Damned audiophiles

[Almo]

So we're replacing the stereo. It has finally worn out, but it's been good.

So the problem I have is navigating the audiphile minefield. When are they full of it, and when are they not? My specific problem relates to CD players.

I've had stereo salesmen be downright rude to me when it comes to CD player issues. To me, it's digital, and so I don't need a $5000 piece of equipment to play the disc. I'm aware that the DAC needs to be of decent quality, but I personally doubt you can get really noticable sound improvements about a certain (fairly low) price point.

I found this link: http://regonaudio.com/Jitter.html which seems to explain one issue well, but how important is this?

I'm a pretty sensititve listener, but I did an experiement with compressed audio once. I took the same track and reexported it from the raw CD data to various bitrate AAC audio files, and I couldn't tell the difference in my expensive headphones. Even the 56 kbps bitrate file didn't stick out.

So I'm very wary of getting sucked into paying a bunch of money for something I don't think will make much of a difference.

Anyone here have any thoughts or advice on what I should do about the CD player?

 

[rwguinn]

So we're replacing the stereo. It has finally worn out, but it's been good.

So the problem I have is navigating the audiphile minefield. When are they full of it, and when are they not? My specific problem relates to CD players.

I've had stereo salesmen be downright rude to me when it comes to CD player issues. To me, it's digital, and so I don't need a $5000 piece of equipment to play the disc. I'm aware that the DAC needs to be of decent quality, but I personally doubt you can get really noticable sound improvements about a certain (fairly low) price point.

I found this link: http://regonaudio.com/Jitter.html which seems to explain one issue well, but how important is this?

I'm a pretty sensititve listener, but I did an experiement with compressed audio once. I took the same track and reexported it from the raw CD data to various bitrate AAC audio files, and I couldn't tell the difference in my expensive headphones. Even the 56 kbps bitrate file didn't stick out.

So I'm very wary of getting sucked into paying a bunch of money for something I don't think will make much of a difference.

Anyone here have any thoughts or advice on what I should do about the CD player?

First off, I am a "folkie" with excursions into Rimski-Korsakov, Tchaikovski, and Wagner.
My Blu-ray player seems to play DVD's, CD's and MP-3's quite well, but I also use Zip-cord for the speakers.
Get the one with the bells and whistles you want. I paid $250 (or less) for the Blu-ray player.

 

[Coolhat]

Audiophiles... isn´t that just a glorifed term for shop-a-holic? Audiophiles may describe their obsession as "hobby" or "passion", but in the end it is just about buying expensive stuff and then replacing it with even more expensive stuff.

Anyway, just pick something that feels solid and is nice to use (responses well to commands, has an ergonomic remote).

 

[I Ratant]

One of my friends was shopping for new audio equipment, and being an engineer was into frequency response and sound levels and all that acousta-nut stuff... until he realized he really was to listen to Johnny Cash, so any noise producer would do, the higher frequencies ( above say 6khz) would never be encountered.

 

[quadraginta]

Start with this. What kind of shape is your hearing in?

After thirty years of high volume heavy construction noise (and more than a couple big concerts in the 60s and 70s, ) I know that any real extremes of reproduction quality would be largely wasted on me. I can still hear well (thank goodness), but not well enough to justify any substantial investment in "quality" beyond knowing that the product is decently crafted and dependable.

 

[BigAl]

I'm still enjoying my late-70s/early80s components. As I recall, most of the purchase decisions were from the bargain category in Stereophonic Magazine. It seems to be online now.

http://stereophile.com/budgetcomponents/

I have no idea what the market is like now.

The comment about how good is your hearing is worth considering. I find I can listen to MP3s and audio streams on my PC and enjoy them but when I pop the real CD into my component CD player and system I notice the difference and it *is* better.

I put lots of work into selecting my components. After I made my choices, I stopped listening in buyer mode. I just enjoy the music.

 

[dasmiller]

The comment about how good is your hearing is worth considering. I find I can listen to MP3s and audio streams on my PC and enjoy them but when I pop the real CD into my component CD player and system I notice the difference and it *is* better.

Have you compared at various qualities of MP3? Several years ago, when I was thinking about ripping my entire CD collection, I did a bunch of tests to see what differences I could hear. At 128 kbps (fixed), the MP3s were listenable but certainly not as good as the source CD. At 160 kbps, the difference between MP3 and source CD was small. At 192 kbps, I couldn't tell the difference.

For my disclaimers: I didn't have any way to do a blind test but at 192 kbps, I frequently got mixed up about whether I was listening to the CD or the MP3. Also, I have no reason to think that my hearing is particularly good, so YMMV.

I typically rip at 192 kbps VBR; when I buy from Amazon, I think they're 256 kbps. But there are a lot of 128 kbps MP3s out there.

It may be that the newer encoders (I don't remember which I was using) can do a better job, so my tests may be out of date. And my hearing probably hasn't improved over the last several years. I didn't test any other compression schemes.

