Hello Chris,
Of course it is not a top player anymore. But even unmodded it can give a nice comparisson with modern players.
As there is a service obligation of 7 years getting a manual from the service organisation is difficult. But as there is a central service library your local service organisation might be willing to help you for such a product.
The adress ( I hope it is still valid) I have for you in the UK is:
Philips Consumer Electronics Service
420-430 London Road
Croydon CR9 3QR
Tel.: 0181-689 4444
Success!
Ward
Of course it is not a top player anymore. But even unmodded it can give a nice comparisson with modern players.
As there is a service obligation of 7 years getting a manual from the service organisation is difficult. But as there is a central service library your local service organisation might be willing to help you for such a product.
The adress ( I hope it is still valid) I have for you in the UK is:
Philips Consumer Electronics Service
420-430 London Road
Croydon CR9 3QR
Tel.: 0181-689 4444
Success!
Ward
Thanks for the replies, I'll try and persue those options. I also wondered if anybody out there has or had on of these? I have seen them mentioned in earlier threads but they never really went anywhere. Did the CD100 originally have an I/R remote control for example. I must admit it also sounds better than more modern kit I have had, I don't know why but it sounds more 'earthy' if that makes sense - could be my imagination tho! I have a feeling it would have been a very expensive toy when new in the early 80's, anybody have any idea how much?
Jorge, sorry to correct you, but the cd100 does not have a captive phono lead - it has regular sockets on the back.
The cd100 never had a remote. As I understand it, it was the first CD player available on the uk market and it was expensive.
I also have a cd100 and it's a beautifully-made piece of kit. It's only problem is slow track access and bad handling of CDRs (having difficulty finding track starts, etc.) Anyone have any ideas for improving matters? The cd101 (my flatmate has one) is much better in this respect as it uses the later mech, but its not quite as pretty!
I have considered modding mine, but it's difficult to know where to start. Anyone have any experience? The Meridian MCD and MCD pro were both modified versions of the Philips cd101. The MCD had constant power-on/standby and upgraded analogue circuitry/output stage. My Philips sounds better after a good chance to warm up, and it gets pretty hot.
All of these players are nice to use with the exception of a few quirks. Sonically, I find the cd100 generally very good, with a very solid clear sound, good dynamics, and good bass. On the down side, it can sound a little harsh in the top end, and it lacks the sence of 'space' and rhythmic timing that you can get from the better modern players. The cd101 sounds pretty much the same to my ears.
The MCD sounds similar, but much smoother than the vanilla Philips, so I suspect that mods to the output stage would go some way to improving quality. I'd be interested to find out whether it was possible to clock the player though, as I suspect that this could provide a significant upgrade. Does anyone know if this is possible?
Incidentally, I've heard the MCD pro too and I don't particularly like it... It was significantly re-worked, with a separate box for the dac. Described by a friend as sounding "gutless" which I'd agree with. Weird, huh? Maybe they were trying too hard...
I've been told that the player uses a 12-bit DAC, but I'm not sure this is accurate. If it's the case then maybe that's likely to be the limiting factor in the player's sound. If anyone has any ideas I'd love to hear them. In the meantime, my flatmate also has a broken MCD, so maybe I should have a poke around inside and see if I can get any ideas...
The cd100 never had a remote. As I understand it, it was the first CD player available on the uk market and it was expensive.
I also have a cd100 and it's a beautifully-made piece of kit. It's only problem is slow track access and bad handling of CDRs (having difficulty finding track starts, etc.) Anyone have any ideas for improving matters? The cd101 (my flatmate has one) is much better in this respect as it uses the later mech, but its not quite as pretty!
I have considered modding mine, but it's difficult to know where to start. Anyone have any experience? The Meridian MCD and MCD pro were both modified versions of the Philips cd101. The MCD had constant power-on/standby and upgraded analogue circuitry/output stage. My Philips sounds better after a good chance to warm up, and it gets pretty hot.
All of these players are nice to use with the exception of a few quirks. Sonically, I find the cd100 generally very good, with a very solid clear sound, good dynamics, and good bass. On the down side, it can sound a little harsh in the top end, and it lacks the sence of 'space' and rhythmic timing that you can get from the better modern players. The cd101 sounds pretty much the same to my ears.
