I own a lot of CDs and I would like to upgrade my 20 year old Denon cd player with something better. What are the best models to buy right now? My budget is about 1000 euros.
>>107249840If you're using the digital output, it doesn't really matter.
>>107249840is it better just to rip all cds into flac or even wave?
>>107249840Digitalize your entire library insteadhttps://github.com/SabreTools/MPFhttps://www.exactaudiocopy.de/
>>107249840Hi-fi nerd here.Get a vintage Philips CD104 or CD204 or CD304 or some other model with the CDM1 transport and TDA1541 decoders if you want that "analog" sound (a couple of manufacturers made copies, Marantz amongst them, they also had a top loading model which looks absolutely rad and was the FIRST cd player ever released). I think the CD304 is the most comfy since it has both headphone output and remote control support.But, they have no SPDIF output because they predate the standard, and the TDA1541s are only 14-bit and use 4x oversampling to correct the missing two bits. But most importantly, the transport is literally indestructible. Solid steel construction, using a frictionless, magnetically controlled read head. They stopped using this because it did not scale for faster cd-roms. I have one, it can read CDs, scratched CDs, CDRs, BROKEN CDs all without a problem. It also weighs about 9 kilos, so it makes for a fine defensive object to slug a home invader in the head with (and it would still play CDs fine afterwards).And even that would just be a "sidegrade" to your 20 year old Denon / Marantz. Those were the peak of modern CD tech, they pretty much stopped making new ones after that, or moved production from Japan to Vietnam. The best "modern" player you can get is one of the Marantz SACD players with the HDAM module and the copper insulated covers, but even those are made in Vietnam nowadays.
>>107250069>>107250109I did this, 500+ cd's and about 50 vinyl. Not that much until you start to rip it, especially the records.. was worth it though. I carry my entire library on my phone in flac format. And I also have it on tablet & pc. I used to have it all in mp3 like 20y ago but decided to rip them all again few years ago.>>107249840If you do want a cd player, find one with SACD, I have a few like that and sadly I cannot play them like I should
This poster is retarded >107250275Just get any player with a digital out and a proper DACOr better yet just rip them
>>107249840>My budget is about 1000 eurosA Yamaha SACD player
>>107250275errrrr shit, I meant TDA1540, not TDA1541. The 1540 was mono, so they needed one chip per channel.The TDA1541 was a later, stereo part.also, if you want to go the SACD route, get one of the 00s Denon or Marantz "Reference DVD player"s. They play everything from CD, SACD, DVD Video, DVD Audio, etc. You can only get used models and it will eat up most of your budget, but they are just about the best things ever made for both audio and video. One of my mates had one, it was absolutely crazy how professional they are. We used to play 5.1 Pink Floyd SACDs on it.
>>107250314>This poster is retarded >107250275If you want to just play your music, any player that can take digital input, hooked up to your PC playing back FLAC files will sound the same.But, that's not the same as wanting a high-end CD player.
>>107250387>listen to music>not the same as wanting a CD player Why does he even have a budget if he just wants to waste money then?Just burn the cash
>>107250069>>107250109>>107250314>Or better yet just rip themI have a LOT of them, I'm talking about thousands and thousands, so it's out of question.And I don't mind using and handling physical media, I kinda like it actually.If I want the convenience I'll just use Spotify.
>>107250503Okay I understand that impulse, so just get any DVD player and connect it to your DACThey all use the same cheap optics and drive mechanism so who cares
>>107250503>physical mediarots over time
>>107250455One of those is click -> music plays, while you do something.The other is going to your shelf, selecting a disc, looking at the front cover and opening the tray, taking out the disc, looking at the back artwork if the tray is transparent, inserting it in your silver hi-fi system with solid metal front plate and tray, pressing play, and sitting down in a leather couch and listening to the music and doing nothing else.It's a completely different thing. A zoomie who needs to do 43 things at the same time to avoid getting a panic attack wouldn't understand what it means to slow down and appreciate something beautiful. It's why Vinyl is enjoying a renaissance, because it's just a really beautiful thing, not because it sounds so much better or because it is convenient.>>107250503Which model player do you have? If it is really an early/mid 00s Denon, then the only upgrade you can get is either one of the reference tier players (1000€ might not be enough, their optical pickups may need replacements), or some vintage player with different tech (they don't sound bit-perfect but they are super fucking classy).Personally I have a CD104 but want to get a Marantz CD6004 because I have a matching amp to go with it. Sadly they stopped making DVD players with that design so I can't make a complete marantz tower that does everything. They look so fucking good.
>>107250576I have CDs older than any 3.5" HDD you may own.
nothing better, cd players only got worse
>>107250594and i have 18 year old hdds that still work 24/7, doesnt change anything about the nature of them going to fail, and when they do, if you cant find a perfect digital rip of someone else online, its gone.
