Does a CD played on a DVD mechanism sound better than a CD played on its namesake? And check out our newest RU-vid channel / @octaverecordsanddsdst... Octave Records.
I got tired of my CD only players having trouble reading discs after a while and having to go buy new ones and cd only players are much more expensive than they used to be. When I was shopping for a new CD player I kept reading the reviews and nearly all started mistracking after a while even the 3 or 400 dollar ones. Well I found a CD/DVD player on Amazon for 20 bucks or so. I thought I'd give it a shot...and if it started skipping after a year or two I could buy like 20 more of them for 20 bucks before I had what a single 400 dollar cd player would cost me. It sounded really good and actually was much more compact than a stand alone cd player. Then I read a story that said nearly all the new DVD/CD players were better sound than the old ones because of advances in technology...that got me wondering if I bought a CD only player, could it actually surpass the sound of the 20 dollar one?? So, I went out and bought a 400 dollar CD player. I hooked it up expecting to be blown away, and as far as I can tell after really trying to discern the difference I can't find any audible difference between the two. I haven't done a "scientific" study but it also seems like the 20 dollar player may actually read scratched discs better. At one point the 20 dollar one was having trouble reading discs for 1 day and I sat it on it's side and it started working again. Wondered if a bit of fuzz had been sucked in with the CD and was obscuring the laser, but that was 2 mo ago and no problems since. So this is just me and there could be a million variables that might change what I seem to have concluded but for me the cheap DVD/CD player was as good and way more of a bargain than the 400 dollar fancy CD alone player.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
The players don't matter that much.....your receiver/speakers make your set/experience. Too cheap is usually crap of course.....but you can better pay for a good receiver/speakers than a very expensive cd player.....or dvd/bluray player for that matter.
Laserdisc video was never digitally encoded, it was FM modulated analog. In the mid-80s they allocated some of the track space to digital audio, thus Dolby Digital encoded audio tracks, etc.
Laserdisc is really a mixed bag of signals. haha The physical encoding on the disc itself is still pits and lands, just like a CD. But, the process of reading it is inherently analog -- again, just like a CD, DVD, BD, or whatever. You get an RF output from the laser pickup that contains a waveform that is more or less binary in nature. This is where we run into what it means to be "digital" in the first place -- since, technically, there's no such thing as a "digital waveform" ... it's all analog, and can be interpreted as a continuous signal, or containing discrete data. The whole construct of "digital" is merely a classification of signals that are interpreted in such a way as to produce a quantized output. So, on a Laserdisc, the video stream is slightly modified composite analog video, FM-modulated and multiplexed on different carrier frequencies alongside two tracks of analog audio and (NTSC) / or (PAL) a digital audio track. The digital audio track is PCM just like CD, or it can be re-purposed for DTS frames instead. The analog audio tracks can be a stereo analog audio track, two mono analog audio tracks (e.g., some combination of mono audio, commentary, 2nd language, etc.), or a mono audio track and a modulated Dolby Digital AC-3 stream (which usually has to be demodulated into a bitstream by an external demodulator.) On an NTSC disc, you can select either L/R analog, L analog, R analog (in case it's not actually stereo but rather audio track 1 and 2), or digital audio (if present.) On a PAL disc, you get either L/R analog (which you select to play in stereo, L-only, or R-only), OR you get a digital track. The side effect of all of this is that what you get out of the audio or digital audio jacks of a Laserdisc player depends on the region, the disc, the player's capabilities, and the audio track(s) you have selected to play. Some players will do internal conversion to ensure you can play either analog or digital tracks from either the analog or digital outputs, and some will not. Some will do the AC-3 demodulation internally and output a bitstream from the digital outs, and maybe even decode it into stereo on the analog outs. Most will not. Some players have a dedicated output for the RF-modulated AC-3 output, some just give you meaningless noise on the analog audio output that you can't do anything with. This is just what happens when you retrofit old media with new technology. :-)
@@nickwallette6201 I have a pioneer laser disc and I use it for CDs. Can you please tell me if their is any benefits to using this particular laser disc (pioneer CDC-1030)? I
@@danieldesoto6787 Man, I have no idea. It seems a lot of people want confirmation that they're using "the right" equipment. Don't waste your time with that stuff. Pop a disc in, listen, and if you like what you hear, then it's the right player. The only thing I can say about this specifically is, if you have any Laserdiscs, you might opt to save the poor old girl from having to handle both tasks. I don't believe an LD player makes a "superior" CD player, just that it _can_ be an adequate one. (Whether that particular model is good, bad, or superb, I haven't any idea.) Given the choice, I would use a CD player to play CDs, and save the parts in the LD player from the wear. We have an embarrassment of riches with all the CD players available to us. Why burden a rarer machine with the uncommon ability to play a format that garden-variety CD players can't? But that's just an opinion from somebody who is still amused by the novelty of LD, and will happily watch a movie in 480i just to get to use that old quirky tech.
Love these videos!! Your stuff got me to buy a DirectStream DAC and recently upgrade to a Bridge II for MQA. I honestly never considered PS Audio or had a chance to hear your gear, but I bought blind solely on your expertise and passion for this art. You do amazing things with digital and I think it is greatly underappreciated. Your DAC is amazing and I am thinking of moving to a BHK preamp soon. Perhaps I will replace my entire chain with PSA gear :P You found the right formula between experiential subjectivity and sound engineering principles. Congrats to you and the team!
If you get a chance, go visit PS Audios factory in Colorado. They will gladly give you a complete tour and then you can listen to their audio room. Bring your own favorite CD or listen to one of theirs. They have an Infinity RS speaker system in there that sold for $60,000 brand new. They have pictures and some soundtracks on the internet.
