[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity



I totally agree about the output section. They're really cheesy compared to the first few generations of players and pro equipment and "audiophile" goods. Most audiophile CD players make use of the same basic transports and chip sets with special attention paid to the power supply and the output stage. The best sounding mods I've ever heard were to power supplies. The audio stages are just modulating a power supply that needs to be as clean and low impedance as possible. A lot of push/pull and complementary circuits are making up for half assed power supplies (canceling out the noise).
Phillip
----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Cox" <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 4:23 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity



On 03/07/06, Rod Stephens wrote:
Hey Phillip,

Are you tongue in cheek about the $140 player? If not, I'd like to
know what brand/model it is. For that amount, I'd like to try SACD,
especially if you say it sounds good.

The SACD player I am using is labelled Samsung.


It sounds good when used with a buffer amp (Musical Fidelity X-10 V3)
between it and the power amp. The problem with most cheap audio gear is
that the analog output stage is inadequate and has too high an output
impedance.

A buffer amp with a high input impedance and low output impedance deals
with this.

Without the buffer, this player sounds rather hard and shrill, as do most CD
players.


Many CD players allow you to use an external D to A converter, which has
some advantages. This is not possible with SACD. Even so, SACD is
clearly better than CD, on two speakers.

Regards
--
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]