Vintage CD players

[nut-job]

When one does not hear an expected error from the CDP, is it really due to the good tracking ability of the player or is it more due to the correction circuitry which masks the error so one does not hear it?

The CD-ROM reader in your computer that probably costs less than $10 can read an entire CD 48 times faster than a CD player without making a single bit error.  Certainly some players are better than others at reading scratched or damaged discs, but the notion that you need an expensive player to read data off an intact disc is pure mythology.

[Holden]

...and further to my post in the locked thread, my player is the CD67 MkII SE (not the 63 that I stated). If it's in good working order then you should invest in one. Mine cost me $1000 dollars nearly a decade ago.

[George]

...and further to my post in the locked thread, my player is the CD67 MkII SE (not the 63 that I stated). If it's in good working order then you should invest in one. Mine cost me $1000 dollars nearly a decade ago.

Thanks Holden. Perhaps I will get lucky one day in a thift shop or a Goodwill store.

[Coopmv]

Thanks Holden. Perhaps I will get lucky one day in a thift shop or a Goodwill store.

George,   Have you ever checked out audiogon.com?  People list their vintage CD players all the time and I have seen some pretty nice stuffs over there.

[George]

George,   Have you ever checked out audiogon.com?  People list their vintage CD players all the time and I have seen some pretty nice stuffs over there.

I haven't. I'd prefer to get one from someone who didn't know what they have, you know?

[Coopmv]

I haven't. I'd prefer to get one from someone who didn't know what they have, you know?

Occasionally, you can even run into people like that on audiogon or even eBay.  I bought a much coveted Tandberg high-end receiver from a woman who inherited the unit from her late father.  Now not to be sexist here, women generally have little or no interests in quality sound.  I paid her what I felt was a fair price.

[drogulus]

The CD-ROM reader in your computer that probably costs less than $10 can read an entire CD 48 times faster than a CD player without making a single bit error.  Certainly some players are better than others at reading scratched or damaged discs, but the notion that you need an expensive player to read data off an intact disc is pure mythology.

     You wouldn't want a CD-ROM reader in a CD player, which must be forgiving of errors in precisely the way a CD-ROM can't be. I suppose the same transport and laser would be used, but CD is a one-pass real time system designed to play damaged and otherwise out of spec discs. And sure enough, almost every CD my computer chokes on plays on an ordinary CD player.

     

     
...and further to my post in the locked thread, my player is the CD67 MkII SE (not the 63 that I stated). If it's in good working order then you should invest in one. Mine cost me $1000 dollars nearly a decade ago.

     I think mine was $500 or maybe $600. My first Marantz was a plain CD 63 which was $300. Some outfit did a mod for these players with a tube output. Remember that?

[George]

     I think mine was $500 or maybe $600. My first Marantz was a plain CD 63 which was $300. Some outfit did a mod for these players with a tube output. Remember that?

That mod sounds very interesting indeed.

How does the CD63 compare to the CD67 MkII SE?

[drogulus]

That mod sounds very interesting indeed.

How does the CD63 compare to the CD67 MkII SE?

    It's basically the same player, with some parts upgrades. I don't remember exactly what the differences were though at the time I knew. My brother has my 67 and it still works quite well. I think all of these players were well made and designed (fixed and variable outs on a player makes them quite versatile).

[George]

    It's basically the same player, with some parts upgrades. I don't remember exactly what the differences were though at the time I knew. My brother has my 67 and it still works quite well. I think all of these players were well made and designed (fixed and variable outs on a player makes them quite versatile).

So they sound similar?

[drogulus]

So they sound similar?

     I don't think CD players have sounds unless they are broken or badly designed. I never had a bad CD player, so they all sounded great.

[Coopmv]

...and further to my post in the locked thread, my player is the CD67 MkII SE (not the 63 that I stated). If it's in good working order then you should invest in one. Mine cost me $1000 dollars nearly a decade ago.

That price is probably the equivalent of a $2000+ player today given the inflation rate and the ever depreciating dollar ...

[Coopmv]

     You wouldn't want a CD-ROM reader in a CD player, which must be forgiving of errors in precisely the way a CD-ROM can't be. I suppose the same transport and laser would be used, but CD is a one-pass real time system designed to play damaged and otherwise out of spec discs. And sure enough, almost every CD my computer chokes on plays on an ordinary CD player.