Don't forget the power supply makes a huge difference to audio and just using a dvd with a cheap smps as a complete playback device is going to fall quite short of a similar priced cd player with a proper linear psu. Also SACD was based around DVD technology as that needed to be 96khz 24bit
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
The laser doesn't "read" anything. It simply illuminates the (laser burned) grooves on a thin sheet of reflective aluminum and the reflected light from those grooves is picked up by a "photocell" camera that "reads" the bits.
You only have a few ways to emphasize text in RU-vid comments. You can, for example, make them _italic_ or *bold* or CAPS, or "put them in quotes." You have to use what you've got to allow the expressiveness of spoken language in text. Also, he's right. Pedantic, but right. (While we're at it: It's actually several photocells. At least four, sometimes six, etc. That's what allows the tracking servo to do its thing.)
I have a Sony discman and Philips DVD player. There’s a huge difference on their sound quality . DVD player is louder and the sound is fuller, clearer. So I prefer to use it.
@@keilana6 Could be many things with no real info given. Is it on all discs? Discs can be dirty or off balance. Perhaps electrical interference somewhere, are you sharing a power/plug with other units? Try a different connection to your amp / dac. Try not to have player stacked on top of other av equipment as their casings/cabinets only amplify the noise through reverberation. Many new players, even Sony, are poorly assembled with average parts. Since everyone is streaming these days, the low end units (even at around $300+) are not investing in their parts and labor as much. Good luck!
Years ago, I had what I considered a reasonably decent hifi system incorporating a £2500 CD player, which was a lot of money back in 2001! I did not have a DVD player, so, my friend bought me one. It cost £15 from Tesco. I plumbed it into my system. I have about a dozen duplicate CDs. I’d bought the cd myself, then someone gave me that same cd for Christmas or my birthday. I took 2 copies of the same cd, putting one in each player. I was shocked, yes, I could hear a difference, the CD player did sound better, but not by very much! As an aside from that. I also had duplicate copies of albums on cd and vinyl. When friends came around for a listening session I used to put one copy on the turntable and the other in the CD player and synchronise them and do a blind A-B test on my friends. 7 out of 10 said they preferred the sound of the turntable!
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
@@christopher9727 if you accept the bible as truth, why would your god create man, and expect his creations to please him, honour him, obey him and worship him? Then intermingle with man other creations, designed to make life as difficult as possible?
Preferring the sound of vinyl doesn’t mean it’s superior. A well mastered CD will run rings around a vinyl, while a well mastered SACD 5+1 disk will run rings around the same CD…
I use a Halcro logic EC800 player. It can play CD's, SACD's and DVD's. It plays all of these brilliantly and I am sure it is due to the quality of the hand made Swiss drive mechanism and the great DAC incorporated in the unit. It will play discs that are so scratched that nothing else will play them. I guess the point I am trying to make is that the quality of the equipment probably has more to do with the quality of sound than whether it is a CD or DVD player.
John , the halcro is a tank build masterpiece, but when playing all discs even with the discs that won't play , I think that there would be immense pressure on the lens /mechanism , as a maintenance do u clean with disc cleaner or pull the lid up to do an air blow to clean residue dust particles? that's how I take care of my equipment . Kind regards.
This guy gets it. CD-player or DVD-player or SACD-player or BD-player .. it doesn't matter. Good player? Good player. End of story. @Athur V There's no strain on the mechanism. The disc turns continuously. The laser is on continuously. The lens is held in position by a few electro-magnetic coils that are _constantly_ being adjusted to track the disc as it moves. None of that struggles, or works any harder, when the disc is in poor shape. The signal recovery electronics do, but they couldn't care less. They just take a waveform, and use a fixed set of functions to try and derive a bit stream. If they're successful, great! If they're not, they'll just do it again on the next pass (if there's time), or move on to the next block until you turn it off. None of it knows the difference between a perfect disc and a rubbish one. @steve austin That's not quite so true of discs other than CD. CD data stream is meant to be fudged. Other formats use a format like (or literally) CD-ROM and require the sectors to be readable, else that data is simply thrown away and replaced with silence, skipped over, or interpolated with a string of intermediate values that won't be even close to what was on the disc.
I use an older Pioneer DVD player for CDs and they sound great thru my two stereo systems. One is a small vacuum tube amp, a Reissong A-10, and the other is a vintage Pioneer SX 780. It may not be the fanciest of setups but it sounds great to me, especially thru the A-10.
I'm using a 2nd (£10)pioneer too. I couldn't find much online but on cleaning the laser I was pretty surprised to see at least a dozen or more Rubycon caps. Sounds good and only takes a few more seconds loading, but playback is normal.
I don't know about Lambdas and so forth but my ears know that well mastered BluRay audio is amazing---as in live. I've never had that experience with CD (even SACD.)
Far far from true. As a veteran Audio EE I can assure you he is often wrong technically and is mainly promoting his company. That's his main job and it's okay.
He will still be remembered for promoting imo, overly expensive power conditioners. Waste of money if ever there was. But yes, he does have some good content, and his high end audio stuff has good reviews. I like the layback approach.
A CD well always sound better than RU-vid. Like a DVD movie will be better than watching it from your TV like if it was being broadcasted. Because of DTS:X or Dolby Atmos and UHD 4k.
I would say a DVD can potentially do a better job than a CD player in the digital realm due to it's ability to track better, it has a larger buffer, and a faster processor which all combined means it POTENTIALLY can employ better error correction. Chances are it's audio DAC is crap so use SP/DIF.
A drawback of playing CDs on a DVD player is the lack of playback features and the unit's display. CD players have LED display that informs the user of all sorts of info about the CD, and the user can have playback options with the CD player's control features, such as shuffle playlist, that DVD players don't have.
Depends on the player. I had a DVD player around 2001 (I don't remember the brand) that not only had shuffle, repeat, playslists and such, it also had phase reverse for "karaoke style" voice removal, key shift to 12 tones up and 12 tones down, it even played Enhanced Music CDs... And displayed everything on screen and its big LCD. Unfortunately, it got stolen. Never found another one like that again. :(
@@bloqk16 A bluray or dvdplayer would normally show all that info also in the LED display. Also the cd players I have owned only showed the track number and length of the track counting down plus maybe a few other things like shuffle or repeat.
