[Freo-1]

I recently decided to put together a playback system for the office.  Rather then get some hunk of junk at best buy, decided to get some vintage hardware on EBay.  The prices for vintage solid state (except Mcintosh) is pretty darn good.

I wound up with with two vintage Luxman receivers (A RX-103 that I use for a bedroom system, and a R-114 for the office). Also picked up a Luxman D 405 CD player for the office.  The prices to get the vintage gear is very hard beat, and performance easily beats the off the self systems at Best Buy. 

Here's what I found surprising: The Lux D-405 CD player sounds excellent.  I hooked the player up to my reference playback setup, and the unit is surprisingly close in performance to my Denon 5910 player. It's very smooth for a CD player, and the detail is so close to the Denon, it's not easy to tell the difference.

Given the fact that the Luxman is 20 plus years old, I expected to hear a huge difference to the Denon, but there was in fact very little difference.

I think the lesson I learned here is that 16 bit resolution was achieved some time back, and a lot of claims of improvement for this format have more to do with market hype that actual performance.  All in all, pretty happy with the Luxman player.

Was wondering if other people have had a similar experience? 

[Mister Pig]

Hello,

My experiences have been somewhat different. I have a JVC XL-Z1050TN CD player that I use for a transport. This machine has been called a "classic piece of digital gear" by many vintage people. It was a very expensive piece in the early 90's, one of the better units a regular person could afford.

As a transport it is excellent. Certainly capable of high resolution playback. I did hook it up as a stand alone player. Performance in regards to tonal balance, and detail retrieval is very good. However, it has that two dimensional soundstage that was common for this era of CD players. Music is presented like a wall. This makes it completely unacceptable as a source unit. Most modern cheap CDP's, like the Sony SCD-595 are capable of creating some depth and layering to the soundstage.

With that being said, I still keep the JVC as a transport. I currently use a Bolder modified Squeezebox as my main transport, but the JVC is sitting on my rack waiting to spring into action if needed. Which it will be, since I need to send my power supply back to Bolder for a revision to v3 status. Mine is a v1.

Yes I agree vintage electronics can offer exceptional performance for a reasonable price. I recently overhauled my system, and bought some vintage pieces. These days I am listening to a Jeff Rowland Model 5 amplifier, and Consummate pre-amplifier. Awesome sound quality for the cash I had to lay out.

Regards
Mister Pig

[TheChairGuy]

Yeah, I find counter to your experience too, Freo 

I haven't heard a truly awful CD player in 5 or so years now.....where as previous to that it was mostly the norm.  A $79 combo CD/DVD buys a player than outperforms and sounds more like music than $1000 players of yesteryear, I've found.

It is still not my preferred music format, but it is now uniformly decent at nearly any price...whereas there was nearly no price that got you a good player before.  Whether it's jitter and other artifacts or higher resolution or what not I cannot say (as I am not a technical sort), but the debate rages on about playback with little common ground for reasons for the improvement.

I owned the classic Rotel RCD-965BX, hailed as one of the best from 1991 and pricey at $600 list, and it cannot hold a candle to my $59 COBY today.  Truly.

Glad you're happy with the Luxman, however 

John

[Wayner]

The improving performance of CD players can be attributed to better D/A conversion. I think as the technology and the math of little computer bits and the reconstruction of the analog wave get better and better, so will the players. There are also some outstanding D/A's (Audio by Van Alstine) that will bring a modest cost player up into the high end playback.

As far as vintage decks, I wouldn't go too vintage as I believe there have been alot of transport improvements since like the early 90's.

Wayner 

[Freo-1]

My experiences have been somewhat different. I have a JVC XL-Z1050TN CD player that I use for a transport. This machine has been called a "classic piece of digital gear" by many vintage people. It was a very expensive piece in the early 90's, one of the better units a regular person could afford.

I remember the JVC unit. As I recall, Stereophile had lots of nice things to say about that player.


I agree with the fact that, in general, the DAC's made (for a given price point) today are better. However, getting better performance from the DAC's is only part of the issue.

I have to take issue with the fact a COBY CD player would out perform the high end units of yesterday, not because of the DACs, but because of the analog stages. The higher end units  from yesterday still had excellent analog stages, not to mention better power supply performance.  I suspect that is why the old Luxman sounds as good as it does.

Now, don't get me wrong. When using the Denon's firewire output to the amplifer, the sound is simply incredible.  However, using the analog output from the Denon, there is not the difference in sound quality that I would have expected. The Luxman sounds very smooth, and has depth of soundstage.