I had this experience.  My computer CD/DVD drive could not rip the last tracks of 2 CD's to the hard-drive due to read-errors on repeated attempts.  My CDP has absolutely no problems playing them.  I am not happy about this at all.  I imagine a standalone DVD player can also do a better job in handling errors than the one installed on my computer.

[Coopmv]

    It's basically the same player, with some parts upgrades. I don't remember exactly what the differences were though at the time I knew. My brother has my 67 and it still works quite well. I think all of these players were well made and designed (fixed and variable outs on a player makes them quite versatile).

You are definitely not talking about those look-alike, mainly Chinese-made and readily disposable players ...   

[Coopmv]

          
     I think mine was $500 or maybe $600. My first Marantz was a plain CD 63 which was $300. Some outfit did a mod for these players with a tube output. Remember that?

Were you referring to the Njoe Tjoeb 4000?

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/ah!/4000happening.htm

[drogulus]

I had this experience.  My computer CD/DVD drive could not rip the last tracks of 2 CD's to the hard-drive due to read-errors on repeated attempts.  My CDP has absolutely no problems playing them.  I am not happy about this at all.  I imagine a standalone DVD player can also do a better job in handling errors than the one installed on my computer.

    You have to understand that these drives are doing very different jobs. If you're copying software from a CD it can't have any errors, so you need a multiple-pass error recovery that actually gets the bits right (a feature that makes a program like EAC possible). A CD player is designed to withstand failures and patch errors on the fly without correcting them. It can't actually correct anything since it's a real time system.

Were you referring to the Njoe Tjoeb 4000?

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/ah!/4000happening.htm

    Yes, that's it. The link isn't working, though.

     


     I love a headphone jack on a CD player. They still impress me as the most sensibly designed players ever, and nice looking, too.

[nut-job]

     You wouldn't want a CD-ROM reader in a CD player, which must be forgiving of errors in precisely the way a CD-ROM can't be. I suppose the same transport and laser would be used, but CD is a one-pass real time system designed to play damaged and otherwise out of spec discs. And sure enough, almost every CD my computer chokes on plays on an ordinary CD player.

A CD player is not a real time system.  It has a memory buffer, it reads data from the disc into the memory buffer and it clocks the data out of the memory buffer into the digital to analog converter.  (This type of buffer is called a FIFO, for first in first out.)   How much data the buffer holds can vary.  I presume home systems have relatively small buffers, but one portable unit I have has something like 10 seconds of data stored.  There is even a little graph on the display showing how full the buffer is at any given moment.  If you shake the unit (for instance, by listen to it while running) you can see it start to fall behind because of the resulting mistracking.

The difference between a CD player and a CD-ROM is the software, one responds to a read failure by poping up an error message, the other makes things up.   My point remains, if I can read CDs in my 10 dollar drive without losing a single bit, why would you assume that a CD player would have trouble performing the same task 48 times slower?

[drogulus]

A CD player is not a real time system.  It has a memory buffer, it reads data from the disc into the memory buffer and it clocks the data out of the memory buffer into the digital to analog converter.  (This type of buffer is called a FIFO, for first in first out.)   How much data the buffer holds can vary. 

    Have you ever hit pause and play? The buffer is tiny. It's effectively real time and the player can't go back and read the same passage again. The error correction in a CD player doesn't correct because it can't. 

The difference between a CD player and a CD-ROM is the software, one responds to a read failure by poping up an error message, the other makes things up.   My point remains, if I can read CDs in my 10 dollar drive without losing a single bit, why would you assume that a CD player would have trouble performing the same task 48 times slower?

    It can't, it can't, it can't, and neither can the CD-ROM, so it goes back again, which you can see it do when you use the error correction in EAC. The FIFO is the absolute minimal buffer and when the Redbook standard was set memory was too expensive for the kind of buffer that would be used if you set the standard today.

[Coopmv]

    You have to understand that these drives are doing very different jobs. If you're copying software from a CD it can't have any errors, so you need a multiple-pass error recovery that actually gets the bits right (a feature that makes a program like EAC possible). A CD player is designed to withstand failures and patch errors on the fly without correcting them. It can't actually correct anything since it's a real time system.

    Yes, that's it. The link isn't working, though.

     


     I love a headphone jack on a CD player. They still impress me as the most sensibly designed players ever, and nice looking, too.

This link should work ...

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/view_category.asp?cat=50

[drogulus]

This link should work ...

http://www.upscaleaudio.com/view_category.asp?cat=50

    I see they are using the 4000 as the base player now. It's probably pretty much the same as the older ones.