I had a high end Denon DVD player back a few years ago (I got it used pretty cheap but brand new around 2005 it cost around $1500). It played CDs fantastically well but I was always annoyed about how long it took to load a CD (often as long as 30 seconds) and this was also true of pretty much any high end CD or DVD player I ever used between 2000 and now. I had no idea that it was probably due to the data buffering that the CD or DVD player used to allow for consistent and accurate reproduction.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
I guess if your running an external DAC it doesn't matter but from an analog output perspective I much prefer my vintage CD player to my high-ish end blueray player. They say the DACs are better suited but it just seems to sound better to me and it loads much much faster too.
Not only do cd players sound better. CD carousels change to the next CD faster and quieter than a DVD carousel. CD players support audio files like MP3 and CD-r -rw.Which can also be played in a car radio or other portable audio device. There are many reasons to have the cd player if you listen to music.
Not sure what's he trying to say about the audio level, the disc moving up and down shouldn't change the audio level, it's digital, just ones and zeros and it's not like a vinyl record where you can physically slow down or speed up the turn table. That's what a buffer is for, a temporary memory for the information to be store in case of a glitch in the data stream cause by vibration or movement, it reads a head and stores the data in the buffer so there will be no interruption in play back!
Buy a dvd or a blue ray player and use the optical output through even a cheap DAC into your receiver. You'll notice an immediate improvement in the quality of your music.
I bought some off brand DVD recorder on Ebay 12 years ago and it does sound a bit more high resolution than my Sony CD recorder whether I use RCA or coaxial outputs. The only problem is at low volume, you can hear the fan when using the DVD player so I use the Sony for cds. I had a JVC CD player prior and it did not sound as good as the Sony does.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Denon Link is a good example of the jitter free link by connecting the dvda1ud to the avpa1hd via a specific cat cable. I found after owning these two components that it sounds slightly clearer through Denon link 4th gen after changing it in the menu on the dvda1ud.Denon Link 4th uses the clock of the AV amplifier to achieve HDMI signal transfer with little jitter when playing back HD codecs. (DTS HD-Master Audio & Dolby True HD.
From an audio playback side of CD versus DVD players, I have a CD player with a smooth and warmer sound than using DVD player. I have a high-end Denon audio receiver with Cambridge Soundworks speakers. I did a CD playback comparison with a JVC DVD player to a late model Onkyo single-tray CD player. The audio from the JVC DVD player sounded harsh, while the Onkyo CD player sounded smoother with warmth to the audio. BTW: Not all CD players can sound warm and smooth. I did a similar comparison with an older Sony CD player to the Onkyo unit, where the Sony's playback was similar to the JVC DVD player.
It might have more to do with the Digital filter, or the oversampling rate, or even the output stage. Back in the day when that 1-bit Delta-Sigma JVC DD PEM Errorless DAC came-out, Consumer reports stated that they could not perceive any differences in sound quality or reproduction between any of the player, regardless of the manufacturer or the price-point. Therefore ( and I'm NOT making this up,) "Sound Quality", was NOT EVER used as a performance factor in terms of rating or recommending, in the Overall Final Score, ANY particular disc player over another!
Hey Paul, Great to find this channel. My very first "real" preamp was a PS Audio 4.6 with the M250 power supply. What an incredible piece of kit for ~$500. Anyway, do you plan on releasing another physical disc player/transport after the discontinuation of the Memory Player? I seem to recall that you were relying on the Oppo Blu-Ray licence for your drives and of course, sadly, they are no more. If that is the case, is this the only reason the memory Player was discontinued? Thanks.
Hey Bob, thanks for reaching out and the memories. The 4.6 was a great preamp. Yes, we discontinued the DMP because our source from Oppo dried up. We have another in the works and I hope to offer it for sale later this year, perhaps April or May.
sehnzeleid And actually, whether they have separate lenses or not, they always have a separate laser for reading CDs, since the entire principle of reading pits and lands is based on destructive interference, with the pits being exactly a quarter wavelength of light deep, so that the reflected light from a pit has traveled exactly one half wavelength farther, so when it meets the incoming light, the waves cancel each other out, negating the light output. (On the lands, this effect doesn’t happen, so the light is reflected.) Since this requires the laser’s wavelength to be matched to the pit depth, it means you _can’t_ use the same laser for CD, DVD, and blu-ray. So while it’s possible to have all three lasers within one lens assembly, there are always separate lasers. (In blu-ray players it’s still common to see two lenses, one for BD and one for CD/DVD.)
@@tookitogo Not necessarily. You _can_ read pressed CDs with a red laser. Contrary to the original post here, early DVD players are more likely to use a red laser. This practice wasn't as common later, because recordable CDs use a dye that a red laser can't distinguish, so it won't be able to play them. That got to be an issue later in the DVD's lifespan, when more people wanted to play recordable media. You can try this yourself. Find a DVD player that won't even recognize a CD-R, then take the cover off. You will probably see a tiny red dot shining through the CD while it plays (pressed) or tries in vain to focus (CD-R).
@@nickwallette6201 I’m sorry, but you are very mistaken. The method by which pressed discs are read _requires_ the use of a laser of a specific wavelength, because it’s based on the pits being _exactly_ 1/4 wavelength deep. CD requires a 780nm near-IR laser. DVD requires a 650nm red laser, and Blu-ray requires a 405nm blue laser. This isn’t optional, and doesn’t leave room for interpretation. Every DVD player, regardless of vintage, reads DVDs with a 650nm laser, just like every optical drive reads CDs with a 780nm laser. What you’re observing is simply that the human eye is slightly sensitive to the 780nm near-IR light. (There’s no absolute delineation between red and infrared, so 780nm is commonly known both as “near-infrared” and as “far red”.)
