Laserdisc for CD playback.

I read here on the forum (can't seem to locate the thread now), that a laserdisc player can sound great as a CD player. That they sound "more analog-like". I welcome comments and suggestions. My current CD players include a Marantz CD6004, Marantz PMD371 (which sounds surprisingly good) and a Tascam CD-RW900SL. I have owned Philips 960s, Rega Planets, Saturns and a few others. I bought the Regas on the recommendation they sounded more "analog-like" too, but was disappointed.

I suppose a Pioneer LD would be the way to go, what model or models should I be looking for?

Oh, and I do not care about the picture quality, as I would be using this ONLY for a CD player through the analog RCA out jacks.

 

LD and CD are different format. Some laser disc have analog audio and the latest one came with digital audio also

 

Yep, and staring around 1984 LD could play CD as well.

 

I remember back in the late 80s and early 90s that was a big thing. Theta scammed tons of people by just reboxing a Phillips Laser Disc player. Personally I think good CD Player transports caught up and in some cases surpassed Laser Disc Players in the late 90s. Personally I prefer FLACs from my computer to my DAC then I do CDs played through it. No decernable difference and tons more convenience.

 

I don't think that LD players are more analog-like. I know back in the day in the 90s Philips LD transports were used in some ultra-high-end CD players, and I think I've read of folks who swear the gigantic players spin CDs with very low "jitter" (which I think is mis-timing of the analog clock component of the digital signal). LDs are huge and heavy and spin incredibly fast. Using an LD transport to play CDs is under-stressing the mechanism like nuts. Kind of like using your stove on nothing but the lowest simmer mode.

I would suspect that with modern CD transports any supposed advantages that LD transports may have had in the past have been eliminated.

 

Yeah, you are probably right. The advantages of using a good LD player for CDs may have been superior to a CD player at one time, but probably not so much as technology has marched on.

 

I think *if* you are in the market for a CD player, you can't do better than an LD machine. They're simply way over-engineered for the task. The motors are bigger than the discs itself. They're meant to spin discs that approach 1lb, spin them multiple times faster, and the optics are meant to cleanly pick up a high bandwidth analog video signal which is much more demanding than simply reading a digital signal off a CD where there is a considerable margin for error.


What I can tell you from experience is that they absolutely sail through discs with pressing issues or damage and can easily play discs that will absolutely choke up other players. As for sound, that could vary from model to model - I'd recommend using an outboard DAC anyway.



I can also tell you that technology has marched on. It's 2016 and having an optical disc playback machine seems silly when there are options that are more convenient and more capable. I'd much sooner invest in a good network streamer/DAC and NAS.


If you do go for LD - Pioneer only. Go for a unit that's capable of both-side play and has digital outputs - these tend to be the best units in terms of build quality and performance as well. Get a few movies too why not. Lots of great stuff that will never make it to DVD or Blu Ray.

 

I would want an optical playback machine because I have 5000 CDs. I have no plans on downloading to a computer hard drive. As for streaming, I do Pandora, but only as an alternative to FM radio, not as a "hi-fi" experience. I pay for the "upgrade" in sound quality because there are no commercials.

My computer service is 1.5 DSL, as there are no high speed choices on my corner of the neighborhood. Even Pandora buffers from time to time. For me to invest in a network streamer/NAS does not make sense in my case. If I like an artist, I tend to buy their entire canon. I like Pandora when I am working so I do not have to choose which 5 CDs to put in the changer, and occasionally I hear something new I like.

I do not buy movies. I love to watch movies, but I do not collect movies. Watch them once, why watch them again? So, if the ONLY advantage of a LD is the heavy duty transport, and I would have to rely on an outboard DAC to realize the hi

 

Back before I reinvigorated my large record collection by putting together a two channel system (The Dark Ages), when I played music at home it was through the home theater system. I did notice then that CDs sounded significanyly better played on my Pioneer DVL-919 laserdisc player then on the Sony DVD-CD player or the Denon model I later used. I doll have the LD player, one of these days I'll hook it up to the two channel system and listen to some CDs direct to the amp and via my DAC, it should be interesting!

All that said I would not recommend anyone getting an LD player just for CDs, there are much better options.

 

Just as a sidenote to this conversation: I, for one, want a decent but cheap CD-only machine, because my stereo is all pre- modern era components and trying to force DACs and streaming FLAC and all that is much more of a pain in the @ss (to me, anyway) then just connecting a CD player. Plus, I like pulling out the CD, looking at the cover, looking at the disc, etc. I refuse to change; there, I said it.

