Nothing faulty - I am just curious!
The Japanese did take care to sell built quality
through design, Philips did not: With Sony, Kenwood or Nakamichi chassis parts polished and brushed in the same manner, chassis parts sometimes copper plated.
But even though the chassis of a CD-304 (I think 104 as well)is cast alloy, it is painted dull black and looks looks like cheap plastic. The bottom plate is cheap tin (Verzinktes Blech in our language) and even the anodized looking buttons will peel after the years - but the mechanism seems very durable as we all know...
Ever seen the inside of a CD880 or other top CD-players Philips produced?
The CD304 was a mainstream consumer product, like most equipment Philips produced. Not to be compared with brands like Kenwood an Nakamichi.
LP's are analog stuff which is another category IMHO. In the digital area things have changed. Why use optical disks driven by electrical motors and enjoy more jitter than necessary while noiseless high res solid state audio hardware can be obtained at less cost ? That more recent hardware can play back exactly the same files as the CD contained with added useful features. Why the need to change disks ? Why a rack full of CD's ? Less space taken, less dissipation, less noise... When newer hardware is capable of doing the same with better quality at lower cost it makes less sense to bother with the old stuff when looking from an economical and technical point of view.
I recently scrapped my last CD player (removed the new CDM4 though). There is so much user friendliness and less clutter with modern hardware. Better sound quality too. I have bothered a lot to make CDM1/2/3/4 CD players better, replaced a lot of lasers and spindle motors etc. and I made many many DACs. I can do the same with better results at lower cost with some newer solid state devices, that is all I meant. It would be slightly different if the new hardware would be very expensive.
I recently scrapped my last CD player (removed the new CDM4 though). There is so much user friendliness and less clutter with modern hardware. Better sound quality too. I have bothered a lot to make CDM1/2/3/4 CD players better, replaced a lot of lasers and spindle motors etc. and I made many many DACs. I can do the same with better results at lower cost with some newer solid state devices, that is all I meant. It would be slightly different if the new hardware would be very expensive.
Last edited:
Well , I sometimes get the impression that nostalgia is a reason some keep putting money in obsolete techniques. I see the point with record players as there is no other means to play an LP than a record player. So improving an existing record player or even building the ultimate record player is what one can do to have the best playback of the medium. It is quite different with digital high res hardware that is backwards compatible. Such a device plays red book material without a problem.
BTW I think I contribute enough at this forum. Quite a blunt remark.
The thread is about decades old Philips hardware which was already mediocre in its time. When going on with Philips hardware better choose a good base for modding like CD-880 or Marantz CD80. Not the cheap stuff with bad PCB layout, spindle motors with brushes, mediocre PSU's and plastic cases. If the goal is best sound quality the base must be solid and good enough otherwise it is throwing away time and money. Just a CDM and a TDA are not enough for highest quality.
A guy in China designed a very nice new mainboard for driving CDM4 mechs. Good PSU's and the same chips as were used in the eighties except for modern controllers. The set could be bought with a very nice and heavy anodised case but getting one to Europe didn't happen.
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89444401
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89422998
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89422570-被放棄了的實驗品之CDM-4唱盤-Part+3(裝箱)
BTW I think I contribute enough at this forum. Quite a blunt remark.
The thread is about decades old Philips hardware which was already mediocre in its time. When going on with Philips hardware better choose a good base for modding like CD-880 or Marantz CD80. Not the cheap stuff with bad PCB layout, spindle motors with brushes, mediocre PSU's and plastic cases. If the goal is best sound quality the base must be solid and good enough otherwise it is throwing away time and money. Just a CDM and a TDA are not enough for highest quality.
A guy in China designed a very nice new mainboard for driving CDM4 mechs. Good PSU's and the same chips as were used in the eighties except for modern controllers. The set could be bought with a very nice and heavy anodised case but getting one to Europe didn't happen.
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89444401
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89422998
http://blog.xuite.net/richards828/hkblog/89422570-被放棄了的實驗品之CDM-4唱盤-Part+3(裝箱)
Last edited:
A recent (2016) implementation of top loading CDM4 and TDA1541A:
http://chinatopstore.com/item?id=526979840320
Just as a reference how it can be done.
http://chinatopstore.com/item?id=526979840320
Just as a reference how it can be done.
Last edited:
@Jean-Paul
Not the case - literally- with CD-104 and CD-304. I pulled them out from dusty cellars with a lot of moisture. Even rust on the transformers. And they still work!
See, my work besides editing is recording and mixing. So I use the technology you are touting:
Tapeless, bit depths beyond 24 bit, sampling frequencies beyond 96kHz.
Great for the everyday work with plugins like equalizing, compressing, reverberation.
But hen the master is finished and I dither down all the Hi-Res to 16/441 guess what: I do not hear the slightest difference.
If CD-Roms were reliable, I would rather pull my final mix out of a shelf than firing up a PC or anything else with a screen . I run through list @work the whole day, do not need it @home.