@@tookitogo I'm a little confused by this as well, because all I've heard and read echoes what you're saying, and that's exactly what I thought until very recently, when I saw otherwise. Despite it being "near-IR," you can't see an infra-red laser with the naked eye. There's usually a tiny streak of red that is visible under the lens, but it's not the primary wavelength of the laser, and you're going to be blasting your eyeballs with radiation you're not aware of, if you look at the tiny bit of light you _can_ see. I'm sure you're already quite familiar with all of that, but I just wanted to level-set that what I'm talking about is not _that._ There's a 12voltvids video from April 24th 2022 that's called "2 Free DVD players will either of them work?" where he tests a Toshiba SD-1200 DVD player with a pressed CD (which plays) and a CD-R (which doesn't.) At around 28:00 in, he has the unit tilted on its side and the camera zoomed way in so you can see the laser spot shining _through_ the disc, just like you would see when it's playing a DVD. If that were an infra-red laser, you wouldn't see it at all, much less through the disc (with factory-printed graphics, nonetheless!) At around 30:00, he tests the burned CD, and you can see the spot change in size and shape while it's trying to focus, but never succeeds. The warning label also doesn't call out "invisible laser radiation" like an IR laser normally does, just "visible laser radiation." I've tried researching this myself to find out how that's possible, given the commonly accepted wisdom that you can't do that. It's difficult to find actual qualified sources rather than just forum posts and such. If you know of any, I'm anxious to learn more. In the meantime, the ONLY way I can describe what I saw in a way that doesn't contradict the fact that a red laser was reading an audio CD, is that ... _maybe_ the unit had both the red and IR lasers on at the same time. But that seems unlikely, since it would have to have two separate sets of photocells that are completely blind to the other laser's wavelength. Possible, but unlikely, when they could just shut off the unused laser. Oh, and the other thing... apparently, really early LD players used a gas laser that was visible. I believe it was a Technology Connections video where he showed one of the original RCA or Magnavox players that had one. I don't think they played CDs (I don't think the spindle had accommodations for that hub size), and I'm not entirely sure what the dimensions are of pits on an LD -- not a great deal of technical information like that available these days on a format that was mostly pre-Internet. So maybe that's relevant and maybe it's not. I don't know.
What is your thought on analog laserdisc , being used thru an analog laser (think 1st/2nd gen pioneer player with helium laser with tube preamp) vs cd? I've found alot more "depth" on this era laserdisc done right...
I ended arriving here because I am in doubt between to buy a brand new LG DVD player or a second hand vintage Sony CD player. After to watch this video I figured that I should go for the DVD.
When I have a CD that skips in my CD player, it usually works in my DVD player, so I keep both hooked up to my receiver. (The CD player has a better display, so it's my first go-to.)
I have an old JVC DVD player from 2001 when those things were still pricey. I think it originally retailed for $600, but I got it at Goodwill in 2014 for $15. It’s gold and built like a tank and (knock wood) still works. I use it as the CD player in my bedroom system and it sounds fantastic! I am almost guilty and wondering why I spent $400 for the CD player I currently use in my main system.
I have an old panasonic DVD player that I use since 3 days (it was sleeping since 10 years) and I tought maybe to buy a 500$ cd player... (Cambridge). You may have change my mind !!!
The DVD player almost certainly uses a normal CD infra-red laser. One way to tell: Can it play CD-Rs at all? If it can, it's using an infra-red laser. If it can't, it might be using the DVD's red laser. What you're likely seeing is a better lens, better error-correction algorithm, or something along those lines. There's no inherent advantage. I have lots of CD-playing-capable devices and they vary widely in ability to read poor quality or recordable media.
@@nickwallette6201 Well Nick all I know is I got that one CD that always skipped badly and played it on my DvD player and it didn't skip. I mead the said disc wouldn't ever play on my cd player .😀😀
@@Jermeister12 Oh yeah, I believe you! I had a disc once that wouldn't play in my Sony ES car CD player. Put it into a Discman and it read perfectly. That happens. :-)
No, the best cd playback is the first 16bit DAC that came out from Philips TDA1541A. 90s CD players in general are the best. Technics SOAD70A is the best transport mech from the 90s, it reads everything instantly.
I'm in the belief that a xbox disc reader has a very different component setup in the hardware and software that has a better load out and info storage that makes the CD's sound better verses the regular CD's on the market. However, that's also true about its capability to read DVD and well. Just seems like a better audio and video experience , for me anyway..this is good info on this . Thanks
The Bluray player I use sounds so good from the RCA out's , I can't hardly believe it! I'm sure I could get better dynamic contrast , ultimately from a high quality separates CD transport, and better outboard dac combo, with increases here and there. But, for dirt cheap, I'm flabbergasted how good some of these old video disc players DAC's and output is!
Please give us a “Part 2” to this video. Are the clocks, DACs and other circuitry used in DVD players any better or worse than those in CD players? Should I use a DVD player to play audio discs?
Yes that was the real question in the first place, it seems that Paul is not interested, though, since selling DACs is his job and would never recommend using the one already available with any player! XD
CD players have an internal clock of 44.1khz on their DAC obviously. On the other hand DVD and Blu-ray discs players have internal clocking at 48khz since that is the video standard. Very important to understand this. The last thing you want is a machine doing a poor job of sample rate conversion. So it's better to sample rate convert your music to 48khz before using DVD or Blu-ray to play music.
They usually have both clocks, and select the one it needs. OR, might derive the correct clock from a higher-frequency master clock divided down or synthesized via PLL. Any of these are valid. It would have to be a pretty cheap player to lock at 48kHz, since even the DVD audio formats (DVD-Video audio formats, not necessarily DVD-Audio formats, although those too!) may require the ability to run at 96kHz as well, so the clock has to be somewhat flexible anyway.
