shauns@vice.UUCP (04/26/84)
I promised that I would report on my A/B comparisons of CD players, so here
are my impressions:
Other Items in the chain:
Hafler 110 preamp
Audio Research power amp, 100W/channel
Snell speakers, floor standing models(model # not known)
Players:
Yamaha CD-1
Yamaha CD-X1
NEC 803
Test Discs:
Ravel/Dutoit/Montreal Daphnis & Chloe
Sony Sampler, Jazz Volume, big band and vibraphone selections
Technics Sampler Disc, solo guitar cut
Roxy Music, Avalon
The Bottom Line:
The Yamaha CD-X1 was a poor third. The CD-1 was better, but not as enjoyable
to listen to as the NEC.
Observed Differences:
The distinguishing characteristics were two: 1) harshness, and 2) imaging.
The NEC sounded distinctly clearer than both Yamahas, and instrument placement
and sound stage depth were much more noticeable. The Roxy music album
was almost totally useless to my ears for comparison; major differences did
not manifest themselves until the minimally miked single
instrument jazz and the Ravel discs were played (though sound stage depth
differences were noticeable with all selections).
I am especially disappointed in the CD-X1. It consistently produced a
2 dimensional sound image that sounded both harsh and, curiously, compressed.
Test Conditions:
This audition was conducted under less than stringent conditions. CDs were
switched between players for comparison, and the tests were not double=blind.
We have arranged with the dealer to do a full synced CD test when the new NEC
unit comes in to reduce delay between comparisons. We also will be doing some
comparisons between the low end Sony, Yamaha, and (if possible) Technics
players.
Final Comments:
I went into this test with a rather blase attitude, since I will not be in the
market for a CD player for sometime, largely due to the unavailability of my
type of music. I fully expected that even the cheapest CD player would be
satisfactory. I do not believe that now. Secondly, I am even more convinced
that much more extensive research into reconstruction methods needs to be done
and disseminated. The results of this audition neither proved or disproved my
notions about proper reconstruction techniques, so it's back to the drawing
board. However, I did like what I heard in general. I don't think that the
CD format is inherently inadequate.
I hate all this newfangled technology...
The wandering squash,
--
Shaun Simpkins
uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,chico,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!teklabs!tekcad!vice!shauns
CSnet: shauns@tek
ARPAnet:shauns.tek@rand-relaykiessig@idi.UUCP (Rick Kiessig) (04/28/84)
When I was shopping for CD players, I too made some
A/B tests. Everything I had heard said that there "shouldn't
be any difference" between players, but I thought I'd check
it out, anyway. Here was the setup:
Yamaha R-100 receiver/amp
Revox Plenum speakers
B&O RX turntable
Nakamichi LX-5 tape deck
Yamaha CD player
Sony CDP-101
NEC 803
Comparisons were done between the turntable and CD players,
with the expected results.
The next tests involved recording some music onto several
kinds of tape from the Sony CD player, and then playing them
back in sync with the CD. All recording used Dolby C. There was
noticable hiss on the tape (although very slight and not annoying
except during the quietest passages). The purpose here was to
see how well the tape deck could capture the dynamic range of
a CD. It did very well (I have since learned that setting levels
is the hardest problem when recording a CD - there seems to be
a much larger dynamic range than on any vinyl I've ever recorded).
The final tests were to compare the CDs to one another.
The same CDs were played in sync and A/B'd with the remote
control unit. This was the most suprising part. We all expected
there to be no discernable difference between the players. Or
perhaps a small difference on the high end between the cheapest
(Sony) and most expensive (NEC) units. WRONG! There was an
extremely noticable difference between all three units - on both
the high AND the low end. The NEC had much better imaging.
On a piece like Also Sprach Zarathustra, with the very deep
bass at the beginning, you can really hear a change going from
vinyl to one CD player to another. It was unanimous that the
NEC sounded better than either of the other units. Whether the
difference warrants an extra $500 wasn't as clear, though.
The Yamaha unit subsequently broke down several times,
and the store where these test were done decided to carry ONLY
the NEC player. I ended up with the above setup and the NEC
player (I have since decided that I don't like the R-100 -
its digital tuner really sucks).
Rick
--
Rick Kiessig
{decvax, ucbvax}!sun!idi!kiessig
{akgua, allegra, amd70, cbosgd, harpo, ihnp4, ios, qubix}!idi!kiessigark@rabbit.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (04/28/84)
When conducting listening tests comparing things like CD players, it is virtually guaranteed that the test is invalid if levels are matched by ear, rather than with sensitive test equipment. This is true for styli, tape recorders, everything.
pmr@drutx.UUCP (04/30/84)
I'd be interrested in hearing comparisons between the NEC and the Luxman.
fritz@hpfclk.UUCP (05/11/84)
Has anyone had any experience with the NAD CD player?