And, BTW, when I go to a real store and buy a real CD or LP and pay cash,
only the dealer and me know my taste. What if my taste becomes dangerous? Kurdish Folk music in Turkey? "Village People" in Chechnia?
Maybe one day Pete Seeger in the U.S.?
With streaming, next Problem, energy: I read 10 years ago, the infrastructure of the net uses the energy of a washing machine for sending about 2mB of data from a site to an end user.
I assume these numbers have risen. So how many downloads or hours of streaming consume the energy of the pressing of one CD?
(Could be that shipment is the culprit here)
CD´s are simply still around and lasting.
My oldest CD is 33 years old. So I rather keep going with old technology, this is how Battlestar Galactica survived the Cylons!
BTW old technology: Page is from 2009, I doubt new CDM-4 are still around?
Not the case - literally- with CD-104 and CD-304. I pulled them out from dusty cellars with a lot of moisture. Even rust on the transformers. And they still work!
See, my work besides editing is recording and mixing. So I use the technology you are touting:
Tapeless, bit depths beyond 24 bit, sampling frequencies beyond 96kHz.
Great for the everyday work with plugins like equalizing, compressing, reverberation.
But hen the master is finished and I dither down all the Hi-Res to 16/441 guess what: I do not hear the slightest difference.
If CD-Roms were reliable, I would rather pull my final mix out of a shelf than firing up a PC or anything else with a screen . I run through list @work the whole day, do not need it @home.
And, BTW, when I go to a real store and buy a real CD or LP and pay cash,
only the dealer and me know my taste. What if my taste becomes dangerous? Kurdish Folk music in Turkey? "Village People" in Chechnia?
Maybe one day Pete Seeger in the U.S.?
With streaming, next Problem, energy: I read 10 years ago, the infrastructure of the net uses the energy of a washing machine for sending about 2mB of data from a site to an end user.
I assume these numbers have risen. So how many downloads or hours of streaming consume the energy of the pressing of one CD?
(Could be that shipment is the culprit here)
CD´s are simply still around and lasting.
My oldest CD is 33 years old. So I rather keep going with old technology, this is how Battlestar Galactica survived the Cylons!
BTW old technology: Page is from 2009, I doubt new CDM-4 are still around?
Hi I mentioned solid state playback not the fashionable streaming. Solid state playback as in a mediaplayer with local SD card, SSD (or harddisk but that is mechanical noise and wear again). Those use less energy than old CD players with 5V and +/- 15V bipolar chips. The SAA7220 alone uses 1W. If green was a concern you would not be posting here with a power consuming pc 
True, when streaming the network costs energy but the amount used for audio devices is relatively small. The network equipment will use power anyway as everything is multiplexed and sent in several colours over the glass fibre cables. What is wrong with a display ? There is also one on a CD player. No need for a pc to play music. Many newer sold state devices are operated exactly like a CD player except that there is no CD necessary to put in a tray. Everyone is free to do what he or she wants but I think it is trying to justify the use of old technology for non technical reasons. Any recent device that can play red book material (and high res material of which I do hear the difference) with less jitter and less wear at competitive cost and less energy use is a good impulse for our hobby. Audio is slowly dying and non one buying newer stuff will mean that we MUST buy our stuff in thrift stores in a few years
Regarding taste: you can find much material online whatever your taste is. Here the CD shops are disappearing. CD is over and done. I doubt your online music taste will ever get you in trouble. You will be watched anyway in Germany. Everything you do on the web is monitored. If privacy is a concern one better does things analog.
I see you haven't heard of disc rot ? I experienced this a few times even with well stored CD's. If it is not the discs that will be defective it will be the laser or spindle motor. Mechanical/optical playback is yesterdays technology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_rot
The CDM4 project is for those that already have a CDM4 mech. The kit can still be found but my chinese is not so good otherwise I would find it for you. I think 200 Euro for the player is not much.
True, when streaming the network costs energy but the amount used for audio devices is relatively small. The network equipment will use power anyway as everything is multiplexed and sent in several colours over the glass fibre cables. What is wrong with a display ? There is also one on a CD player. No need for a pc to play music. Many newer sold state devices are operated exactly like a CD player except that there is no CD necessary to put in a tray. Everyone is free to do what he or she wants but I think it is trying to justify the use of old technology for non technical reasons. Any recent device that can play red book material (and high res material of which I do hear the difference) with less jitter and less wear at competitive cost and less energy use is a good impulse for our hobby. Audio is slowly dying and non one buying newer stuff will mean that we MUST buy our stuff in thrift stores in a few years Regarding taste: you can find much material online whatever your taste is. Here the CD shops are disappearing. CD is over and done. I doubt your online music taste will ever get you in trouble. You will be watched anyway in Germany. Everything you do on the web is monitored. If privacy is a concern one better does things analog.
I see you haven't heard of disc rot ?