@@nickwallette6201 Yes, in some it will upsample the 44.1khz signal to multiples of 48khz. My phone upsamples everything to 384khz and can play DSD files up to dsd128, so anything divisible by 384 sounds smoother and has a better sound stage. When playing 44.1khz files the algorithm does an ok job at resampling to 384khz, but you can tell it's being resampled. My new 4k blu-ray player only lets you choose 48, 96 or 192 for clocking, although it can also play Cd's and (SACD) and dsd up to 256.
@@380stroker That's super common for computing devices, since they have to have an audio mixer capable of blending streams from different processes (system sounds, simultaneous audio applications, etc.) That has been the case since Win9x, where you had a sound card that may (or may not!) have an adjustable playback rate, but you got to use it for ONE audio source at a time, and every other application would tell you "audio device busy" if you tried to play a second concurrent stream. The fix was to have a fixed sampling rate to the hardware, and merge all audio streams via SRC. This also allowed digital volume control and in-line effects, EQ, etc. Some hardware (SB Live!, for example) would do something similar at the hardware level, to mix audio from onboard synths, digital audio, analog inputs, etc. I won't say that NO standalone players do this, since many are just computers now anyway. But since they're usually based on SOCs with hardware optimizations for media handling, it's pretty uncommon to see fixed clocking. I'm curious why your player even HAS a clocking setting exposed to the user? Are you sure it's not just a limiter on the maximum output frequency, to ensure compatibility with HDMI devices that don't support 24/96?
@@nickwallette6201 No, the 4k player lets you adjust output as PCM or DSD and Sample rate at 48, 96 and 192. It's a Sony 4k blu-ray player. It plays DVD-Audio, SACD, Blu-ray Audio, DSD files, PCM files ect...
One thing that makes it better -- no onboard DAC needed. Since most DVD/Blu-ray players have digital audio out, there's no need to convert it when going to your AVR. This makes them more like CD transports.
“It is what happens after that information is read.” The Digital to Analog Converter (DAC); the pre-amp; etc. all contribute to the signal that is sent to the power amp. I witnessed the difference between CD players just recently, when I heard Van Halen’s 5150 songs (2004 remastered versions) through the NAD C568. This equipment made them sound like the 1986 LP.
For the average home, if you simply want to use a BluRay player, doubling up as CD player, that’s fine. Go right ahead. It’s been working fine for me with a coaxial cable running directly from the BluRay player into a set of powered active Edifier 2.0 speakers. I can also switch to playing a CD through the TV (connected with a hdmi cable) as if it was a DVD if I want. The TV is connected to the same Edifier speakers with an Optical cable. It all sounds great, either way! Like I said, for the average home, keep it simple. Keep it easy. One set of powered active speakers linked up to a TV, a BluRay player and a record turntable is relatively inexpensive and it’s all you need in the domestic setting.
Paul ... i know i am later to the party ... just getting back into music at the ripe age of 68 ... I LIKE THE WAY YOU FINISHED THE VIDEO WITH THE QUICK BUT TRYING TO BE HUMOROUS THUMBING YOUR NOSE AT THE 'BITS ARE BITS' CROWD ... my partner is a bits are bits-er ... i dont know why ... but it seems obvious it is in how the bits start moving around ???? (i wonder about the quality of the bit ... but that's another issue) ... i like how you explained the way you moved information from the transport to the dac ... i am very low budget and am in here just looking to figure out what kind of cd or dvd player i should be chasing ....one channel advocated a blu-ray dvd ... on ebay .... there a number of Denon cd transports ... but as you mentioned ... all transports, cd and dvd players are not make alike ... THANK YOU FOR YOUR VIDEOS ... YOU HAVE ARE EASY TO WATCH ... respectfully ... chuck
Most audiophiles and reviewers mention all of the video-circuitry in a DVD-player as a negative influence on the sound, and the (and Paul hints at this) often lower grade sound-treatment post-drive, so clock and analogue circuits and filters. I think this is where the big differences lie: a dedicated CD-player only has one job to do and it'll be comparatively easier to do this well on a budget, than a DVD-player which needs much more complex, power-pulling circuitry. So everything I've read and heard is that all else being equal, a CD-player will sound better than a DVD-player for CD's. At least that's how I understand it with my limited knowledge..
Usually DVD players have much higher jitter but not always. Laser disc players had a better clamping mechanism and was thought to make a better transport.
Doesnt really matter. The tech for reading CDs and DVDs is quite reliable, tested and proven. What really matters is the digital signal being sent to a good dac.
Testing Pioneer (which is both "super Audio CD" player and "DVD player" [DV-563A]) which is available for a very cheap price, shows that when it goes hand in hand with good DAC and powerful amplifier and reasonable speakers, the result is pleasing enough ... (I used iFi Pro iDSD+ Parasound Halo 21 + FoCAL)
'Ole Audiophile To Paul: I personally own & use a twenty year old DVD unit that does show 'some' superiority over a CD unit, it was a first generation DVD-Audio player that used a CD only feature called Double Remaster where it played back CDs at 176.4 with three levels a variables. Now, luck to you explaining the differences between a DVD Audio capable player & your run of the mill DVD Video player to the masses my friend. Safe to call it what it was this long in, it was a Panasonic DVD F-85 five disc changer.
A whole lot older & a bit slower & more awkward, the unit still works as advertised, go figure. It's a Panasonic! wow, I wait with bated breath for its eventual demise.../Sure wouldn't have happened with a Sony, one can bet on that from my personal experience.
I have a CD player, about 15 years old and recently replaced the drive tray mechanism, including the laser. Guess what ? the drive was a dvd drive. Bought a drop-in replacement together with a spare. Good for a few more years. By that time, the tech will be there to extract all the info from a cd, I hope.