 

I've owned a number of LD players and found the Pioneer to be the best built and engineered (Sony being the worst). For audio, their standard line LD players gradually improved with each model series, reached their peak with the Pioneer CLD-D703/704 models. (The later "CLV" series of LD/DVD combo players actually pale in comparison.) Pioneer's hi-end Elite line ended with the CLD-97 & 99 models, which shared quite a bit with the regular line CLD-D703/704 models.

It is true that handling Laserdiscs requires a beefy transport, large motor, heavy clamping, and structural engineering to keep the large mass of a 12" platter damped and rock-steady at high RPMs. That said, these later era machines were designed to be excellent CD players. They have a "Direct CD" mode (button) which sets up the machine for audio-only CD playback: It opens a smaller, separate CD-sized drawer for the 5" disc, kills all the video circuitry to prevent signal interference, and reduces the start-up time for the CD playback. Pioneer also included their best DACs (at the time) beginning with the 700 series. The Elite CLD-99 added a "Legato Link" circuit that was supposed to enhance audio playback. It might have added more detail to movie soundtracks, but CDs sounded better without it (to my ears). Fortunately, the Legato Link could be defeated. The 703/704 never had it.

When playing a comparatively feather-weight CD, the LD transport is hardly taxed at all. It's also not a big stretch for an LD player to run at CD speeds. A standard CLV laserdisc rotation gradually slows from 1800 to 600 rpm during playback, which is reaching near the CD start-up speed of about 495 rpm IIRC.

All of this is not to say that an LD machine makes the best CD player, but you could certainly do worse. There are many flimsy CD transports out there--even in some pricey stand-alone CD players. An industrial strength LD machine might seem like overkill, but in the later Pioneer models the CD playback design was not an afterthought. DACs have certainly advanced in the last two decades, but you can use the digital outs if you want.

 

That's pretty cool, I had no idea about that "direct CD" mode - my D604 has the seperate smaller CD tray but definitely no direct mode that I know of. Still it seems that they took that functionality very seriously. Definitely not just an afterthought.

That's not to say that there aren't some laserdisc players with great DACs, but much better could be had in 2016 so the attraction would be the transport and optics IMO.
There are also many music-related videos that never made it to CD, lots of live performances for example. Since pretty much every disc made since the late 80's has a 16/44 PCM soundtrack, you can essentially think of them as a big 12" CD if you wanted just saying that having the capability to play them back opens up your library to other material you may or may not be interested in.


Also, to clarify, your internet speed would have no bearing on the performance of a NAS/streamer setup - that is entirely dependent on your local area network, which is dictated by the equipment you use. There's typically enough bandwidth with a good router to properly deliver 24/192 audio, even wirelessly if you've got a good router. For 16/44 it's barely a struggle at all. It's the same data being delivered to your DAC, arguably even more reliably than optical disc. You wouldn't need to download anything - the discs can be ripped losslessly and put on disk for both archival and playback. 5000 CDs are a lot easier to manage on a small hard drive than on a shelf but that's just my opinion

 

Thank you, but I am not interested in ripping 5000 CDs when all I have to do is play them in my CD player. Other than portability, I do not see the payoff. I have CD players in my cars and I never listen to music when on foot, or sitting in a restaurant, shopping, etc. I have my CD arranged alphabetically by artist's LAST name (not first name like computer files do) and then chronologically by artist's original release date. I have no trouble finding a CD I want to play.

I may buy a LD for a transport and maybe also a good DAC/Streamer combo.

 

I'm with Scatterbrane. Ripping my CD collection to FLAC would be crushingly time consuming, and what would be the benefit? The convenience of opening a computer file instead of picking up a CD and putting it in a player. No thank you.

 

Seems a bit odd to pursue a 10-25 year old unit that relies so much on mechanics in order to operate. Assuming you're OK with chasing down rather old units, I think vintage hi-end dedicated CD players would offer more bang-for-the-buck. Maybe some deals on older Esoteric models?

 

Some people like to have all their music "on the go", or available instantly in every room in their house. Or just feel better that their well-curated collection would survive any disaster, once ripped to files and stored off-site.