I experienced this a few times even with well stored CD's. If it is not the discs that will be defective it will be the laser or spindle motor. Mechanical/optical playback is yesterdays technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_rot
The CDM4 project is for those that already have a CDM4 mech. The kit can still be found but my chinese is not so good otherwise I would find it for you. I think 200 Euro for the player is not much.
Last edited:
How is your Hi Res material distributed? (Up to 2gigs for one hour stereo - this equals a whole movie) With smoke signs? My text will probably be about 70kb.
How much rare earth elements are today needed, how much was it with old technology?
And really, you avoid powerful preamps now?
Disc rot only once, when buying a used CD.
How much rare earth elements are today needed, how much was it with old technology?
And really, you avoid powerful preamps now?
Disc rot only once, when buying a used CD.
As explained the network equipment uses power anyway. The streaming does not define the power usage. I am in that business and a lot of energy is used but if you stream or not won't make a difference. Data is multiplexed and sent in several colours over the fibres. The streaming part is negligible. Once downloaded it is stored. Let's be fair : you will probably drive with your car to the shop to buy a CD. That CD is also brought there with a Diesel truck. The raw materials and end products are also shipped to and from far away cheaper countries with a Diesel truck or by ship... Etc. etc. If we start to think like this we should stop the hobby alltogether. With regards to the rare earth elements: I wouldn't know but I guess old stuff used more of that than modern stuff. That is just a guess though when I think of some of them. If we think like this we should not be using smart phones.
Please calculate the energy a pc uses on annual basis. You will be surprised. It is not the few kb of your text but the hours it is working.
Not sure what you mean with powerful preamps ?! I use power efficient FDA only. No analog stuff in use anymore for quite some years. Just 2 devices of which one is luxury and can be omitted. Power efficient, small, no heat, no mechanical wear out and excellent sound quality. Better than any CDM. Plays everything I throw at it. No nostalgia, I don't like to look back.
Please calculate the energy a pc uses on annual basis. You will be surprised. It is not the few kb of your text but the hours it is working.
Not sure what you mean with powerful preamps ?! I use power efficient FDA only. No analog stuff in use anymore for quite some years. Just 2 devices of which one is luxury and can be omitted. Power efficient, small, no heat, no mechanical wear out and excellent sound quality. Better than any CDM. Plays everything I throw at it. No nostalgia, I don't like to look back.
Last edited:
Why would anyone do that? It doesn't need any justification so why would one bother trying?
I often see things the other way around - people try to justify the use of new technology for technical reasons when the old tech is fine and perhaps gives a richer experience overall, especially richer when technology appears to be evolving to a narrower and narrower set of human interaction (touch screen) and therefore less diverse use of the brain and body. - just think how that familiarity of use between all sorts of devices from phones to cars to hifi carves a very narrow set of neural pathways in the brain, making one less able to adapt to new experiences or ways of doing things..
You do also come up against the legal aspects of ownership with digital files - buy them from places like itunes store and I don't think you own them, they are kind of licenced to you until they decide otherwise. Ripping CDs for personal back-up is still illegal in the UK - was made legal, then the big gun music labels stepped in and the legalisation was reversed. Therefore one is reqired by law to re-buy everything you have on CD..
The enjoyment of a CD player itself is enough to have one, again no justification needed.. for me you'd have to try hard to justify getting rid of it for solid state transport. I use both !
Last edited:
People are different; think differently, engage with the world differently.
That kind of thought process for choosing gear is so cold and uninvolving for me, it doesn't feature in how I think about audio gear. It has got to grab me at more levels than just sound quality and technical efficiency.
Same over here. New technology has to offer clear advantages and it has to sound good. Involving so to speak. I don't get attached anymore since having handled quite some audio equipment. It is volatile technology as we can see.
When one is used to owning many various devices and the pile becomes too high there comes one day that just 1 device will do
When one is used to owning many various devices and the pile becomes too high there comes one day that just 1 device will do
Last edited:
My amp did not give me the impression of being "volatile" when it hit my foot...
Oh, we just introduced a new benchmark here.
No joke:
A CD-304 from about 50mm height on my left foot -
Two toes swollen and black, could still
move them so I avoided a medic.
I was limping for about 10 days, shoe did fit again after two weeks.
So real High End is when your toes need to be amputated. ..
A year or so ago I visited someone with a "full digital high end installation". At least it was presented to me that way. I listened without prejudice. Sound quality was excellent. However, I could not see where the equipment was. When I asked it turned out that there was no visible or physical source.
No source that could be observed, no buttons to touch, just a tablet for operating the system. I found it quite disturbing even though I am not that old fashioned It still haunts me as I am in this hobby to learn and I like to see equipment and what's inside. Less devices is very OK, no devices is a no no (for me).
No source that could be observed, no buttons to touch, just a tablet for operating the system. I found it quite disturbing even though I am not that old fashioned
It still haunts me as I am in this hobby to learn and I like to see equipment and what's inside. Less devices is very OK, no devices is a no no (for me).
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.