@@tadeusz1 "By that time, the tech will be there to extract all the info from a cd" -- This is what I was referring to. The tech is _already there_ to extract the info from a CD. It's been there since the mid-late 90s. All it takes is a CD-ROM drive and some software - like Exact Audio Copy or cdparanoia. I've been partial to Plextor drives, since they expose good error correction data to help discover when an audio sector may not have been read perfectly, so the software can retry automatically. But they're not the only ones that do that. With the right hardware and software, there's nothing of any consequence on the CD that doesn't end up in the ripped file. (The sub-channels don't, but that's mostly positioning data which has no purpose outside of the CD anyway. All of the audio data is there, and that's all that matters.)
@Baba Ganush If using analog outs, understandable since you would be using the Dac and analog audio circuits of the DVD or bd player, so no mystery there. If using digital out like coax, optical or hdmi, sound quality should mostly depend on the external dac or prepro or receiver used for da conversion, assuming similar amps used If you are a bits are bits person and don’t believe disc transport or jitter affect sound quality, then you shouldn’t care what disc player is used with a digital output
@Baba Ganush another issue could be the blu ray or DVD player up sampling CDs to 48, 96 or 192khz, which could easily affect the sound. Many dvd and bd players do this by default. You need to turn off upsampling in the player’s setup menus Some players may also have a digital filter option in their settings So for meaningful comparison among disc players, all these menu options need to be off, then use digital out to the same external dac/prepro/receiver/amps If you plan to compare disc players analog out sound quality, you should also be aware of these menu settings, which may or may not be applied to the analog outs
You look like a master. Can you point me in the right direction? I have a Mark Levinson no.27 amp. When I turned it on I heard a strong pop on the right speaker and then the unit went into protection mode. Even time after that when I turn it on the power switch would pop back to the off position, I only have the pwr cable plugged in. The power light still lights, fuse is good. Any guidance from anyone would be greatly appreciated.
Paul, DVD drives operate at two different wavelengths, sometimes (always?) with two separate lasers entirely. It’s very common for PlayStation 2s or 3s to have one ‘laser’ die but the others still be perfectly functional, rendering them unable to play some games, for example.
Slightly surprised by the answer, I'd have thought there would be some difference in how 'focused' the laser is in a dvd-rom when playing cd's. since many would be variable. One of the main selling points when I bought a Sony S7700 almost 25 years ago, was their dual lens. I guess c2c error correction would maybe be something too, but not sure about that in players, maybe moreso a thing in computer drives.
Probably doesn't, just buffers enough (a few seconds worth) so that the buffer doesn't empty as it's filling rate varies (as a result of keeping the output clock steady while the input jitters) for the rest of the CD play time. That's not very well phrased, but I hope you get the idea! (I have no personal experience of the Perfectwave, just an engineering background.)
I play my cd’s on my blue ray player using the orange digital cable sound outlet to my amp and the sound is like night and day compared to using your red and black av cables. Its amazing.
Blanket assumptions of any sort are destined to lead you astray here. The transport: The actual mechanical components really only need to be good enough to get a reliable RF stream from the disc. It doesn't have to be perfect, there's enough redundancy in the encoding to account for misinterpreted optics. That was entirely intentional, and is the only reason early players worked at all. There's actually software that can read C1 and C2 error statistics from a PC CD-ROM drive and graph the bits recovered vs. position on the disc. It's fascinating to see how common errors actually are, and you can _still_ get a bit-perfect copy that will compare as 100% identical over multiple reads. So, is the "transport" important? Not particularly. It has to be "good enough." Remember, even if you go to heroics to balance the spindle, lock the CLV servo into super-accurate resolution, paint the edges of your disc black to prevent diffraction, etc etc etc., the disc itself still has imperfections that cause it to wobble up and down relative to the lens, and for the spiral track to be slightly off-center to the spindle, among tons of other pedestrian issues. In addition, the lens has to track the spiral within its field of view, and then ask the sled controller to move the whole pickup assembly outward by a smidge every now and then. How much of a distraction is THAT while trying to read pits at the hundreds-of-nm scale? The controller chipset that handles all of the servos, spindle speed, optics focusing, etc. -- that's pretty important, but it got to be a trivial exercise a long time ago. Trust me. If you can get a $30 CD-ROM to track a disc spinning at TWENTY-FOUR TIMES its nominal speed of 500RPM, then a 1x drive is going to have absolutely no problem whatsoever, even with COTS chipsets. The IC(s) that handle EFM decoding, error correction, and that sort of thing -- also important. This determines how well the player deals with read anomalies. Again, it's pretty easy to get an essentially perfect result with common parts. We've been doing it for 40 years. The difference between CD and DVD doesn't matter at all. The DVD parts aren't playing your CD. Usually. There are _ some_ players that will use the red laser, but it can't read CD-R and CD-RW discs, so if your DVD player can, from an optical perspective, it has a CD player packed in alongside the DVD player, so essentially, there is no difference. The spindle needs to be able to spin a little faster, but that's not a big ask. The servos have to be tighter, but that resolution doesn't really affect the ability to track a disc with pits twice as wide, and aren't necessarily better than the circuits already in a good CD player. Once the RF is acquired from the optics, it goes into a buffer of anywhere from a couple KB (a CD audio sector is roughly 2KB, and basically needs to be read into memory, in its entirety, to do all the decoding and error-correction anyway) to the extreme case, time-shifted to play back the entire audio program at a later time -- like when ripped to a WAV file. There's no such thing as "jitter" issues from a transport. It's entirely the responsibility of the digital-to-analog converter to turn a buffered pool of bits into a precisely-clocked playback of samples. Jitter