row after row after row of new releases. OTOH, perhaps this is perfect for you.

Yep, that means I have a few hundred CDs in boxes in the basement. Anyone know what to do with them?

[davids]

Or get Apple Music. $5/mo for CD-quality, $10/mo for "lossless" uncompressed quality. Unlimited catalog, no effort to rip CDs, no need to purchase a CD player.

Or Spotify, Tidal, or whatever service that floats your audio boat. They have different emphasis in music. For example, I tried Tidal a couple of years ago. The available music library is full of hip-hop and rap. I see no way to tell it not to. There is so much of this that the library is useless. For example, there is a new music section but there’s nothing in it but rap and pop for row after row after row of new releases. OTOH, perhaps this is perfect for you.

Yep, that means I have a few hundred CDs in boxes in the basement. Anyone know what to do with them?

If Mark starts paying for a streaming service he will also need to buy a streaming player to connect to his stereo. That will cost more that the NAD CD player I recommend.

So no.

[9tubes]

If Mark starts paying for a streaming service he will also need to buy a streaming player to connect to his stereo. That will cost more that the NAD CD player I recommend.

So no.

I'm not following. Most audio receivers have streaming built in these days. If his doesn't, then maybe an Apple TV to stream to the receiver? That is $180 vs $380 for the NAD CD player. Aren't there even more inexpensive streamers that can connect to a receiver?

Plus, a music service provides for carrying the music on your phone as well as in the car, while in a coffee shop, or wherever.

[giordana93]

he said above that the amp was from the 90's, so without dac. and if sound quality matters, the streamers are still mostly lower quality signals, like mp3, if I'm not mistaken. There are exceptions, of course, but they are more expensive. If you're in an environment where you can't hear the difference between a cd and an mp3, well....

and some people actually like to look through a library of physical cd's, pull one out an pop it in a player. I'm not really like that, but there are certainly times when the compression of lossy streams is obvious and worth a small investment in some hardware to avoid.

[giordana93]

I would also second the recommendation of scouring the local craigslist or fbook marketplace for both cd and dvd players. I don't use it often, but my old yamaha dvd player is perfectly adequate, and even if the amp does not have a digital "in" port, certainly a stand-alone DAC would, and pretty much all of the dvd players have a digital out. I assume they can all play music CD's?

[9tubes]

There might be streaming players (that is, stored music) still available that are mp3 quality but there is no point in buying old technology. Stored music today plays at whatever bit rate you want. All the streaming services today have data rates above CD quality, even lossless uncompressed.

I agree the DAC quality is separate from the steaming service quality.

[Mark Walberg]

Typical for me, I took apart the Sony and cleaned it.
Works fine again.
I've learned a lot about CDs and players and DACs though.
Thanks for all the interesting advice.

[Mark Walberg]

Some of what I've learned follows:
CD is a good lossless form of storage that will live longer than I will. So, I think I will hold on to using the CDs.
Some people think that the CD players of the 1990s were the pinnacle, while some say that the DACs have improved so much that the old stuff is garbage.
I've not done the comparison, but I suspect that my 68 yo ears won't hear a lot of difference between a good old CD player and a new transport with a fancy DAC. Would like to test this though.
Interested to hear what others have found about this. Lots of opinions on the net, but not much data. True for most things on the net.

I must say that I've found that a headphone amplifier makes a truly huge improvement in sound with good Grado 325s. So, I can hear that.

[Curious George]

Recently purchased Cambridge Audo AXC35 player and AXR100 amp.
I'm using the analogue connections as I like this the best.
They both have the same DACs, so you would think no difference. I think there is, but I have no idea where or why that may be.

In using the same system I have tried a Blu ray player, alternating optical and analogue connectors.
Also tried a 20 year old JVC micro system with analogue and optical out.
Didn't like the sound from the optical input from any combination.
There is a huge difference in betterness between CD players, and I'm very happy I have the AXC35

[Bob Ross]

CD is a good lossless form of storage that will live longer than I will.

Well...

It will almost certainly live longer than most digital file formats, if for no other reason than files are so dependent on codecs and operating systems that change like the weather. (Anyone tried to play back a Sound Designer II file recently?)

But there's been a fairly compelling argument for several decades now that all of the "LASTS FOREVER! INDESTRUCTABLE!" hoopla surrounding CDs when they were first introduced was pure baloney: We've proven empirically that a clumsy adult (or a determined infant) can render a CD unplayable almost too easily. And we've only had ~40 years of data on how long CDs truly last; for all we know they'll all disintegrate spontaneously when they hit the 50 year milestone.

Of course, I too am nearing the age where something only has to outlive me to be viable. But if I were genuinely interested in creating a legacy music collection, I'd have each recording stored as several different formats...including at least one analog.