Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site vice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekchips!vice!shauns
From: shauns@vice.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: CD Player listening tests
Message-ID: <1335@vice.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Apr-84 12:39:22 EST
Article-I.D.: vice.1335
Posted: Thu Apr 26 12:39:22 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Apr-84 10:33:14 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 63

I promised that I would report on my A/B comparisons of CD players, so here
are my impressions:

Other Items in the chain:
Hafler 110 preamp
Audio Research power amp, 100W/channel
Snell speakers, floor standing models(model # not known)

Players:
Yamaha CD-1
Yamaha CD-X1
NEC 803

Test Discs:
Ravel/Dutoit/Montreal Daphnis & Chloe
Sony Sampler, Jazz Volume, big band and vibraphone selections
Technics Sampler Disc, solo guitar cut
Roxy Music, Avalon

The Bottom Line:
The Yamaha CD-X1 was a poor third.  The CD-1 was better, but not as enjoyable
to listen to as the NEC.

Observed Differences:
The distinguishing characteristics were two:  1) harshness, and 2) imaging.
The NEC sounded distinctly clearer than both Yamahas, and instrument placement
and sound stage depth were much more noticeable.  The Roxy music album
was almost totally useless to my ears for comparison; major differences did
not manifest themselves until the minimally miked single
instrument jazz and the Ravel discs were played (though sound stage depth
differences were noticeable with all selections).

I am especially disappointed in the CD-X1.  It consistently produced a 
2 dimensional sound image that sounded both harsh and, curiously, compressed.

Test Conditions:
This audition was conducted under less than stringent conditions.  CDs were
switched between players for comparison, and the tests were not double=blind.
We have arranged with the dealer to do a full synced CD test when the new NEC
unit comes in to reduce delay between comparisons.  We also will be doing some
comparisons between the low end Sony, Yamaha, and (if possible) Technics
players.

Final Comments:
I went into this test with a rather blase attitude, since I will not be in the
market for a CD player for sometime, largely due to the unavailability of my
type of music.  I fully expected that even the cheapest CD player would be
satisfactory.  I do not believe that now.  Secondly, I am even more convinced
that much more extensive research into reconstruction methods needs to be done
and disseminated.  The results of this audition neither proved or disproved my
notions about proper reconstruction techniques, so it's back to the drawing
board.  However, I did like what I heard in general.  I don't think that the
CD format is inherently inadequate.

I hate all this newfangled technology...

The wandering squash,
-- 
				Shaun Simpkins

uucp:	{ucbvax,decvax,chico,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!teklabs!tekcad!vice!shauns
CSnet:	shauns@tek
ARPAnet:shauns.tek@rand-relay