from the transport itself is entirely, 100%, beyond a shadow of any doubt, completely inconsequential. It's GOING to be bursty. It HAS to be bursty. There's no way to play a digital audio medium without dealing in bursts of data. It isn't analog, it's not processed as it comes off the disc. It sits waiting to be fetched by the audio half of the player, to the point where _the disc's speed_ is determined by the timing needs of the playback engine. Now, in some cases, the term "transport" encompasses the part of the player that turns the raw data stream into samples, and then clocks it via a digital audio output -- SPDIF or whatever. That's all well and good, and that signal contains a clock that will be recovered by the external DAC. _However,_ the DAC itself can use its _own_ clock, synchronized via PLL or some-such, to re-clock the samples to a more precise interval that is at the same _average_ rate as the transport. So again, not really a big deal unless the transport is SO out of step that its speed changes considerably over time. Alright, so the transport has to meet a threshold of "competent" -- what's next? There's a lot said about power supplies. E.g., is linear better than SMPS? No. Not at all. For one thing, they have different noise characteristics. SMPS have high-frequency noise, which can be bothersome in that it tends to couple between circuits, but it's easier to filter out. Linear supplies have mains-frequency noise. 50/60Hz ripple takes a BIG filter to attenuate, but it's also slow-moving and can be relatively easily compensated-for. Ultimately, there are lots of parts of the player that just don't care -- motor control, digital logic, etc. The analog parts should be so heavily filtered and de-coupled from the power rails that, if the local regulation was done correctly, it literally doesn't matter one lick. Cheap players will use cheap power rail filtering. They'll use cheap clocks in the DAC. They'll use cheap DACs. They'll just cheap analog filters. Premium players will do overkill filtering. They'll use high-quality DACs. They'll use more precise clocks, and/or sophisticated re-clocking from external digital inputs. What about the video circuitry? .... What about it? Sure, it's always possible that analog video outputs will leak sync pulses into the analog audio circuits. The high-frequency digital stuff (HDMI, MPEG decoders, etc.) are all operating well above the audio band, so as long as shielding / grounding / rail isolation is all handled well, the lower harmonics shouldn't be problematic. If they're not handled well, it _will_ be a problem. You can't generalize. But it's not like CD players don't have noise sources. They have digital micro-controllers (read: computers) to handle the user input, timing, positioning, mechanism control, etc. They have motor speed controllers. They have electro-magnet controllers to focus the lens. Again, if the noisy stuff is well isolated from the analog stuff, it doesn't matter. That's true regardless what formats the box will play.
I bought a Philips 204 CD player couple of years back, which has the same chipsets as my old 151. Except 204 uses the fabled CMD-1 mech, instead of lightweight CMD-2 in 151 Never would have believed how much difference that could make... Sure there may be other minor differences between the two as well, 204 has twice the circuitry and sturdier PSU, but still the main chips are the same, and they really don't sound same at all.
I did an AB comparison between a JVC 1991 CD player with a 1 bit 8X over sampling rate and a Toshiba 2008 192khz 24 bit DVD player using duplicate copies of factory made CDs. I couldn't tell them apart if my life depended on it. Using the JVCs fixed output even the output levels were indistinguishable. I really like the JVC model because of its many features including remote adjustable volume, no need to hook up a TV monitor and all controls available on both the remote control and on the player itself. The DVD players were very cheap so I bought a bunch of them including a 5 disc player. The JVC unit has been very reliable with no problems in constant use for 28 years. I'm tempted to buy an identical used backup unit on ebay just in case. It's better than my prior Denon unit that cost 4 times as much and periodically had reliability problems.
My favorite piece of HIGH END VINTAGE audio equipment [circa 1987] is the JVC XL-M700 that not only looks & performs well but also sounds great !! On my JVC XL-M700 I can insert a 6 CD Cartridge & select the albums & songs I want to list to an any order & number of times I want. The addl single tray CD adds more convenience to play an added single cd. I store all my CD album cases in custom displayed oak cabinets and all the CD's in JVC CD numbered Cartridges. I created a spiral bound reference guide that lists each of the 6 CD albums inside each numbered cd cartridge along with specific favorite songs. In addition to all these ease of use benefits, I never have to physically handle my CD's. This JVC CD cartridge system allows me more time to listen to the music instead of trying to find it !!
Hello good morning, I love your channel, and I have a question, I have a yamaha HTR3080 home theater, I want to connect a yamaha EQ-70 equalizer, do you know how to do that? Or if you can with a special cable?
With most Yamaha home theater receivers there’s no way to really connect an equalizer. They really have no need for one, though. What are you trying to equalize on it?
My dad used his first DVD player purchased around early 2001 almost soleley fro play his CDs for near 7 years until it died, and his second one for the same purpose ever since 2008.
As I understand information on discs is duplicated to allow for error correction. My CD player apparently cut the error correction to improve the sound. This resulted in many discs being unreadable until the firmware was updated. The way error correction is handled must be a big factor in the final signal quality.
You can't really "cut" the error correction. There IS redundant information because it's expected that the optical process isn't going to be perfect. The process of turning the signal from the laser into PCM data requires going through a specific set of transformations. You can't omit those and still get a valid result at the end, and even if you could, it wouldn't be "higher quality" -- it would just be wrong some of the time. Using the error-correction as intended should yield a stream that is an exact duplicate of what went on the disc. You can't get any higher-quality than that. My guess is, the firmware had bugs that failed to handle errors correctly. Errors are incredibly common. If your player screws up the process of recovering from them, it will make for a defective player -- as you found out. :-) There is definitely no advantage to it. Nobody would engineer it that way intentionally.
