14 responses Add your response
Do I sense a definitional impasse? A CD player, by
definition, plays CDs. CDs are, by definition, recorded in
the redbook standard/format -- whether they be copies,
burned copies or anything else. If you want something that
plays something other than (or in addition to) CDs -- such
as HDCD, SACD, DVD, Blue Ray, etc -- you're looking for
something other than a CD player...no? If you're looking
for a multi-format player that also offers CD playback
comparable to the best purpose-built CD players, then that
is in fact something entirely different from a CD player.
Oh, and good luck...;)
What I mean by that is: not sure that such a beast exists --
or ever will. The duration of the format wars that we'd
all been waiting out in the hope that such a machine would
get made has left the entire debate a bit moot. For a large
part, the market has shifted to non-shiny-disk-based
equipment. Which is to say that the R&D focus of folks
seems to be directed to multi-format / HD-capable DACs fed
in large part by computers. In short,
don't really see any shop with the gumption to make a world-
beating multi-format player bothering -- the number of folks
buying shiny, spinny disks (of any format) these days has
dropped so dramatically that building such a machine just
'aint worth the time. Or, thats my theory, at any rate
(someone's bound to do or have done it....but the market is
very definitely headed in a different direction).
Alternatively, I suppose, you could get a well-respected
multi-format player (the Oppo comes to mind) and then either
run it off of its internal DAC or wire it as a transport
into one of the afor-mentioned HD-capable DACs. Certainly
an option but, again, not a CD player.... Or, have I missed
Mezmo. Seems I am guilty of the definition problem. I mean to say that the ability of a player to perform well with commercially manufactured CD's should not impress anyone. I want reviewers to say , "It sucks with my CD burns ", or "It played half my CD-RWs half the time.", or "It played most of my CD-RWs without hesitation" .
Garn - To answer your question, in my case I don't really have or play any "burns" so whether my CDP plays them or not is of no concern. Maybe most are like me which is why reviewers don't mention it.
Just curious - What do you burn, from what, why? It's just something I haven't done much of so I dunno, maybe I'm missing something.
"Also, MP3 is more of a problem than RW"
CD-RW is a problem with older CDP that have weaker lasers since CD-RW has about half of reflection of CD.
Most of DVD players have inherent MP3 playback. They usually have poor sound but decent transport with good tracking. I use cheap DVD player as an addition to Benchmark/MacMini music server.
I was made aware of the reflectivity issue in a forum here.
Where, I also was made to know that NAD payers are fussy. I get better results with RW in the .wav format with a loss of info trade off.
All said, it seems absurd that ones computer plays aftermarket discs better than ones component CDP or transport. I heard of a new Meridian that balked at "factory" new sealed discs !! So, we just accept this situation with "quiet resignation ", that burning is beneath Hi Fi and proper discs will play properly ?
Agree, it is strange. It is even possible that copy plays and sounds better than original since poorly printed CDs make CDP to skip (pop) or interpolate missing samples, while perfect CD-R copy of the same CD can be achieved using programs like EAC or MAX that read the same sector multiple times until they obtain proper checksum.