|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc. |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
|
Which of the early(1980's) battleship-build CD Players( starting with the 100 and ending with the 304mk11) sound the best? Was there a pecking order when for example the 104,204 and 304 were available at the same time?
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Adelaide
|
Hi Les (?)
there should not be any sonic difference in the early machines as they all use the TDA1540 dual dacs and ne5532 opamps, except the 304 mkII, which is - I believe- a TDA1541 dac machine. The very early CD200 and CD300 use a so called SOPHI board for the error correction, and I find them less resilient to disk errors (CDR's actually) than the SAA7020 machines. They don't like CDR recorded at higher than 8X Otherwise I personally cannot tell the difference between them, there are more variations between examples of the same player - due to various state of wear/disrepair- than between models. If you have choice, then go for the more exotic models that offer (some) creature comforts, like time readout (CD 104, CD202) or fancy loading mechanism (for visual effect mothing beats a CD300/3) The CD100 is a classic because it's the first, but the case is small and a pain to get into. Not fun for repairs or modding. Speaking of the CD100, the best professional modding of this player is by Meridian. For the peak of sonic excellence in this generation of players, the Meridian CDM would be (is) my choice. Hope this helps Philippe
__________________
"Everything else is gaslight" |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 12km off the alaska highway in northern BC
|
I own the mission DAD 7000. What is the actual difference to the philips 104?
Was this unit also modded by meridian, or is this just rebranding? The mission was actually built in Belgium, as the label indicates. |
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hampshire
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hampshire
|
and of course the Grundig CD7550 appears to be a CD104 clone, though some claim it has some circuit changes (unspecified) that further improve the sound. It certainly has a nicer front display. Some of the later 104's had rather garish frnt logos and labelling, while the Grundig is rather discrete, though not as nice as the B&O CDX
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 12km off the alaska highway in northern BC
|
Quote:
Never liked the not so much "bang" for the buck danish looks... |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
|
Which of these early Philips models were 16 bit? I know the 304Mk11 is 16 bit ,but was the 303 a 16 bit machine?
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Adelaide
|
Les,
the CD304 mkII, if its a tda1541, will be the 16 bit machine. All the others (and the Marantz clones we have'nt mentioned yet) are TDA1540 machines - so 14 bits. Personally I don't find the 14 bit (4 x oversampled) lacking in any way. - call me cloth ears Seriously, I have a Meridian 206 DS, and while more detailed, its not as much fun to listen to music as the MCD, which is 'more involving'. (I usually try and resist these 'audiophile' terms, but it makes sense in this case). Call me strange, but I actually listen to music for fun Hey Jives, I also have a CDX, so maybe I'll put the guts of the MCD in the CDX - now that would be awsome Audio-kraut, I don't know the mission player, sorry. If it physically resembles the CD100 or MCD, then it's a Philips clone. Apparently, there is also a Grundig clone of the CD100, and a Loewe clone of the CD202, but only seen pictures of the last one. More Fans of the early machines, great! Philippe
__________________
"Everything else is gaslight" |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 12km off the alaska highway in northern BC
|
Quote:
Yes, I listen to music for fun and don't like to "listen" to the equipment. But this vintage system is fun to listen to, and I cannot say that I find tis old cd player lacking either. Never played "against" my pioneer avi 59 in direct comparison, but listening to some well known "test" cd's, I can clearly discern the colouration the speaker introduces as compared to my kef's 104/2, but the information that is on the cd still is transmitted and I find nothing missing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | ||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hampshire
|
Quote:
I like the sound of your brit system. The Mission is exactly the right width for a Quad44 stack Quote:
I doubt you could put the boards from the Meridian in the CDX. The Meridian was based on the Philips CD101, while the CDX (despite being a top loader also) is actually a CD104 electronically. I think the Meridian looks good in that nextel/rubber finish. Trouble is it can flake in some examples |
||
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Philips cd 104 Player not yet received... | wckong | Digital Source | 17 | 9th July 2007 02:58 AM |
| PHILIPS CD80 cd player $1 | homemade | Swap Meet | 0 | 28th March 2007 01:43 AM |
| Philips CD Player | Gandalph | Digital Source | 0 | 13th December 2006 02:31 PM |
| Philips CD player | Vivek | Digital Source | 3 | 25th April 2002 09:55 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.11681 seconds (81.19% PHP - 18.81% MySQL) with 10 queries |