>>107250608>and i have 18 year old hdds that still work 24/7,OK, so you are a zoomie. Got it. 18 years is 2007, that's fucking nothing. I have a CDs nearly twice as old and a player that's over 40 years old and still working flawless.Well I guess 18 years is a lot for a HDD, because they last 5 years on average. But I really doubt you could show me a CrystalDiskInfo screenshot with 150k hours in it to back up your bullshit claim, so that makes you a zoomie and a liar at the same time.
>>107250586>Which model player do you have?It was an entry level model, I think I paid it slightly more than 200 euros.DCD-500AE.Sound is just ok, nothing too good nor too bad. I think it's easy to find something significantly better even today without having to sell a kidney.
>>107249840a used naim
>>107250586>muh ritual Fucking retard none of that has anything to do with the actual hardware Besides I probably have more records and a better hifi system than you yet I actually care about the music instead of the retro quirk chungus performativity>>107250726Just spent 1000€ improving your actual stereo, room, or on more music Don't waste it on some plastic shit that spins a disc
>>107250726Yeah, that's one of the better dedicated players. Denon & Marantz (same company btw) are really the high end of the biz. The guy I knew with a near reference tier DVD/SACD player had a Denon that used the exact same design too.>I think it's easy to find something significantly better even today without having to sell a kidney.Unfortunately that's not how it works, CD tech peaked in the early 1980s, back when it was new and everyone tried making the best possible players to impress everyone. After that, things just became cheap and affordable, and then they just stopped making players altogether due to the advancement of digital players. Even Denon&Marantz only makes network players now (DLNA/spotify/itunes network playback and bluetooth).A 200€ player from 2006 is already a high class dedicated player, the only thing above that are the "reference" tier players which are near audiophile levels of dumb. But that won't matter because as long as you read the CD perfectly, you just need a better DAC+amp and that's not the job of the CD player.Personally I'd go with a vintage 1980s set instead, they have indestructible transports. Or if you want it to sound "great", get anything with a SPDIF output and a hardcore DAC/amp with SPDIF input.note for reference, I use a Philips CD104 and a Marantz SR6015. My only issue is that I have sensitive ears and I can hear the disc spinning inside the player which is some extra background noise I could do without. But holy shit the construction of that player is out of this world, above and beyond any other CD player made in the past 20 years.
Please don't listen to this autistic retard
>>107250801>>muh ritual >Fucking retard none of that has anything to do with the actual hardwareThe more disposable you think of your albums, the less you value them. The ritual is half the music. If you've ever held a live performance - or even attended a serious one, not pop music but something with a real orchestra - you'd know that.>Besides I probably have more records and a better hifi system than you yet I actually care about the music instead of the retro quirk chungus performativityYou probably have more records, but I doubt you have a system that beats mine, chiefly because you consider it just "some plastic shit that spins a disc".I mean for starters, the player I use had a metal transport, try, and pickup arm, not plastic.
>>107251041You are a retard with no self control who wasted money on an old compact disc spinner and are now coping bigly lmfao
>>107251093And you are a zoomie who'll never know how wonderful it feels like to finally listen to any album without having to deal with all the cracks and pops of a vinyl or radio or the low fidelity of a compact cassette.>wasted money on an old compact disc spinnerGot it broken for 25€, repaired it myself, and now I have a better CD player than 99.99% of the planet. Show me a modern high-end CD player that can play back broken discs without skipping a single time.
>>107251189>Retarded senile boomer copiumo I am laffin>playback broken discsAny personal computer
>>107251219>resorts to name callingYup, that's how most online arguments go once you have nothing else to say.
>>107250503You can rip them as fast as you play them, but given the quanity you don't even listen to most of them in which case you own them for the feeling of security hoarding brings (which is fine). CD players only got worse but you want to buy something so buy something. This is about the endorphin hit from buying and fondling objects so you can't lose by adding more objects.
>>107251236Already said it all mongo Enjoy your "high end" CD player LOL
>>107251292>Enjoy your "high end" CD player LOLHigher end than you'll ever own ;)
>>107249840forget cd players unless you like the look.for $1000htpc, topping e50 dac, hdd.rip your music to flac, for the stuff your really like and future purchases, see if there is 24bit stuff available.main issue would be, you want to play an album and just pop in the cd. no real counter for this. you'd need to manage your audio collection with something like mediamonkey. advantage is you can make playlists over time that match your mood.
