ARC Ref CD-8 Compared to ARC Ref CD-9 or CD-6??

Would sure appreciate some thought on this subject. Thnx

Thanks Jafant ... still thinking about dipping a toe into computer/digital world, but so far, I'm holding with redbook CDs and vinyl for source.

So ... have you had the chance to compare just the redbook CD function of the CD-8 and CD-9. Is there much sonic difference?

I seem to recall that Kal once said that the CD-9 redbook function uses upsampling features and it doesn't have a 20K Hz brickwall filter. Therefore, slightly better sound; more dynamic.

Well that may be. But let me tell you about my PH-7 phono pre experience. I switched out my PH-7 for the PH-8. To this day, I still can't tell the difference.

Jafant ... What you say doesn't surprise me. I think except for a few circuit changes that relate to the redbook CD playback functionality, the CD-8 and CD-9 very well could be closely related sonically.

As an aside, I picked up a few CD versions of older LP issues that I own. For example, The Manhattan Transfer. IMO, oftentimes the CD sounds as good as, if not a tad better, than the LP.

I am having even better luck with hi-rez redbook CD that I've picked up from Acoustic Sounds. I think redbook CD still has life. The challenge is getting good source CDs.

Audiotomb -- I assume your comments about the CD-8 and CD-9 speak to the redbook function. Actually, I thought the CD-8/9 shared similar redbook related circuits and power supplies. So while I accept your comments, I am a little surprised that you thought the CD-9 redbook performance was so much better than the CD-8.

Interestingly, I bought a DEQX PreMATE a few months ago. The PreMATE comes with a DAC too ... uses Burr Brown chips. I compared the DAC functions between the PreMATE (using the CD-8 as a transport) and the CD-8. Very, very close.

Thanks.

BIF