I remember Audio did a report on CD players back in the early 90's, and there were a number of them that achieved full 16 bit resolution back then.  I think the advances with the DACs are best heard on the higher resolution media (SACD, DVD).

[TheChairGuy]

I agree with the fact that, in general, the DAC's made (for a given price point) today are better. However, getting better performance from the DAC's is only part of the issue.

I have to take issue with the fact a COBY CD player would out perform the high end units of yesterday, not because of the DACs, but because of the analog stages. The higher end units  from yesterday still had excellent analog stages, not to mention better power supply performance.  I suspect that is why the old Luxman sounds as good as it does.

Freo,

I should note that the COBY, which actually cost me $39.00 (+ shipping) was a (oddball) unit built for mobile/car use.  I bought it purposely to use with batteries in a second system as I kept hearing how great going off the grid was.

I swapped out the wall wart/cigarette lighter adapter with a 12 v car battery....and thought the resultant sound was worse (I have since read that a battery without further capacitive load is not a proper power source for audio products.  ).  So, I subbed in a Radio Shack 12v (linear) regulated power supply ($25 on ebay) and it truly improved.

Finally, I added a $59 Dakiom Feedback Stabilizer.....in several instances I've used it with cheap digital gear it has improved them - dramatically with my old Sony DVP-S7700 which was my 'dedicated' transport for my previous $4K+ set-up.

So, truth be told, the COBY system (which is 24/96) cost me about $125, not $59......but it is still far more natural and less etched than either the very carefully assembled Sony/MSB (all modded) $4K+ set-up or the much-vaunted $600 Rotel RCD-965BX.

XRCD, gold discs, careful audiophile mastering, whatever - I hear nearly no disc that ever sounds natural (re: real) on compact disc whether at my home, at a show, or audio get-together.  So, I'm decidedly happy with my COBY (it's very small and unobtrusive, too, with a very nice remote - even has remote volume) as the medium mostly doesn't matter to me but for low volume background music.

Enjoy the Luxman.  If you even want to try to improve it, you might find the newer $99 or so Dakiom to do nicely. They are all over Audiogon - Mr. Dao's ads are terrible (he's Korean I think so English is not his primary language), but the products do seem to work mostly as advertised.

John

[Freo-1]

Enjoy the Luxman.  If you even want to try to improve it, you might find the newer $99 or so Dakiom to do nicely. They are all over Audiogon - Mr. Dao's ads are terrible (he's Korean I think so English is not his primary language), but the products do seem to work mostly as advertised.

Thanks, John

I'll look into the Dakiom.  I'm not sure what is does exactly. Sounds like you give it an endorsement.

Cheers,
Keith

[TheChairGuy]

Keith/Freo: Yeah - Mr. Dao's ads do his product some disservice......they are overhyped, are full of bad grammar and they cheapen the marketing and technical message of the products.

But, in all instances BUT with the MSB Gold Link III DAC I had, it has helped digital playback quality.  I have the original $59 units, but they now make more pricey mono 'Feedback Stabilizers' that are supposed to be improvements over the original.

I think you're up in the $150 range for a pair of those (too lazy to look at their website right now) - but I know of no comparable add-on, tweek, or modification that may improve digital playback for similar money.

I am less enthralled about the speaker improving Dakiom's....I didn't hear benefit with those...only the amp/preamp/CDP ones with rca jacks.

So, yes, it's an endorsement as such - but I have heard few others and their experiences with it so it's just me out there endorsing it (tho they have endorsements on their website).

Regards, John

[Mister Pig]

Hello,

My experiences have been somewhat different. I have a JVC XL-Z1050TN CD player that I use for a transport. This machine has been called a "classic piece of digital gear" by many vintage people. It was a very expensive piece in the early 90's, one of the better units a regular person could afford.

As a transport it is excellent. Certainly capable of high resolution playback. I did hook it up as a stand alone player. Performance in regards to tonal balance, and detail retrieval is very good. However, it has that two dimensional soundstage that was common for this era of CD players. Music is presented like a wall. This makes it completely unacceptable as a source unit. Most modern cheap CDP's, like the Sony SCD-595 are capable of creating some depth and layering to the soundstage.

With that being said, I still keep the JVC as a transport. I currently use a Bolder modified Squeezebox as my main transport, but the JVC is sitting on my rack waiting to spring into action if needed. Which it will be, since I need to send my power supply back to Bolder for a revision to v3 status. Mine is a v1.

Yes I agree vintage electronics can offer exceptional performance for a reasonable price. I recently overhauled my system, and bought some vintage pieces. These days I am listening to a Jeff Rowland Model 5 amplifier, and Consummate pre-amplifier. Awesome sound quality for the cash I had to lay out.

