Is it unwise to buy a state of the art CD player at this time?

NorthStar · Sep 10, 2016

Today is September 10, 2016. I don't know the exact number of SACDs available in the world; I only know that it's over 10,000 +++
Kal would know best. Classical SACDs are constantly being released. My SACDs sound better than my CDs and better than the CD layer from SACDs.
Plus I love multichannel hi-res music, from SACDs. DSD music files are avail in large quantity for downloads.

If searching for a new CD player I sure want to have one that can also play SACDs, stereo and multichannel.

? http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?33947-SACD-is-it-worth-it-Whats-a-good-player

Al M. · Sep 10, 2016

NorthStar said:
Today is September 10, 2016. I don't know the exact number of SACDs available in the world; I only know that it's over 10,000 +++

That still pales in comparison with the many millions of titles available on CD. I refuse a format to dictate my musical tastes.

NorthStar · Sep 10, 2016

Oh but SACD don't dictate your musical taste; they come in many flavors...from classical music lovers, jazz, blues, rock, pop, world, etc.
Sure, we have a much more open music library with CDs and LPs.

SACD is just a niche market, but still beats the hell of DVD Audio and Blu-ray Audio and Pono.

Anyway, CD players, some play more than just CDs; none wrong with that. And if only CDs are in your music collection, just buy a CD player.

* I tried to find the number of SACDs all together, but couldn't find it. I think it's less than a million, and more than 15,000. :b
If we listen to only the music we know and love, and listen to it four hours every single day; by the time we exit the planet that would be roughly equal to ... 36,000 CDs.
Assuming one is 60-years old, and each CD is one-hour long. By age 85 we gone. All those CDs our children's children can have them, and throw them wherever they see them fit best. ...A CD player or @ the bottom of the ocean. :b

Here's what I seriously think: if you love classical music as your top flavor, stick with CDs, or/and get SACDs.
If you like more than just stereo music, get SACDs...hybrid multichannel.
If you like jazz as your main music genre, stick with LPs.
If you like rock music, LPs. ...And CDs too, the remastered ones for old classic rock.

If you like all genre of music; get a music server with a vast library.
--------

The OP has many CDs; excellent CD players start @ $600.

Mobiusman · Sep 11, 2016

Thank you everyone for your input. I am still totally confused other than that the Spectral SDR4000SV is an amazing sounding machine.

Fiddle Faddle · Sep 11, 2016

Mobiusman said:
I have Spectral reference electronics at the core of my system and recently ordered their latest SDR 4000SV cd player, but am having some second thoughts because CD's are clearly going to become less important to us audiophiles as streaming advances, although I do have a significant library of both CD's.

I would not hesitate at all in this case and I think it is actually a very wise investment. The calibre of the equipment is not in question and for me that would only leave the serviceability question. But given what Spectral mention on their website - especially as regards the bespoke transport - it would seem that you will not experience any maintenance, repair or other long term serviceability issues.

NorthStar · Sep 11, 2016

I searched the Spectral SDR-4000SV CD processor, and I was looking for its architecture...the DACs, the HDCD decoder, etc.
• http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?20464-Spectral-SDR-4000SV

The documentation is limited. It looks great though, in & out. And the people behind are top notch. I admit, twenty grands (MSRP) is a ridiculous amount of money for processing CDs from a CD player. But I can overlook this and go beyond...

Say I could buy one for half price (a good deal) @ $10,000 - if it sounds as good to me as it sounds to you, Mr. Russ, I would buy it, no sweat, no confusion.
I have a fair collection of music in the CD format...several thousands of them, and a fair chunk encoded with HDCD.

I would like to do a blind test; between the Spectral 4000 and say a Rotel RCD-1570 (MSRP = $999) ... just for fun ? http://rotel.com/product/rcd-1570
Or a Rotel RCD-1070 player, with a HDCD decoder. You can find one for less than $300 ? http://rotel.com/product/rcd-1070

When confused, take your time, examine your other options, proceed with listening sessions.
The Spectral SDR-4000SUV might eclipse the two Rotels above; it's a limousine for the price. Only you knows best.
...Your ears, and bank account, and the remaining days of your life. :b

But yeah, it's normal to be confused; we all have different backgrounds, philosophies, systems, different sounds, rooms, speakers, financial freedom and wisdom.
Don't sweat the small stuff. :b

microstrip · Sep 11, 2016

NorthStar said:
(...) * I tried to find the number of SACDs all together, but couldn't find it. I think it's less than a million, and more than 15,000. :b (...)

One very disagreeable aspect in SACDs is that many of them are not pure DSD or DSD converted from analog tape - most of them come from PCM sources. There is a complete lack of technical details on most of them about their origin. This critic extends to most HiRez files. One aspect is however well established - the higher the resolution, the more expensive is the file!

