Which is the Best for REGULAR CD music

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Shion_ca, Nov 4, 2002.

  1. Shion_ca

    Shion_ca Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2002
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Most of my collection is comprised of regular CD's, I've listened to the shannling and will listen to some other 600-700 dollar players but want to get a good idea of what's available for 400 (Can) so which of the following (in your opinion) is the best music player ...

    The pioneer DV-656A
    The phillips DVD 763SA
    The panasonic RP82.

    I currently have the RP82 burning in at home to see how it sounds. Has anyone compared these? Or listened to any of them in regular CD mode? Have any thoughts on how they'll compare to the CD quality of the NAD 541i?

    Cheers.
     
  2. KeithH

    KeithH Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2000
    Messages:
    9,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Shion, I have not used any of the DVD players you listed with CDs, but I would be very, very surprised if any of them could keep up with the NAD C 541i, Shanling CD player (solid-state model being considered here), or any players in the $600-700 range. Generally speaking, dedicated CD players are noticeably better than comparably priced DVD players, and here, you are considering DVD players that are considerably cheaper than the CD players you are testing. If you can spend $600-700 for a CD player, you will undoubtedly do better than what the budget DVD players will offer. It is true that the Pioneer '656A and Panasonic 'RP82 offer DVD-Audio playback, which should not be overlooked, but CD replay is still likely to be lackluster.
     
  3. Shion_ca

    Shion_ca Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2002
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This was my initial supposition, but I'd like to know for the extra money exactly how much more I'm getting so I thought it couldn't hurt to audition. In addition there appear funny reviews like the following claiming that a sony NS500 DVD player is superior to the NAD in regular CD play. Probably not accurate but hey, who knows?
    http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...r-10-2002.html
    Not always is money directly related to quality and I like the pioneer sound. So far I'm not impressed with the panasonic RP82. Sounds too bright. It's still burning in.
     
  4. Alf S

    Alf S Banned
    BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2000
    Messages:
    3,477
    Likes Received:
    621
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Real Name:
    Alfer
    Shion,

    Curious, what exactly is "buring in"? What purpose does this serve?
     
  5. Shion_ca

    Shion_ca Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2002
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Some on this board believe that equipment changes in sound over the first 30 hours or so of play. Potential causes for this are that parts that haven't spun, turned, dac'ed, take some operation time to "settle in". Perhaps heat causes expansion in wiring which never entirely contracts, whatever... Some believe that wires can experience this phenominon as well, though the legitimacy of which I can't comment as to.

    Higher end manufacturers will sometimes give "burn-in" times associated with their equipment to reviewers. If you read audiophile reviews they generally leave the item running for anywhere from 30 - 100 hours before reviewing. For the sake of not getting accused of not giving the equipment time to "burn-in" I figured I'd leave it running to avoid any arguments of this nature.

    In general people characterize a brighter and thinner upper range and mid range sound with newer components which then tend towards mellowing and deepening as time goes on. While this may be the case it's also possible that this effect is psychosematic and indicative of the reviewer getting used to the sound over time. However audiophile reviewers wouldn't leave their speaker running as they "burn-in" their cables and so wouldn't be subject to this. They may however be biased towards thinking everything needs to be burned in and thus affect their own judgement of devices they know to be out of the box. Double blind tests would be of some use in this regard. My personal hunch is that yes something does change, but it's in no way based on reasonably scientific data and so I remain cautiously skeptical.

    Now were you just baiting me, or had you indeed never heard mention of the phenominon?
     
  6. KeithH

    KeithH Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2000
    Messages:
    9,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Shion, you know what they say about opinions. Everyone has one. There are bound to be people out there who will feel that the Sony 'NS500V is a better CD player than the NAD C 541i. I think it is safe to say that this will not be a majority opinion. In any event, there are several possible explanations for why the reviewer rated the Sony unit better than the NAD player. Here are a few:
    * He was objective and simply found the Sony unit to sound better to his ears. Let's consider giving the reviewer the benefit of the doubt. Undoubtedly, the Sony and NAD units sound different, and perhaps the reviewer simply preferred the sound of the Sony unit.
    * The idea of an SACD player that also plays DVDs for under $200 (the price of the 'NS500V when Sony phased it out) clouded his judgment. Perhaps the reviewer was so jazzed by SACD replay and the nice list of features in a budget component that he became biased into thinking that the do-it-all Sony unit (or do-it-most since it doesn't do DVD-Audio, HDCD, or MP3) had to be better than the "vanilla" NAD CD player (vanilla in looks and features).
    * Perhaps the reviewer has a bias against NAD components. Some people do. NAD components look very utilitarian. In addition, NAD has developed a reputation for turning out CD players that are sensitive to scratched CDs and are not reliable. This reputation has developed from comments all over the web that people have made about problems found with the older C 520, C 540, C 521, and C 541 players.
    These are a few possible explanations for the reviewer's vantage point. Finally, I feel that there is far more irresponsible journalism out there on the Internet than in print. While one should take all opinions with a grain of salt, I feel one has to be especially careful with what one reads on the Internet. As a result, feel free to flat out ignore everything I write here. [​IMG]
     
  7. ReggieW

    ReggieW Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Keith,

    I too read this review over at Secrets and also found it hard to swallow. I have never heard the NAD, but I have heard the Sony many times, and the CD playback via analog is nothing to write home about. If NAD is asking 500.00 for something that can't best a budget sony DVD player, then NAD must be running a scam - Which I don't believe of course. NAD does have a reputation for making outstanding CD players, though some have had quality control issues in the past.

    Reg
     
  8. KeithH

    KeithH Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2000
    Messages:
    9,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reggie, well said. I have not heard the NAD C 541i yet, but I have heard the Sony 'NS500V. Like you, I was unimpressed with the 'NS500V as a CD player. I seriously doubt that it competes with the NAD player.
     
  9. Lewis Besze

    Lewis Besze Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 1999
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    While everybody has their opinions,none more valid then the other[opposing],even if it represents a "majority".
    If I was to purchase one of these players,I would auditions those my self[which the author should do as well],and let others speculate.
     

Share This Page