CD player recommendation.

A recent blind test found that a redbook CD transpirt and DAC was chosen over top Hi Res 24/192 + dacs. Rather than noting whether people could hear a difference it's also worth noting which sounded 'better' as well. And the tester chaired the AES and formed Monitor Audio and written books on loudspeakers.

All and any blind test on this issue can not add up people's scores. It is one subject who must be tested and that person's results evaluated.

9/10 meets statistical significance to the 0.5 level... but so does 59/100 or 6/10 ten times with one miss. The latter test needs to be conducted in audio but it isnt being done. Again 59/100 is .05 level. And reduces errors in the test. If you see some test where someone is deemed failing a dbt because he got 6/10 or 9/16 congrats you just read a test that is total shyte.

 

no, it's 19/20 to get to the 0.05 level

can't make out the rest of your post but the text is incorrect

 

No it is not. You can achieve 95% confidence with less than 19/20. It depends on the design of the experiments to do the test. Not all ABX experiments are the same design and require the same correct/incorrect responses to reach 95% confidence. A lot also depends on the cognitive and physiological psychology and human factors aspects of the design of the experiments and testing when dealing with human subjects. Humans aren't machines. We don't process inputs the way machines do. ABX testing methods don't take that into account.

 

I do not know of any experimental design that will allow 9/10 correct to yield either 0.50 or 0.05 significance levels...

you will have to unlearn me from the dozen graduate level statistics courses I took, but go ahead...

I did assume parametric stats. & it was decades ago - a link is fine

 

You'll need to unlearn me from my undergraduate degrees in industrial engineering / human factors and computer science. The industrial engineering side included statistics and design and analysis of experiments along with courses in human factors and cognitive psycology. Do an ABX test in Foobar. You do not need 19/20 to get 95% confidence. The ABX test in Foobar has done the math right for the design of their particular style of ABX test. I checked.

I do not believe the style of ABX test as done in Foobar is appropriate for testing the type of audible difference there is between high-res and redbook res, and even less appropriate for testing the difference there is between a good transport and a bad transport. The human brain is just not suited to that sort of difference. The human brain can ABX audio where there is an actual artifact (like pre-ringing due to lossy compression algorithms). The human brain is not so good at doing an ABX test against listening for more subtle differences in overall audio quality like there is when comparing high-res to CD-res. I can hear a difference between high-res and CD-res. I also understand why I'll never be able to pass an ABX test to demonstrate that difference. It's due to human factors and cognitive psychology.

 

Boy, I could not disagree more strongly. Most CD players do sound pretty much the same, lacking musicality and convincing dynamic quality (compared to a nice analog kit, that is). But I was loaned a $15,000 Aesthetix Romulus CD player, and it is simply astonishing how much more musically satisfying it sounds compared to any other CD player I have ever heard, including a similarly expensive AMR that was loaned to me about 3 years ago to use at the audio shows.

CD players do not "sound the same", and sometimes a particular model VERY MUCH stands out as significantly superior. Anyone who buys a CD player because it was recommended or because it is on sale, is merely accepting mediocrity.

 

I'm not a foobarizer, I'm a scientist and would not want to rely on them for correct statistical design. If you have any equations or statistics texts to offer, I'm all ears.

 

I'm not going to attempt to cover an entire course work of design and analysis of experiments in a forum post. Wikipedia has a good summary of the basics for an ABX test. 9 correct out of 10 trials will get you 95% confidence. 15 correct out of 20 trials will get you 95% confidence. The design of the ABX test as done in Foobar will get you to 95% confidence faster due to the more advanced type of ABX test that foobar implements compared to the basic ABX test as analysed in the Wikipedia article. The math and theory to demonstrate that is more than I'm going to attempt to explain in a forum post. The people who designed the ABX test for Foobar have published their math for how many trials are necessary to get various confidence levels. I'm not going to attempt to search Google for that. The analysis is out there on the web if you're interested.

 

This was a good choice for me, memory player and DAC by PS Audio

 

I have replaced my audio research 2 with a audio research cd 3 mk II
Great player

 

Nowadays there is no need to spend big money in order to get top sound quality from a cd player.The format was mastered long ago.

If you want new? Nad C516bee is a nice unit for $200

If you want a great sounding CD player for under $75..Then just buy any second-hand player off ebay with the Philips TDA 1541 or TDA 1543 DAC's...Or any Sony with the 1bit pulse DAC.

