"J.Major" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Pooh Bear" wrote
in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

[snip]

Through a quirk of fate, I recently acquired an operational CDP-101, the
first CD player sold widely at retail in the US, that I still
occasionally use. AFAIK it is 100% origional. It sounds no different
from the best-sounding modern players including my SACD/DVD player. It
even does a credible job of playing CD-Rs.

If you cannot ear any differences between a CDP-101 and today's best
digital
player tell us a lot about your total lack of credibility concerning
audio. It also tell us that we should not give a damn about your opinion
about hi-fi. I have owned a Sony CDP-101 in 1984 and I could not stand its
harsh high (it was giving me headaches) so I sold it after a bit more than
a month.

At the time of the introduction of the CD, Denon had been doing digital
recording for about 10 years, and Telarc had had been doing the same for
5 years. Mainstream labels had been using digital recorders to master
commercial releases that were initially released on LPs for about 4
years. The technology had been around long enough and used often enough
to be relatively mature and sound good, if properly used.

I've been warning about Arny's presbycusis,
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/...ticlekey=24916, for some time
now. It's obvious; it's painful, and tragically, Arny covers it up with a
blustery, offensive attitude. Arny, it's time for you to recuse yourself
from personal observations about audio quality. I suggest that instead you
concentrate on formalism, methodology, and critique thereof. Age has no
prejudice there.