 

I understand - part of the reason that I can't imagine ripping my collection to FLAC is because I've already ripped (most of) it to high-bitrate MP3, and I have DLNA devices on two floors and have the music available in most of the house that way, as well as automatically uploaded to Google Play Music where all my MP3s live in the cloud available for playback virtually anywhere that I have an internet connections. So I get the ripping/portability idea.

Also, I have high-rez capability on my computer thanks to an E-Mu 1212m audio card, and I have downloaded high-rez content and can play it connected to my audio system.

But in my main listening room which is my office I like physical media a whole lot more. I find it easier and much nicer to select music from my library by being able to see shelves of titles. Going to my computer would be great if I knew the exact album and/or artist I want to listen to, but if I just want to browse and pick something completely off-the-cuff, which I very often do, nothing beats a shelf full of media to pick over.

I guess the question is what would I get from a FLAC conversion of all my CDs? When I converted them to MP3 and set up the DLNA I got portability, ability to play anywhere in the house, ability to load a portable for camping, walking, driving, etc. etc. Going to FLAC now would give me the ability to play from my computer without having to get up and load a physical disc. Sound would be exactly the same. but I'd lose artwork/lyrics/etc which can be important particularly with box sets. In other words the gain would be very little for me. Definitely not worth the trouble for me right now.

 

Flood, fire, tornado, theft. I decided, what is easier for me? Ripping all my 2000+ CDs, vs. replacing all of them if something happens to them? There is no amount of money or time that would allow 100% replacement of what I've acquired over the past 25 years.

Remember, you're not losing access to those CDs as you have today, just securing their integrity and convenience. Basically for free, at the expense of time.

Also, I'm not "going to my computer" to pick the next thing I want to listen to. I literally grab my phone or iPad, and open a list of every album, artist, track, genre, etc. and simply tap. I can scroll or select anything in under 2 seconds, while I'm walking from the kitchen to the bedroom or to my patio outside. Or even on a vacation from Texas to Virginia. My music follows me, I'm not bound to where the shelves of plastic and paper are

 

I used to own a Pioneer CLD-97, one of the more highly-regarded laserdisc players. It was fantastic as a CD player! Gave my EAD 7000 DAC a serious run for its money.

But not because it was a laserdisc player. It was because it was a precise, overbuilt optical disc player.

Other LD players, even within the Pioneer line, might not fare so well.

So while it could happen, why buy a decades-old player with who-knows-what kind of mileage on it? Lasers wear out in the very best players. And if you found a vintage new-in-box upscale laserdisc player, you'd pay through the nose.

There are plenty of recent-model CD players available, new and used.

Let LD do a graceful fade.

 

So, what I am saying is I sold my 3000+ record collection, my SOTA Sapphire turntable, Eminent Technology Tonearm and 3 or 4 different phono cartridges, Grado, Dynavector, Sumiko etc back around 1999-2000. I did record some LPs on my CD recorder and they sound pretty good, better than the commercial CDs of the same titles (don't know how or why). What I am looking for is a CD player that will sound as good as my old analog system. None I have listed in my OP have done the trick. I was hoping a good LD would get me closer.

 

Budget?

Your history suggests familiarity with quality equipment.

And if your CD-recorder sounds good, why not stick with that?

Or...

In a best-of-both worlds consideration, how about a used pioneer universal player from the mid-late-200os (they were highly regarded for their transports; I had a few), and add a new DAC. The latter has considerable bearing on sound characteristics. and is available in a wide variety of sonics and price points. The uni would add SACD capability.

 

Well it is not that the CD recorder sounds any better with commercial CDs, what I am saying is the CD-rs I made from LPs sound better than the commercial CD equivalents. I do not understand this. If I can make a CD-r that sounds good, why can't CDs be mastered to sound like analog, without analog's limitations of course?

Yes, maybe the universal player would be a good idea!

 

That's a whole 'nother argumentative thread.

 

Well it confuses me. This experience tells me that CD format is not the problem. It is the people who master for CDs that somehow filter out the analog magic. If only they were to INCREASE the DR and low end frequency response and not fiddle with the rest of it, maybe CD CAN sound like analog? Until I made CDr copies of my LPs, I thought it was the CD format I did not like. So, now I know it is something else, and I have no idea what it could be.

 

With all these CD players I have, maybe the logical thing to buy is a nice separate DAC. After all each of these CD players have both optical and RCA S/PDIF digital outs.