 

[Almo]

My hearing seems to be in good shape, though I've had tinnitus at least since I read what it was. Seems mostly psychological, as I can go for days without hearing it sometimes. If I have any damage, it's from being around monitors and TVs all day everyday for most of my life, and the high-pitched frequency the scanning beam makes seems to be burned into my head.

Since my experience comparing the $20 HDMI cable to the $170 one, I don't trust the industry's pricing schemes.

 

[Beanbag]

The sales people will push you to the highest priced item they can -- it's their job to do so.

My suggestion is:
1: Find a unit with features you like. Are the controls easy to operate and understand? Is the remote control (if it has one) easy to operate. Do you like the way the unit looks?

2: Check the mechanical aspects of the system. Is the CD/DVD player tray solid, or does it seem flimsy? Pop a disc in the unit and listen to the unit (NOT the music) as it plays. Does it sound smooth, or does it grind/rattle/shake/etc?

3: Now, take a listen to the music. If it plays fine to your ears, and the price is right for you, BUY IT.

DON'T get swept up in the BS about hi-end speaker cables. Unless you're running 5000 watts per channel, plain old 18 ga. zip cord (the kind you use for wiring lamps) is just fine. If you want to splurge, get 16 ga. or 12 ga. zip cord.

Obviously, for specialized connectors like HDMI, you can't make them yourself. The cheaper cables will work just as well as the expensive ones. Just check that they're well-made, mechanically. See that the connector fingers are straight and not bent or deformed. And keep your cable lengths reasonable. If you've got a four-foot run, for pete's sake DON'T get a 25-foot cable. Get a six footer so you've got a little room to shift things around.

There actually IS a difference between low-end and hi-end cables (besides the price). The catch is, you need a couple thousand dollars worth of test equipment to SEE the difference -- you can't HEAR it.

Go with your ears and common sense.

Beanbag

 

[Loss Leader]

By far, the most important consideration should be ease of use. Find a system with an interface that you really like. You'll be much happier spending more money on that feature than on anything above basic sound reproduction.

 

[macdoc]

I was in very high end audio distribution for many years in the 80s and some off the wall systems could transport you...

I got out in the 80s recession in part because with digital the difference between a decent cost effective system with good speakers ( clearly the major key )
and a $5k+ system was not justified for most users

That said - human hearing can be pretty discriminating when it comes to harmonics and sounds supposedly below the noise floor ( think of how you can hear a voice you know when a crowd is chatting...)

There is some art in DAC..that is one hinge point...

The other of course is converting it back into sound waves via speakers or headphones...

I tend to go for the headphones and will spend on them

OPPO sort of showed up the videophiles as well tho they did use top notch components but at an incredible price point...

Not sure where the OPPO of the audio end lies these days.

Imagery and transient response still play highly in speaker choice and can be magical when it comes together in a decent room ( a huge factor ).

You are correct to take sales pitches with a big grain of salt.

The whole move back to vinyl has my head spinning but it may be an aspect of harmonics that arrive via analogue better that is driving that - rather than just a fashion trend..

that aspect was always lurking with digital..

But indeed caveat emptor these days...

I find it amusing that those with expensive systems often do not understand their room acoustics and end with marginal sound and people are always surprised when with a little positioning I can make a cheapie system sound decent.

Room size and the nature of it's acoustics ( lively or muted ) has a big play in your choice

 

[sol invictus]

So the problem I have is navigating the audiphile minefield. When are they full of it, and when are they not? My specific problem relates to CD players.

They're full of it nearly all the time, especially when it comes to CD players.

Anyone here have any thoughts or advice on what I should do about the CD player?

Yeah - don't buy one. Get a digital music player like a squeezebox. It's much more versatile and convenient, and the sound quality is indistinguishable. If you're very concerned about SQ and really need a CD player, buy a good amplifier with digital inputs or an external DAC and feed the digital out of a cheap CD player into that.

For reference, my sound system would cost around $10K new. Most of that is in the speakers.

 

[Halsu]

For reference, my sound system would cost around $10K new. Most of that is in the speakers.

IMHO, the most important things are room acoustics, speaker placement and the speakers themselves. These three things have a big effect on the way stuff sounds. Everything else is pretty irrelevant - almost all CD players, amplifiers, cables and so on are "plenty good enough", and the differences between them are negligible compared to the threesome.

 

[Halsu]

The whole move back to vinyl has my head spinning but it may be an aspect of harmonics that arrive via analogue better that is driving that - rather than just a fashion trend..

It's about "likable artifacts" and Pavlov's dogs i think. Vinyl has big artifacts: distortion, compression, limited dynamic range, limited tonal range and so on, but we have learned to associate those as positive "warmth". You can record a vinyl to a digital medium with those artifacts intact - the result still sounds "warm" like a vinyl... in other words, what we like about vinyl sound is actually the imperfections.