@@michaeltb1358 I hear ya, but I think whoever told you that was mistaken. It doesn't make any sense, at a technical level. And in terms of having a desirable outcome, is about as sensible as having monks duplicate text books by speed-reading to improve transcription accuracy. ;-)
While still being on the stagecoach (at the moat is more like it), I didn't understand very much of the information that was being delivered. However, you are very funny. That's a plus in my book !!! Soooo, for novices like me, can a cd be played on a dvd player ? 😏
Bobbi, it can, however in my limited experience the sound isn't as good as using a dedicated cd player. Perhaps it's due to a mismatch in the laser wavelength as mentioned in this video. I only have a cheap dvd player, so maybe a higher end one would perform better as a pure audio player. The result of playing a cd via a dvd machine is passable, however you might miss some detail in the music which might spoil your enjoyment somewhat. So probably not one for an audiophile. Ian
My .02 is that the CD design spec was to the limit of the physical constraints of the read mechanism and disc at the time . So when you take a smaller wavelength laser the laser edge is more defined and results in less jitter in reading the same CD disc. Also the platter speeds were likely better controlled with DVD and possibly better still with blu-ray Also likely that blu lasers have better read quality to avoid errors. Personally I preferred DVD to SACD sound when done well. Just pull out your old Sopranos TV show and listen to the music at the end of each show. The fidelity is rather impressive even through a lower cost DVD player in IMHO economies of scale of DVD players ( the fastest adopted consumer electronics category of all time) allowed for better sound at similar lower price points than for CD players.
CD, DVD, and BD all use different laser wavelengths. So, in a BD player, you will usually have a blue laser for BD, a red laser for DVD, and an infra-red laser for CD. You don't get the advantages of more precise lasers because you're literally not even using them on lower-density media. It is _possible_ to use a red laser to read CD, but you give up the ability to read CD-R and CD-RW discs completely. The red laser can't "see" the dye.
I use to put a dvd in a cd player and it played audio.My question is what kind of dvd's can do that what's the name brand's and i'm searching for dvd recorders.But what dvd recorders can make can make a dvd play on a cd player ??
Actually it was in 1983; and the first CD Players were available in Japan, and Europe. Then in 1983 CD Players were on the market, such as the Sony 1zero1, in Canada, and USA. Anyway, a great lecture. I'm a bit surprised that the laser assembly, and mechanism is more important than the DA Converter! I read something as you've explained on a web site about as with this topic; however I thought that the DAC was of high importance. That the DAC was of prime consideration to the eventual playback of very good sound.🔉🎵🎶
The DAC _is_ more important. The mech needs merely to be capable, and all of its timing sins will be forgiven by the requirement of a data buffer between the optics and the DAC. There's no way around this. You have to buffer a certain amount of data to do the eight-to-fourteen modulation decoding and error correction. So, jitter (as it comes off the disc) doesn't make any sense at all. Audio samples are going to be made available in bursts of fractions-of-a-second lumps, and it is up to the audio-playback engine to time their individual transmission to the DAC, and, BTW, to inform the mecha controller whether to speed up or slow down the disc speed to keep the data buffer full but not overflowing.
@@nickwallette6201 Thank you very much for the added technical information, and clarifying what significance a DAC toward an analogue result, Nick. My case, instead of eventually purchasing a CD Transport as I had planned, and researched; I decided not to even though there is plenty of promotion, and advertising to make that separate Connection! I chose to have one of my used CD Players repaired, an AMC CD-6; to maybe get it connected as a Transport. At present I have a used Marantz SACD/DVD DV6400 connected by way of Blue Jean Coaxial Cable in good condition. Technician who is also familiar with Audio, advised on this option; since in my case I was considering a less expensive choice that is as good, and efficient. Web site called Audio Science Review suggested a similar choice instead of an expensive CD Transport. Besides, I've run out of shelf space! I now have up to 4 CD Players of four brands, and from 3 eras connected to my Sony AV Receiver of 85W (bought in 2012); that I only use for Audio. I'm not going to post them because my reply is already long. Also, an HK T25 Turntable (1980s), and HK TD212 Cassette Deck are connected.🔉🎼🎵
Agree with you. Big difference in transports. Actually more than between dacs, in my experience. I did test High end Pioneer Dvd against high end Sony ES disc player - both with it ows dac - and with an external dac. I recognised more sound difference between the transports, that between the dacs. 😊
do they make a cd or dvd player without mega bass audio another words a flat eq for a pa system playback ? I've been using you tube but every video has a different eq.
Once again just not true. The first Pioneer Bluray players didn't even play CDs. Oppo DVD 980 player could play some of the worst burned discs, both CD and movie bootlegs.
@@j.t.cooper2963 I have cds from 1986 that look like they were made today. I take care, that doesn't change the fact that I had four different CD players that would skip and never had any skip on Blu-Ray players.
The way it works is you use the optical output on the DVD player and use it as a "cd transport" through a DAC instead of using the rca cables into the left and right inputs and using it as just a cd player. The difference in the sound vs using the L/R outputs is phenomenal.
I have a first gen and a hitachi an 90s onkyo carrusel, some discmans and several dvd players some bluray players, iomega in my pc etc, all read the same quality, the only main diference are the lack of formats(cd rw, sacd, mp3 etc) and the speed of reading discs
CD-players always have all the bottons on the faceplate whereas with many DVD and Bluray players you ave forever looking after the remote + many nnow omit the lcd screen. But soundwise it's not worlds apart. Some Cd-players are a bit better, the MASH ones from Technics are the first that come to mind, but another pair of speakers will have a much greater effect on the audio. ;-)
My experience has been the DAC in DVD or CD players can vary wildly even within the same brand and price point, and this is what's making the difference everyone is mentioning in the comments.
Yes. Most of the comments here don’t seem to take the DAC into consideration. It’s super important. Most DVD players and even most dedicated CD players have DACs that are either suboptimal or outright crap. No matter the brand or model of player, if the DAC isn’t any good, the sound will be compromised. It isn’t 100% about the DAC, but it cannot be ignored. You can throw $1500 at player but if it has a $2 DAC, much of your money is wasted. Other side of the coin; a $20 player can benefit from a good outboard DAC, but probably will never sound as good as a mechanically and optically good player with the same DAC.
I have done this comparison with my Sony UBP-X800 and Sony MXD-D3, and yeah everything you said is the truth, my system is half vintage and new stuff, with the CD player connected to my equalizer it sounds as good though, more gain on the signal makes it sound the same
I have that same 4K player and it does sound nice for CD's but my Yamaha CD S300 which is a cheap $300 CD player sounds much better than the 4K player.