Also quantity is not quality. Labels reissued in SADC are mostly tittles that are popular and assured reasonable sales. If I look at my current CD and LP catalogue less than 5% exist in DSD. Surely, many SACD recordings are excellent and a few sound better than the equivalent CD.

IMHO many people prefer SACD just because their player has a better sounding implementation of the SACD format than that of CD. But this is just a feeling, I have no data to support a debate on it!

witchdoctor · Sep 11, 2016

Mobiusman said:
I have Spectral reference electronics at the core of my system and recently ordered their latest SDR 4000SV cd player, but am having some second thoughts because CD's are clearly going to become less important to us audiophiles as streaming advances, although I do have a significant library of both CD's. If I use the logic that I used when I spent at least as much as the SDR 4000SV costs recently on a new VPI table SDS, Benz Micro cartridge, PASS phone stage, Vibraplane, two expensive IC's and AC cords and a new Steve Blinn rack, not to mention a fair amount on new reference vinyl, then I know I should proceed with the SDR 4000SV order.

The Spectral sounds incredible, probably the best CD player I have ever heard, but it has no ability to import other digital signals, meaning that I will have to keep my old DAC for streaming and other digital inputs, and of course buy another set of very expensive MIT cables (either MAX-2 or SHD).

While there is no general answer and it depends on what I value, I would love any input from anyone on this subject in hopes that it will help me clarify my dilemma.

Thanks

A frind of mine dumped her CD player when she ripped all her Cd's to computer. Now she never uses her system any more and deeply regrets the switch. Keep the Spectral if computers are a PIA. Switch to a PC or a streamer if you are a geek.

Al M. · Sep 11, 2016

witchdoctor said:
A frind of mine dumped her CD player when she ripped all her Cd's to computer. Now she never uses her system any more and deeply regrets the switch. Keep the Spectral if computers are a PIA. Switch to a PC or a streamer if you are a geek.

Computers are a PIA, at least for me.

I was at the computer audio event at Goodwin's last year and reported on it:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...s-High-End-Computer-Audio-and-dCS-Rossini-DAC

While it was interesting to hear all about it, it became clear to me that optimal implementation is a very involved process. It's not plug and play. If anything, I rather got turned off from computer audio.

But then, the event was more for those already immersed in computer audio and seeking some further guidance.

NorthStar · Sep 11, 2016

microstrip said:
One very disagreeable aspect in SACDs is that many of them are not pure DSD or DSD converted from analog tape - most of them come from PCM sources. There is a complete lack of technical details on most of them about their origin. This critic extends to most HiRez files. One aspect is however well established - the higher the resolution, the more expensive is the file!

Also quantity is not quality. Labels reissued in SACD are mostly tittles that are popular and assured reasonable sales. If I look at my current CD and LP catalogue less than 5% exist in DSD. Surely, many SACD recordings are excellent and a few sound better than the equivalent CD.

IMHO many people prefer SACD just because their player has a better sounding implementation of the SACD format than that of CD.
But this is just a feeling, I have no data to support a debate on it!

Francisco, we need accurate data on this entire Super Audio CD saga. :b

* Here's something I noticed from my SACD music collection; I don't recall spinning one with HDCD encoded on the CD layer, only in DSD.
Anyone else?

I would love to hear that Spectral 4000 CD player/processor.

Barry2013 · Sep 11, 2016

I am facing a similar issue.
I am considering upgrading from my DCS Puccini/Scarlatti Word clock and want to retain my current SACD capability. If I stay with DCS that means a minimum of three boxes. To date I have not found any one box SACD player that looks as if it will match my existing rig let alone beat a Scarlatii or hybrid Scarlatti/Paganini dac transport clock.
Last night after reading the HiFi Plus review of the Analogue Domain Isis integrated amp I was prompted to play my Mofi SACD of Patricia Barber's Modern Cool. If I really needed any confirmation of the virtues of SACD that provided it.
Yes not all SACDS live up to expectations but properly executed ones are so much better than Red Book.

Al M. · Sep 11, 2016

microstrip said:
One very disagreeable aspect in SACDs is that many of them are not pure DSD or DSD converted from analog tape - most of them come from PCM sources. There is a complete lack of technical details on most of them about their origin. This critic extends to most HiRez files. One aspect is however well established - the higher the resolution, the more expensive is the file!

In fact, it could be that many SACDs came from 16/44 PCM. They simply may have sounded better than the CD counterpart because greater care was taken in the mastering. Again, mastering trumps format.

This potential issue became apparent already in the first review of SACD in Hifi News & Review by Martin Colloms from 1998. He said the SACD layer of a particular SACD sounded much better than the CD layer, but then a simple frequency sweep over the content revealed that the mastering of the two layers was not the same! Comparing apples and oranges.

