It's a Pioneer I got a year ago. DV-563A. I don't know if it's still
available. Honestly, I don't think there's much difference between the $150
player and the $500 player. They're all made cheaply. They are not easily
repaired. They don't last that long, in my experience. So unless you are
going to step up to $1k or better, I'd spend as little as possible. Just
avoid the off brand stuff. The picture is good on DVD, CD is okay (a little
brash), DVDA can be awesome and the high frequencies on SACD sound like
analog to me. That's where I never liked CD, the high frequencies, although
they made up for it in dynamics, bass, S2NR, etc.. The SACD and DVDA are
the best formats ever, in my opinion, when mastered well (and I've heard
some bad SACDs due to incompetence). The RCA SACD reissue series really
does "blow away" every analog copy I've heard. I'd wasted an embarrassing
sum on one of those 45RPM four single sided ultra premium kick ass reissues
of Munch/Boston/The Organ Symphony, just to have it knocked on its butt by a
$13 SACD. Woe is me. The naysayers will opine that SACD is a doomed
format, but with the specialty crowd (that includes such small operations as
RCA and Telarc), it's still doing quite well. If you think about it, the
small labels, after the initial learning curve and tremendous investment in
the proper equipment, can deal with SACD hybrids for not much more than a
regular CD. The extra juice offered by SACD to their customers gives you
"value added" to the product, enhancing sales with the
audiophile/cognoscenti crowd. Something like: "hey Biff, should I buy the
SACD hybrid Telarc or the CD only EMI for the same price?". "Well Tanner,
the Telarc will play in your BMW and in your SACD player at the mansion, so
get it". You can say the same negative things about the regular CD as SACD
since it appears the music industry is in a deepening crises with downloads,
piracy, MP3, etc... I really wasn't kidding about MP3 killing off CD. The
odd thing is, it's getting harder to find a really good CD player.
Reviewers and buyers have noted that there aren't very many great mid-priced
CD players like 10 years ago (Marantz, Rotel, Sony ES, etc..). With all the
extra stuff added like DVD, DVDA, SACD, MP3 playback, etc...., the regular
16bit 44K playback has suffered. I concur and I've heard 10 year old
players that sound much better than current offerings.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rod Stephens" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 1:42 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity
> 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.
> Rod Stephens
> P.S. I've got a Best Buy up the road even though we're a small town.
> phillip holmes wrote:
>> Hey Tom,
>> Stop picking on me. And the CD player cost $140. And I got it from Best
>> Buy. It also plays SACD and DVDA pretty good. Actually, the SACD
>> playback is fantastic for what it is. I still don't think this CD thing
>> is going to make it. MP3 is going to rule. All you suckers who adopted
>> CD are going to be like all those early adopters of stereo. The joke's
>> on you losers!
>> Besides, I got my $10,000 turntable for 1/3 of MSRP. I'm no sucker!
>> Phillip (tongue in cheek, if you couldn't tell).
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Fine"
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2006 6:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity
>>> Yes, this whole fingerprint thing reminds me of the audiophool with the
>>> $10K record player and the $50 Chinese Wal-Mart CD player claiming LPs
>>> "always" sound better and CDs "always" sound "terrible."
>>> For what it's worth, I borrow, play and sometimes make personal-use
>>> copies of circulated library CD's and DVD's all the time. We're talking
>>> fingerprints galore and scratches to boot, plus usually some sort of
>>> off-center stick-on library label to potentially effect playback
>>> mechanics. Never had a problem, using typical consumer DVD players and
>>> Plextor drives in the computer. I had a DVD last week ("Battle of
>>> Algiers" -- superb movie, highly recommended, DVD reissue is excellent)
>>> that had a pinhole chunk chipped out of the edge. It played perfectly --
>>> I tested every bit of the DVD because I was curious if there was a data
>>> problem from the chunk. It was all scratched up too.
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerome Hartke"
>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2006 7:25 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity
>>>> Moving away from opinions, our testing laboratory has conducted tests
>>>> both CD and DVD discs containing such defects, both of our own
>>>> and obtained from Philips Laboratories. Results are as described in my
>>>> initial contribution.
>>>> Simple fingerprints should never interfere with playback unless the
>>>> drive is of very poor quality. The real risk of fingerprints is in the
>>>> from the body. Those of each person are distinct, and some can degrade
>>>> over an extended period of time.
>>>> Media Sciences, Inc.
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alex Hartov
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2006 5:58 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Longevity
>>>>> That is part of the hype. You try it. I know from experience that a
>>>>> simple finger print will mess up playback on either CD or DVD. I
>>>>> don't know where the notion of a whole in the CD/DVD being
>>>>> recoverable comes from but it's definitely nonsense.
>>>>> On Jul 2, 2006, at 5:31 PM, phillip holmes wrote:
>>>>> >> CD and DVD error detection and correction algorithms will "play"
>>>>> >> discs with
>>>>> >> 2 mm diameter holes. Some DVD systems require a 6 mm defect before
>>>>> >> data loss
>>>>> >> occurs, and the problem is then loss of servo lock by the read
>>>>> >> drive. Can
>>>>> >> 78s do this?