The MCD sounds similar, but much smoother than the vanilla Philips, so I suspect that mods to the output stage would go some way to improving quality. I'd be interested to find out whether it was possible to clock the player though, as I suspect that this could provide a significant upgrade. Does anyone know if this is possible?
Incidentally, I've heard the MCD pro too and I don't particularly like it... It was significantly re-worked, with a separate box for the dac. Described by a friend as sounding "gutless" which I'd agree with. Weird, huh? Maybe they were trying too hard...
I've been told that the player uses a 12-bit DAC, but I'm not sure this is accurate. If it's the case then maybe that's likely to be the limiting factor in the player's sound. If anyone has any ideas I'd love to hear them. In the meantime, my flatmate also has a broken MCD, so maybe I should have a poke around inside and see if I can get any ideas...
It uses two 14 bit mono DAC's (TDA1540). I have a B&O CD-X which is based on the CD104.
Making mods will be difficult, but there is a post out here where somebody was going to try to connect a TDA1541 DAC with no oversampling. This should be possible (put it in a mode where there are two separate pins for left and right digital data), but i did not see a response on the forum.
I'm not going to do much mods to my cdx, since there is little space inside. I think that accounts for all of those players, since all is mounted in the heavy subchassis and there is not much space around that. And the chassis is full with pcb's, since there are many digital chips around. Not so integrated as later models (separate error correction, decoder, etc).
Only modding on component level is than a good option (opamps, caps etc).
Greetings,
GuidoB
Making mods will be difficult, but there is a post out here where somebody was going to try to connect a TDA1541 DAC with no oversampling. This should be possible (put it in a mode where there are two separate pins for left and right digital data), but i did not see a response on the forum.
I'm not going to do much mods to my cdx, since there is little space inside. I think that accounts for all of those players, since all is mounted in the heavy subchassis and there is not much space around that. And the chassis is full with pcb's, since there are many digital chips around. Not so integrated as later models (separate error correction, decoder, etc).
Only modding on component level is than a good option (opamps, caps etc).
Greetings,
GuidoB
Thanks guido.
That's all very interesting... and you're totally right about the lack of internal space.
I've owned CD104s before and I reckon that these sound a little better than the CD100. They got better reviews at the time. Maybe it's worth having a look inside one of those before considering mods. I always understood it that they were based on later-generation chips, but maybe just for error-correction etc...
It's strange that the B&O is related to the CD104 because it looks so much like a CD100.
Let me know if you find out anything else. Or if anyone else has direct experience... If I look inside the meridian and philips i will post a comparison. Could be interesting.
That's all very interesting... and you're totally right about the lack of internal space.
I've owned CD104s before and I reckon that these sound a little better than the CD100. They got better reviews at the time. Maybe it's worth having a look inside one of those before considering mods. I always understood it that they were based on later-generation chips, but maybe just for error-correction etc...
It's strange that the B&O is related to the CD104 because it looks so much like a CD100.
Let me know if you find out anything else. Or if anyone else has direct experience... If I look inside the meridian and philips i will post a comparison. Could be interesting.
104,204 and 304 run on philips chips.The earlier models needed Sony support.There is a mk2 version of the 304 that has aTDA1541 DAC.It's no improvement
verblown bass and thin high
frequencies.If someone built an IIR replacement for the FIR saa7030filter.........that might give those old machines a new live!
As it stands I would only restore it to the original specs.
I have (had) some of these machines,the unmodified are simply the best!
Martijn
verblown bass and thin highfrequencies.If someone built an IIR replacement for the FIR saa7030filter.........that might give those old machines a new live!
As it stands I would only restore it to the original specs.
I have (had) some of these machines,the unmodified are simply the best!
Martijn
How did that silly face appear in my reply?I typed ""
Blutomqold,
to transform your cd100 into a transport you will need some chip that transforms the old digital interface into spdif.I wonder if it exists.I have once taken a 202 apart:it appears it even used 2 different interfaces because of some non-Philips chips.
I would keep your 100 as a working museumpiece:more fun.
Martijn
"Blutomqold,
to transform your cd100 into a transport you will need some chip that transforms the old digital interface into spdif.I wonder if it exists.I have once taken a 202 apart:it appears it even used 2 different interfaces because of some non-Philips chips.