IMHO many people prefer SACD just because their player has a better sounding implementation of the SACD format than that of CD. But this is just a feeling, I have no data to support a debate on it!

I sure know DACs that sound better in the DSD format (of which SACD is one example) than in the PCM format. One example is the NADAC. PCM through this DAC sounds best when upsampled to DSD.

NorthStar · Sep 11, 2016

Barry2013 said:
I am facing a similar issue.
I am considering upgrading from my DCS Puccini/Scarlatti Word clock and want to retain my current SACD capability. If I stay with DCS that means a minimum of three boxes. To date I have not found any one box SACD player that looks as if it will match my existing rig let alone beat a Scarlatii or hybrid Scarlatti/Paganini dac transport clock.
Last night after reading the HiFi Plus review of the Analogue Domain Isis integrated amp I was prompted to play my Mofi SACD of Patricia Barber's Modern Cool. If I really needed any confirmation of the virtues of SACD that provided it.
Yes not all SACDS live up to expectations but properly executed ones are so much better than Red Book.

I certainly agree with that discovery; it has been mine as well. And many of my CDs sound phenomenally good, from the better music record labels.
And that encompasses Jazz, Classical, Blues, World.

TBone · Sep 11, 2016

Al M. said:
This potential issue became apparent already in the first review of SACD in Hifi News & Review by Martin Colloms from 1998. He said the SACD layer of a particular SACD sounded much better than the CD layer, but then a simple frequency sweep over the content revealed that the mastering of the two layers was not the same! Comparing apples and oranges.

... tilted scales ... dynamic range measurements have since confirmed that many so called "superior" SACDs inc. a compressed CD layer.

No wonder many think SACD sounds better.

microstrip · Sep 11, 2016

TBone said:
... tilted scales ... dynamic range measurements have since confirmed that many so called "superior" SACDs inc. a compressed CD layer.

No wonder many think SACD sounds better.

Than we must buy the SACD, rip it to file, transcode to PCM red book and record a CD for comparison.

mullard88 · Sep 11, 2016

Has anyone taken delivery of the Spectral 4000SV CD player?

Mobiusman · Sep 11, 2016

Any thoughts or experience about the Ayon CD-T transport and the Ayon Stratos DAC?

JackD201 · Sep 11, 2016

Shouldn't the question be.... Shouldn't I get a SOTA CD player while I actually Can?

dan31 · Sep 11, 2016

JackD201 said:
Shouldn't the question be.... Shouldn't I get a SOTA CD player while I actually Can?

Well said.

NorthStar · Sep 11, 2016

Mr. Russ, is it possible for you to audition the Spectral SDR-4000SV Reference CD Processor in a town not too far from you?
Also, is time running fast; like do you have the time to wait for professional reviews from the true very best professional audio reviewers?
______

• http://www.moremusic.nl/spectral/SDR-4000SV.html
• http://www.stereophile.com/content/...ew-yorks-innovative-audio#cl1S0xlvj2Ag9ctS.97

The rear panel is a very minimalist design; analog unbalanced RCA stereo out jacks...Tiffany style.
One digital coaxial output (Tiffany).
The other digital output I can't quite make it. ...Spectral's own interface?
One IEC AC power connector jack...with a power on/off switch. ...And a fuse holder.
That is all.

Controls Rear Panel:
Spectralink Digital Interface (optional)
Main Power Switch
AC Line Fuse
IEC AC Power Connector

Compact Disc Drive: Front load type with VRDS clamping system, diecast alloy contruction
Disc Loader: Precision type with polished linear bearings
Pickup: Objective lens drive type with 3-beam laser pickup linear drive servo

The accent is on the stereo analog output (Outputs: RCA single-ended). That is its raison d'etre.

It's called a "Processor". Does it have some DSP for room correction? I doubt it or they would have mention it.
It does have the latest HDCD "long" filter...which could be attributed to part of its processing.
Nowhere is the mention of the DACs, their brand and model number...just how many of them (4), and in double balanced configuration.

Digital Systems Specifications
Sample Rate: 44.1KHz
D/A Conversion: Four custom 24 bit DACs in double balanced
configuration
Digital Filter: 8x oversampling, 56 bit math 64 bit accumulator HDCD
Analog Filter: Passive type, linear to 28KHz
Frequency Response: DC to 22Khz ± .3 db
DAC Step Resolution: Better than -120dB
Digital Noise Output: 100 uV peak to peak or less
Transient Overshoot: 8% or less
Transient Settling Time: 100uS or less @ 1 %
Intrinsic Jitter: Less than 1 picosecond rms,
3-4 picoseconds peak

* Notice the amount of jitter? ...Only 1ps!

Is it unwise to buy a state of the art CD player at this time?

Member

VIP/Donor

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor

Member

New Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Similar threads