Regards
Mister Pig

Going to have to back track on this opinion. When I made this observation, I was using an Electra-Print transformer based passive pre-amp. Apparently the JVC did not care for it one bit. Jusdt recently I have listened to the JVC with an active pre-amplifier in the system. Much better. Respectable amount of depth, very nice detail, good imaging. All in all, quite good. Not perfect, not up to my DAC. But for a modest price, a good CDP.

Regards
Mister Pig

[Freo-1]

Going to have to back track on this opinion. When I made this observation, I was using an Electra-Print transformer based passive pre-amp. Apparently the JVC did not care for it one bit. Jusdt recently I have listened to the JVC with an active pre-amplifier in the system. Much better. Respectable amount of depth, very nice detail, good imaging. All in all, quite good. Not perfect, not up to my DAC. But for a modest price, a good CDP.

Regards
Mister Pig

Thank you for the update. This is my observation comparing a Denon 5910 vs the Luxman D-405. The difference in sonics is minor at best. The Denon really excels with SACD/DVD media, but on CD, one would be hard pressed to identify differences.

Cheers!

[Tubes 4 Ever]

Here is my two penny feedback. As an oldie but goldie I was raised on 8 track and thought I died and went to heaven with vinyl.  I have stepped into what I think is clearly superior sound. I now run dac from my hard drive and i tell you it is in my opinion leaps and bounds better than any cd I have owned or listened to. i realize this is all very subjective but I think this sound suits my old ears.

[Derockster]

Here's my opinion on the subject of Cd players.First off let me say I listen solely to vinyl.It is my opinion that companies like pioneer with their pd65 and pd91 machines and naim with their cd3 and California  audio labs with their dx1 machine all had it right back then with their 16 bit format some being non-oversampling.Regards derockster

[SET Man]

Hey!

   Short answer not much in the past 20+ years.

   16bit 44.1k just don't have enough computer power to capture all the sound to start with anyway. So, to me...  it basically begin with this flaw and no matter how much you try to improve it , it ain't going to be like the real analog signal. You just don't have enough data to start with.

   Can CD be enjoyable. Yes! But still went to compare it to analog there is still something missing to it.

   Yes, you could said that I'm biased on this since I have and listen to analog vinyl. 

Take care,
Buddy

[BrassEar]

I know this thread is old but not much has changed IMHO.

I have owned the JVC 1050, also the Squeezebox. Tried many other touted high end players (AudioNote NOS) and various DACs with my JVC 1050 as transport.

Best CD player?

Sony Playstation PS1 off ebay for $20. That player sounds almost as relaxed as vinyl. Oversampling is a giant farce IMHO.

[Freo-1]

I know this thread is old but not much has changed IMHO.

I have owned the JVC 1050, also the Squeezebox. Tried many other touted high end players (AudioNote NOS) and various DACs with my JVC 1050 as transport.

Best CD player?

Sony Playstation PS1 off ebay for $20. That player sounds almost as relaxed as vinyl. Oversampling is a giant farce IMHO.

Nothing has changed since the last set of posts.  The format medium has much more to do with sound quality, so hi resolution has much more effect on the sound than advances within the CD format.

One needs to compare "apples to apples", meaning one needs to compare a CD to hi res version of the same format to assess.

Glad to hear that your enjoying your music.

[mcrespo71]

I don't care what format it is at this point.  I have tremendous sounding CD's and vinyl.  My concern now is how current recordings are being recorded, where the majority are compressed and brickwalled.  It doesn't matter whether this is pressed on vinyl or CD because it sounds like crap on either version.  Case in point is one of my favorite bands, Oasis- I own all their albums in CD and vinyl- some vinyl recorded at 45 RPM and they all sound like crap, if you want to compare the recordings to anything that was recorded in the golden age of analog that I personally own (50's-70's).  I don't care about which format it is.  I'm more concerned about the horrible recording engineers who are mastering new bands.

[Freo-1]

I don't care what format it is at this point.  I have tremendous sounding CD's and vinyl.  My concern now is how current recordings are being recorded, where the majority are compressed and brickwalled.  It doesn't matter whether this is pressed on vinyl or CD because it sounds like crap on either version.  Case in point is one of my favorite bands, Oasis- I own all their albums in CD and vinyl- some vinyl recorded at 45 RPM and they all sound like crap, if you want to compare the recordings to anything that was recorded in the golden age of analog that I personally own (50's-70's).  I don't care about which format it is.  I'm more concerned about the horrible recording engineers who are mastering new bands.

Very valid point.