>>107250586>Vinyl is enjoying a renaissance,Because most people are and always were airheads. Popularity is no measure of merit. The average human is a mindless cunt who buys Applol iPad socks to feel like they're one of the cool kids. They didn't grow up with the inordinate effort required to obtain, rip and use old media so it seems romantic to them. I did and it wasn't. The point of the often glorious audio systems of the era was music not ritual. When every dorm or barracks room had a collection it was custom to sneakernet whatever we didn't own but that was just (much) more work consuming time better spent partying and doing male things.Zoomies are unable to adult so they confuse owning objects which symbolize adulthood to them with superior function. That's fine but no one should lie to themselves. Vinyl records suck. They were tolerated because that's all there was, then lingered like all widely used legacy tech. The alternatives were horribly unreliable eight track (which I completely avoided in its day) and cassette until pressed CDs were offered. Of course if you wanted a mix it went on cassette because writeable CDs didn't exist yet. Cassettes also suck but were disposably cheap and could be left in hot vehicles then not mourned when they failed. De-noising vinyl suckage meant Burwen Research boxes for noise reduction and a dbx box so cassette tapes would suck less (though than meant they'd sound like ass unless played on a compatible system). Vinyl is best played once for verification than a second time to rip (to reel to reel before the personal computer replaced them) which is what enthusiasts did in the pre-computer era. Playing them more than that just audibly damages them. >>107250668None of the digital media longevity shit matters to adults who backup our data. I'm ancient too. ALL media is disposable, some sooner than others, so never be one deep.
>>107251588Based post except for>Playing them more than that just audibly damages them.Simply not trueAnyway record collecting has been ruined by the current hype around vinyl making the prices soar I blame Taylor Swift
>>107251588That's funny because most vinyl nuts I know (which includes several family members) go for it exactly because back in their day having a sapphire tipped high end vinyl player was impossible to get, and you could get maybe one album every few months. Which meant they listened the shit out of everything, memorised all the artwork and liner notes, and placing the needle on the plastic was a thousand times practised move that had to be mastered. A noise reduction box or a reel to reel player was the stuff of dreams you'd only read about in magazines.It's why oldfags get into that nowadays: to live out their childhood dreams.As for CDs, it's digital tech, it has a measurable maximum peak that all players can reach. But when you see a 1984 CD player you'll marvel at the novel technology they used to get it working, and the fact that it STILL works to this day, while the modern plastic mass produced players last a few years at most, before they need the read head changed and the cogs re greased. It's comparing a consumerist garbage to a precisely engineered machine that was built to last.It's why I'm recommending a vintage player, because they have way the fuck more impressive mechanisms. They'll give you something that a modern player CAN NOT.>ALL media is disposable, some sooner than others, so never be one deep.I'm not denying that, but my laserdisc copy of, I dunno, Star Wars or Aliens looks way the fuck better on the shelf than the tiny miniscule DVD or Bluray case. And you actually have to take care of that when playing it, you can't just play frisbee with the thing. It's about appreciating what you have, not how high quality you have it in.
>>107250503>I have a LOT of them, I'm talking about thousands and thousands, so it's out of question.I don't get it. Just copy them on the fly - once you decide to listen to them - to a NAS. This is fucking /g/ and it is almost 2026. What is wrong with you? And no, it does not take as long as listening. Ripping CDs is a question of seconds, not 72 minutes.
>>107252031Rip your fucking laserdisc then. That is a one off thing and the quality will be the same from then on. Forever. You can even encode in something insane like freaking mp2 if you wish to.
>>107252031>>107251767>>107251588IMO vinyl is good enough to listen to if it is fresh. As if people (including you) would be able to actually hear a net positive difference in EITHER direction when comparing CD/digital and vinyl/analog.Of course CD is better in theory. Of course vinyl is in fact worse when it comes to max dynamic range and frequencies possible. Of course CDs will always reproduce the same thing without degrading.But more often than not vinyl gets better mixes and masters and that is a key. Who cares for 14kHz vs 20kHz if all you get on a CD is freaking distorted because the producers went over 9000 on the fader?That being said... I am a musician. I record our shit using microphones first built in the 50s. And that is fucking best practice. Shure SM57 like POTUS, U87 condensers and Sennheiser MD421s are studio standards more than 60 years after they have been introduced. We use fucking AKG something and Beyerdynamic DT770 headphones to listen to ourselves when performing. Hell, guitarfags still use fucking valve amps. Do you really expect to hear more than what our equipment is able to capture and playback? Hi Res audio my arse.
Getting speakers with more wattage would be more significant
>>107249840One of the supposed best CD transports is the Denon 2930CI DVD player. Fantastic for CDs, plus it can handle hi-fi DVD audio as well, though those tend to really just be better mixed/mastered content rather than the crazy sample rate amounting to anything worth a damn.I don't know much about top end CD transports beyond that. I was going to pick one up and never got around to it. I'd rather stick to USB and flac/ape rips.The one benefit of 96kHz sample rate and higher is that those crazy rates deactivate the oversampling filter in any modern DAC, and the filter does add its own flavor to music, but that is a stupid subtle difference not worth a damn, in my experience, and your rig better be high end with killer playback or you won't even notice. Just not worth chasing. But if you use a computer, you might be able to apply some upsampling plugin and set to minimum phase to achieve the same effect with redbook audio (44.1kHz, 16-bit audio of any kind).> >107249960Said no one ever.Not all digital circuits are made equal, retard.
>>107250069if you rip to wave what ripper do with original cd error at each song
>>107249840Get your hands on one of these CD changers that holds like 100-200 discs, they're great
