Hi all,
I have a Marantz CD-94 - a great machine. I also have the Sercice Manual of the improved version CD-94MkII. So I could identify the differences.
I wonder if anybody has ever compared the two machines, and how much better is the MkII version sonically? I know it has dual TDA1541A S1 DAC chips and a differential analogue section - does it make much difference?
I have a Marantz CD-94 - a great machine. I also have the Sercice Manual of the improved version CD-94MkII. So I could identify the differences.
I wonder if anybody has ever compared the two machines, and how much better is the MkII version sonically? I know it has dual TDA1541A S1 DAC chips and a differential analogue section - does it make much difference?
Hello oshifis,
Comparing CD-94 and CD-94 MkII is not the way.
I have a Marantz CD-94. You can perform many (and easy) improvement on this interesting CD player: changing AOP, capacitors, rectifiers diodes... You can find this on this forum.
Comparing CD-94 and CD-94 MkII is not the way.
I have done all the mods you mentioned and some more. What I am specifically interested in is the balanced TDA1541A topology in the MkII version. Marantz use a simple solution: one TDA chip gives R+ and L+ analog outputs as usual. The DATA line of the second TDA chip is simply inverted, so it gives R- and L- analog outputs.
Pedja Rogic described a more complex solution here:
http://diy.audialonline.com/archive/I2Sbal_split.pdf
He uses R+ and R- on the same chip (L+ and L- on the other), so the total current draw of the chip is constant.
I would like to know (without trying it myself) if there is any subjective advantage of Pedja's balanced solution over the simple Marantz balanced topology, and that over the unbalanced one-chip topology. Evidently, both balanced solutions must use a more complex balanced-to-unbalanced analog output with more opamps, which might adversely affect the sound.
Any comments?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.