Here is a point that ties format and recording quality together.  I've got a DVD Audio of Fleetwood Mac Live at the BBC (back when they were primarily a blues band), and the sound quality far exceeds (on most of the studio cuts) the vast majority of current recordings. (CD or Hi Res).

Listen to vintage Decca recordings of Savoy Brown on CD. Sound quality is much better than current Oasis (or Killers, etc.)

[mcrespo71]

It's so very upsetting to hear some of the new bands that are recording really good music that sounds brutal to my ears.  The whole "loudness war" is killing the sound of modern music.  Sure, there are occassional standouts- White Stripes or Spoon, but 90% of anything I buy now that is new sounds like crap.  It's gotten worse in even the past 2 years, in fact. I just got the new Radiohead Best of CD and the "remastered" sound is far worse than the same cuts from the original CD's in the 90's.  Creep is brutally harsh on the new remastered CD and doesn't sound fantastic on the original, but it is at least not ear bleeding.  If this keeps up, I may as well listen to some of these in my car because they honestly sound better there to me. 

If anyone is buying vinyl, I suggest you buy it from those that are mastering correctly.  Don't pay $30 for a compressed version of Oasis Dig Out Your Soul or Madonna's Hard Candy that was cut from the CD, but buy something like the new Van Morrison Reissues from Warner done by Steve Hoffman from the original master tapes. Sorry, but everyone is throwing their hate in this "vinyl revival" and putting out crap product.  In the meantime, I wash the prices for vinyl reissues rise.

BTW, your example of Fleetwood Mac is a good one- Peter Green era or even the Buckingham era are examples of some very, very good rock recordings.

[Freo-1]

It's so very upsetting to hear some of the new bands that are recording really good music that sounds brutal to my ears.  The whole "loudness war" is killing the sound of modern music.  Sure, there are occassional standouts- White Stripes or Spoon, but 90% of anything I buy now that is new sounds like crap.  It's gotten worse in even the past 2 years, in fact. I just got the new Radiohead Best of CD and the "remastered" sound is far worse than the same cuts from the original CD's in the 90's.  Creep is brutally harsh on the new remastered CD and doesn't sound fantastic on the original, but it is at least not ear bleeding.  If this keeps up, I may as well listen to some of these in my car because they honestly sound better there to me. 

If anyone is buying vinyl, I suggest you buy it from those that are mastering correctly.  Don't pay $30 for a compressed version of Oasis Dig Out Your Soul or Madonna's Hard Candy that was cut from the CD, but buy something like the new Van Morrison Reissues from Warner done by Steve Hoffman from the original master tapes. Sorry, but everyone is throwing their hate in this "vinyl revival" and putting out crap product.  In the meantime, I wash the prices for vinyl reissues rise.

BTW, your example of Fleetwood Mac is a good one- Peter Green era or even the Buckingham era are examples of some very, very good rock recordings.

Cheers, Mate!

Check out the old Savoy Brown recordings, very well mastered.

I''ve got a DVD of JET live, and the audio is pretty good, so it can be done. Powderfinger Live Vulture Street is not bad sonically.

[mcrespo71]

It's so very upsetting to hear some of the new bands that are recording really good music that sounds brutal to my ears.  The whole "loudness war" is killing the sound of modern music.  Sure, there are occassional standouts- White Stripes or Spoon, but 90% of anything I buy now that is new sounds like crap.  It's gotten worse in even the past 2 years, in fact. I just got the new Radiohead Best of CD and the "remastered" sound is far worse than the same cuts from the original CD's in the 90's.  Creep is brutally harsh on the new remastered CD and doesn't sound fantastic on the original, but it is at least not ear bleeding.  If this keeps up, I may as well listen to some of these in my car because they honestly sound better there to me. 

If anyone is buying vinyl, I suggest you buy it from those that are mastering correctly.  Don't pay $30 for a compressed version of Oasis Dig Out Your Soul or Madonna's Hard Candy that was cut from the CD, but buy something like the new Van Morrison Reissues from Warner done by Steve Hoffman from the original master tapes. Sorry, but everyone is throwing their hate in this "vinyl revival" and putting out crap product.  In the meantime, I wash the prices for vinyl reissues rise.

BTW, your example of Fleetwood Mac is a good one- Peter Green era or even the Buckingham era are examples of some very, very good rock recordings.

Cheers, Mate!

Check out the old Savoy Brown recordings, very well mastered.

I''ve got a DVD of JET live, and the audio is pretty good, so it can be done. Powderfinger Live Vulture Street is not bad sonically.

I will check out the Savoy Brown recordings.  Thanks for the tip!  I have the first Jet album on vinyl and it is not too bad sounding.