 

Sorry but that is complete tosh. There are some decent players to be had for little money, but to get realistic and convincing fidelity unfortunately still requires some investment. Going back to a budget player after a really good DAC ( take your pick ) is quite shocking actually.

 

I've mentioned this a few times regarding Cambridge CD players - especially in the Topaz range. My son bought one and found the player inserted gaps between tracks that should play continuously. (This is ordinary CD playback - not MP3).
The design fault was highlighted some time ago on this forum.

Cambridge Audio CD10 and CD gaps

 

I really love my Nakamichi CDP-2A with the Philips TDA1541A DAC. It makes CD listening very smooth and musical sounding.

 

"Some investment" being approximately £200: Marantz CD5004 CD player Marantz CD5004 CD player Measurements

 

I currently use a 1988 Philips CD-380 which i picked up in mint condition for £40 on ebay.It has the TDA 1543 .Both that DAC and the 1541 have a nice 'analog' sound signature.

 

I'm a big believer in the TDA1541A, I have the Marantz CD75 MKII from new in the mid 80s and the CD50 Special Edition that I picked up recently from a charity shop for 40 quid!

I've A/B'd with many more expensive options to so say match with my more expensive amp/speakers combo and none have made want to change.

 

What is complete tosh is the insistence by some that audiophile/high-end sound quality can only be achieved through pieces of very expensive equipment that are built like battle ships..The equation of 'more money in/better build = Better sound quality ' mainly only applies to turntables nowadays.A cheap portable cd player can sound as good in blind listening as a 10k flagship.I know it doesn't sit well with the audiophile's sense of fair play,but that is the way it is.I'm quite happy to match my £40 philips CD player with 6K Tannoy Ardens because i know through experience that high-end CD players would offer little if any improvement over my player.

He is a link to a discussion about one of the cheap '1bit pulse' Sony players i recommended.
Sony CDP-715E - is it a 'classic' yet?

'The 715 /715E is a superb sounding player.
It has the clarity and 3D imaging that very few CD players can match regardless of cost.It deserves to be used in very good systems.
I have tried a lot of CD players and DACs and the only one that bettered it [and only just] was an Accuphase DP 700 and that is a $24,000 player.The two players sound remarkably similar just that the Accuphase has a touch more bass and refinement.Much better than the Sony ES players,Esoteric DV50,a Vincent CDS8,Minimax DAC plus,several Audio Gd DACs including the highly praised Reference 5,Moon 300D DAC,Twisted Pair Buffalo Sabre DAC ,Micromega Mydac etc.None of them came even close the the 715.I gave up on DACs after all that.'

 

Ive had a boatload of TDA1541 players - some are pretty good, in fact I use a Marantz player with the same chip in my bedroom system and it sound just fine with the Luxman receiver and Epos speakers, but putting it ( or any of the other budget alleged giant killers ) on my main system is just a huge retrograde step. No offence but I ditched Naim years ago, overhyped, overpriced and a long way from a clear window into recordings. Each to his own ! Most of the power supplies in budget equipment are utterly under specced and inadequate and the circuit boards usually have dirt cheap op amps everywhere, believe me these might measure OK but they will degrade the sound. Am I saying they cannot sound fine - no, nor am I saying that every expensive CD player is better by default, no. On paper some very cheap players measure as well or better than many a high end player ( NOS in particular ). I live a long way from London but if you want to compare an Audionote DAC 4.1 against your Sony Goliath slayer I'm all ears !

 

Personal preference and taste make a difference to ones enjoyment of a CD player/system, some people like to use the loudness button! If this reviewer feels this CD player is better than Sony's more expensive players then good for him but even the Sony technicians that made/designed it clearly disagree as they made more expensive players that sound different. I for one (limited experience) have never heard a "giant killing" CD player. I have found vintage played with adorable sound BUT, imo, they don't offer the pinnacle of sound reproduction.

 

Yes i gave up on Naim gear as well recently. Regarding the TDA1541.Even though excellent i do find the sound slightly dark and two dimensional compared to the TDA1543 or 1bit Sony's.Regarding a 'clear window into the recording' ?..Valve equipment in my opinion can give a rose tinted view out of that window rather than a totally transparent one.

 

Agreed, which is why you should try Hypex N core with your Ardens, unbelievably good !

 

Sounds interesting.I do like monoblock amps..Will check out the reviews.