I would keep your 100 as a working museumpiece:more fun.
Martijn
martijn said:
Did I mention changing opamps ? I merely reacted to this quote:
Which you contradict by saying you heard a modified one that sounded amazingly good. Which you contradict again by saying that it also sounded amazingly good 18 years ago.... They sounded good at that time because there wasn't much to compare them with. Amazingly good is a too high qualification IMO.
So what do you mean exactly ? BTW I am 100 % sure one can not compare modified cdplayers with the original that was heard 18 years before. Impossible.
I avoid CD202, 304 etc. because I think they're too old and not up to par with the "newer" old Philips cdplayers but I dare to say that every cdplayer can benefit from even the smallest mod which includes changing opamps, diodes, changing caps, rerouting cables and fitting low jitter clocks etc. I call those things modifications because I don't know how to call them else.
Best practice is to compare with a second cdplayer of the same type. I admit that there are people out there that can mod the most beautiful cdplayers to hell with their melting glue guns but I know more skillful people as well. If modifications don't make things better it is better to stop modding IMHO.
Jean-Paul,
it looks to me that we essentially share the same opinion.
What I consider a repair you tend to call a modification.
Since these old players will brake down you can't escape a decent repairjob.I think you will concur with me that in such a situation you will still choose the best option available while retaining the original schematic/printed circuitboard(I'm talking repair,not redesign )
The moment I choose a different clocksystem or a transformer that can output more current or a different analogue filter etc I would call it a modification.
I understand that some of my repairchoices would constitute a modification in someones opinion.And indeed they sometimes are borderline in my opinion.
I concur with you that these machines don't deliver the best you can get from CD.If well restored they are very enjoyable machines.If heavily modified they seldom retain that nice compromise.
Martijn
it looks to me that we essentially share the same opinion.
What I consider a repair you tend to call a modification.
Since these old players will brake down you can't escape a decent repairjob.I think you will concur with me that in such a situation you will still choose the best option available while retaining the original schematic/printed circuitboard(I'm talking repair,not redesign )
The moment I choose a different clocksystem or a transformer that can output more current or a different analogue filter etc I would call it a modification.
I understand that some of my repairchoices would constitute a modification in someones opinion.And indeed they sometimes are borderline in my opinion.
I concur with you that these machines don't deliver the best you can get from CD.If well restored they are very enjoyable machines.If heavily modified they seldom retain that nice compromise.
Martijn
The Philips CD100 was the first commercial CD-player on the market, so really it is a vintage-object. The value depends srongly on the fact of the completeness of the original package, i.e. the original box, manual and first demonstration/test-CD (I do not remember exactly this CD). The naked apparatus has a commercial value at this moment (6-6-07) of E 125.
When the CD100 was promoted on television in 1981, Philips showed a CD with a nail-hole in it and claimed the CD was still usable. But afterwards, this was far away from the real truth.
I used it a few years in the eighties; the sound was somewhat cool /unnatural. Therefore here in the Netherlands are some companies specialized in upgrading it.
The CD-drive + laserunit however is of a very good mechanical construction and was sold worldwide in many years for everyone who wanted to build his own trademark CD-player.
The system works slow, and copied CD-R have sometimes problems with the automatic track-sequence, but you can manually go forward or backwards with the tracks.
Also the system has a limitation in showing the amount of tracks, dueing to the amount of LEDs in front of the CD-player.
When the CD100 was promoted on television in 1981, Philips showed a CD with a nail-hole in it and claimed the CD was still usable. But afterwards, this was far away from the real truth.
I used it a few years in the eighties; the sound was somewhat cool /unnatural. Therefore here in the Netherlands are some companies specialized in upgrading it.
The CD-drive + laserunit however is of a very good mechanical construction and was sold worldwide in many years for everyone who wanted to build his own trademark CD-player.
The system works slow, and copied CD-R have sometimes problems with the automatic track-sequence, but you can manually go forward or backwards with the tracks.
Also the system has a limitation in showing the amount of tracks, dueing to the amount of LEDs in front of the CD-player.
I thought my cd player [Marantz CD-63 1st gen] was the only one with that problem!! Are you sure it's not a problem of faulty electrolytics on the servo?
I've found the black-colored CD-R disks (a la Playstation 2) work perfectly with this player, by the way.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.