Roger Russell says that not all CDP sound the same. I, for one, agree with
him as I have experienced these differences myself.

I do have one question. Has anyone else experienced these differences that
Roger describes at http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#cd ?

Below is an excerpt from his webpage regarding this.

-------------------------------
"Do all CD Players Sound the Same?

Tests for response and distortion in CD players all turn out very well. The
measurements show that distortion is extremely low and response is ruler
flat. CD players have eliminated the differences between phono cartridges.
They have also eliminated pops and clicks and those inevitable scratches on
the records that seem to appear out of nowhere. They have also eliminated
problems of dust, turntable rumble and playback loss. Despite all of these
advantages, there are still listening differences.

If you have only heard one CD player, you will have enjoyed all of the
advantages without being aware that there are still differences. In an A-B
comparison, response is the same, even when compared with a steady source
such as pink noise. Harmonic and intermodulation distortion are so low that
the players all sound very clean.

The difference is something new and may require a readjustment to know what
to listen for. The difference is in imaging. It is most easily heard using
speakers that have exceptional imaging capabilities. It is almost
impossible to convey a listening experience in words. However, I will try
to describe what I have heard. I have used a McIntosh MCD7005, McIntosh
MVP851and a McIntosh MVP851 supplemented with a McIntosh MDA1000 digital to
analog converter for the listening tests. I made these tests in late 2004
and early 2005.

Imaging using the 7005 appears to be very wide and pleasing with orchestral
music. Some new age recordings seem to completely envelop the listener.
It’s all very nice. It was only when I began using the 851 that I noticed
there was a difference in imaging. Classical music sounded like it had much
better coherence, giving it more clarity and sense of aliveness. However,
it was more than just imaging. It was a new kind of distortion difference,
more like a phase distortion that affected the coherence of the image. The
851 was made in 2004 and the older 7005 was made in 1987.

The explanation had a definite physical cause. It was the digital-to-analog
filtering. The filtering was significantly improved in the 851. What I was
hearing was confirmed by McIntosh engineering. It was also pointed out that
some people preferred the sound of the lesser filtering. I was in agreement
when it came to new age music. I liked being enveloped in the sound.
However, the spaciousness provided in some new age music is all
synthesized. There is no real world reference to hearing this music except
through loudspeakers or headphones, whereas, classical music has a real
world reference and it is that which guided my decision in my search for
improved accuracy. I accepted the new age music, with the improved
filtering, as it was probably intended to be that way.

The experiment went further when I added the 1000 D-to-A converter to the
851. The digital output of the 851 is fed to the D-to-A converter prior to
the filtering. The 1000 converts the digital signals to 786 kHz with 24 bit
resolution before converting to analog. This is literally the best
filtering possible. The kind of listening experience was similar but not as
pronounced. There was a further improvement in coherence and a little more
loss of separateness between the speakers. The difference was getting to
the point that it wasn’t always audible, depending on the program material.
Having heard this further improvement, it became my new reference.

So what was the problem in the first place? It was the sampling rate of
44.1 kHz. It is the criticism of many who voiced their opinion and
complaints. It was too low in frequency. The problem was not that we can’t
hear that high or even half that high. It was in the restoration to the
analog form and the digital-to-analog filtering that was inadequate. It
didn’t cause a response problem, it caused a spatial or imaging problem..
So why don’t all players have better filtering? Better D-to-A filtering is
expensive and a separate D-to-A converter is grossly expensive. The MDA1000
sells for $8000.

Perhaps decisions are money oriented. The improvements are slight in
comparison to what would be a greatly increased cost for CD players. Most
consumers would not notice the difference in listening but would notice the
higher cost of the players, which would affect the sales of CDs. In fact,
the MP3 format goes in the opposite direction and is very popular

The SACD format offers a higher sampling rate and avoids the problem. It is
said to be much closer to the original analog sound and analog recordings
like tape and vinyl. It is also said that using the MDA1000 offers sound as
good as analog. Other formats are being tried such as DVD sound."
---------------------------------

rich

--