It's very similar to the Film vs. Digital discussion when it comes to photography (both stills and video). People associate the imperfections of film with "quality".

 

[Almo]

Thanks for the feedback; we won't be making a purchase for a while, so more is welcome. Anyone read that link I posted in the OP? That post would indicated that buying a cheapie CD player and using an external DAC would be a bad idea because of jitter. But is that really something as obvious as they say it is? The link talks a little math, which didn't seem unreasonable to me, but I'm not really sure about it.

 

[sol invictus]

Thanks for the feedback; we won't be making a purchase for a while, so more is welcome. Anyone read that link I posted in the OP? That post would indicated that buying a cheapie CD player and using an external DAC would be a bad idea because of jitter. But is that really something as obvious as they say it is? The link talks a little math, which didn't seem unreasonable to me, but I'm not really sure about it.

My suspicion is that jitter is essentially never audible. All modern DACs do a decent job attenuating it. But if you're concerned about it, buy a DAC that is immune to input jitter - like a Benchmark DAC1 - or use a digital music player with its own internal DAC, like a squeezebox (or a Transporter if you want to go higher end). Or if you must buy a CD player and this is going to bug you, get a medium to high-end one from a solid, major manufacturer (they should be available in the $400 range).

You can run some tests for yourself, it's particularly easy with jitter. Buy/borrow a DAC/amplifier with multiple digital inputs. Buy/borrow several digital sources (one cheap and one high-end CD player, for example). Now have someone switch between the inputs on the DAC/amp and see if you can distinguish, blind.

If you ensure the sound level is matched I'm willing to bet you won't be able to.

 

[marting]

My suspicion is that jitter is essentially never audible. All modern DACs do a decent job attenuating it. But if you're concerned about it, buy a DAC that is immune to input jitter - like a Benchmark DAC1 - or use a digital music player with its own internal DAC, like a squeezebox (or a Transporter if you want to go higher end). Or if you must buy a CD player and this is going to bug you, get a medium to high-end one from a solid, major manufacturer (they should be available in the $400 range).

You can run some tests for yourself, it's particularly easy with jitter. Buy/borrow a DAC/amplifier with multiple digital inputs. Buy/borrow several digital sources (one cheap and one high-end CD player, for example). Now have someone switch between the inputs on the DAC/amp and see if you can distinguish, blind.

If you ensure the sound level is matched I'm willing to bet you won't be able to.

Also, if you have Matlab you can easily create your own CD to test players and DtoA converters. Find the highest frequency you can hear then create a tone just above that. Record this at various levels and the spurious audible noise from jitter can be fairly easily discerned. Add two of these tones 100 to 2000 hz apart to check for non-linearities in the DtoA. You can also use a ripped track to add various levels of "jitter" to a known recording to see how much jitter margin you need.

I suspect for most CDs it's well below audio threshold.

It wouldn't surprise me if there isn't some free stuff on the web that people have already produced.

 

[novaphile]

Thanks for the feedback; we won't be making a purchase for a while, so more is welcome. Anyone read that link I posted in the OP? That post would indicated that buying a cheapie CD player and using an external DAC would be a bad idea because of jitter. But is that really something as obvious as they say it is? The link talks a little math, which didn't seem unreasonable to me, but I'm not really sure about it.

I can help you with this part of the question...

I have a good CD/DVD player and a good receiver. In theory the DACs are better quality in the CD player, but I use the DACs in the receiver when I'm playing DVDs via the digital coaxial connector (so that the receiver can separate the various channels for the different speakers around the room).

Every now and then I play a CD via this method, because I forget to change the selection on the Receiver.

I cannot tell the difference between the DACs on the Receiver and the DACs in the CD player.

There have never been any artefacts of any kind.

 

[BigAl]

Have you compared at various qualities of MP3? Several years ago, when I was thinking about ripping my entire CD collection, I did a bunch of tests to see what differences I could hear. At 128 kbps (fixed), the MP3s were listenable but certainly not as good as the source CD. At 160 kbps, the difference between MP3 and source CD was small. At 192 kbps, I couldn't tell the difference.

Nope. I haven't done any encoding where audio qualities mattered. Mom has accumulated a huge opera CD collection. She's 92 and has partial hearing in one ear and can't deal with the CDs any more. When the 1GB iPod came out I asked her to tag her "100 favorites" and I jammed them into the 1GB memory with the highest compression. She loves it. An audiophile wouldn't.

 

[Speedskater]

If you get a bunch of CD & CD/DVD players ranging in price from $29/$30 to whatever the high-end shop will loan you. They will all sound the same save for defective units and units that have strange tweaks.

Now having said that it seems more and more Audio/Video units have DSP's with a mind of their own. Some do all sorts of things like equalization, level compression and channel steering without telling you. Only with careful studying of the manual or signal testing will you discover these added features.