Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site olivee.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!oliveb!olivee!greg
From: greg@olivee.UUCP (Greg Paley)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Request for Opinion (Golden Ears) Re: 2X oversampling,16 bits.
Message-ID: <253@olivee.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 21-Mar-85 13:24:22 EST
Article-I.D.: olivee.253
Posted: Thu Mar 21 13:24:22 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Mar-85 02:31:41 EST
References: <1007@hound.UUCP>
Organization: Olivetti ATC, Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 64

This isn't really an answer to Dick Grantges' article, but rather
a commentary on some of the further complications involved in
choosing between CD players and their diverse technologies.

Of course, the sound quality is vitally important.  "Digital Audio",
while not convincing me 100% with some of their reviews, at least
command my respect by being one of the few U.S. publications to
acknowledge differences in the sound quality of CD players and
provide some commentary on this in their reviews.  This has forced
me to try and obtain copies from friends travelling to Europe of
German audio publications, since German "Audio", "Stereoplay" and,
to a lesser degree, "Fono Forum" comment extensively not only on
the sound, but always end their reviews with a judgement as to
the unit's performance relative to its price.

So far, test reports in both their "Audio" and "Stereoplay"
magazines have consistently ranked the sound quality of the
various 14-bit/4x-Oversampling machines (including all of
the Philips units) as "ausgezeichnet" (outstanding) in both
sound and value.  I have not seen their tests of the Sony 102
or 302 (same sound, more features), but their previous tests
of Sony units have ranked the sound as "durchschnittlich"
(average) and have ranked other 16-bit, single-DAC, 1x sampling
units as, at best, "ueber durchschnittlich" (above average).
Their articles have, however, hastened to point out that even
gross differences in ranking translate into relatively subtle
audible differences when compared to most other equipment.

Another area where the 14-bit/4x-Oversampling machines score
significantly higher and consistently so is in error correction.
Is it a coincidence that most of these machines are European
made and that European manufactured CD's have a significantly
higher defect rate?  It seems as if the Japanese machines are
designed with the expectation that the disks themselves will
be near-perfect, as most of the Japanese-manufactured CD's
themselves seem to be.  The problem comes with the greater
frequency of European CD's and, now, American CD's coming onto
the market.  Unfortunately, I found no mention in the "Digital
Audio" review of the Sony 102 of its error-correction performance.

I have heard quotes on the Sony for as low as $329.  The bottom-
of-the-line Magnavox can be purchased locally for - you guessed
it - $329!  The actual frequency response curves given for the
Sony are flatter at the top than those of the Magnavox, but
the reduced phase shift caused by the use of the single DAC in
the newer Sony is still greater than that produced by the dual
DAC's in the Magnavox.

The answer should, I guess, be "listen for yourself".  The
difficulty in this is finding a dealer who has both of the
units you're interested in and who also has the capacity to
demonstrate them through associated equipment that you know
and trust.  I've been fortunate in having friends who've
let me do extensive listening on their equipment and who've
let me take their units home (my home system includes 
Hafler 110/220 and Vandersteen 2C's), but those units are
the Revox, NEC and NAD - all of which now seem more expensive
than I feel is now necessary to pay for a good unit.  The
further problem is predicting how the better sounding unit
will do in handling less than perfect disks.

As I said, no answers but just more questions.

	- Greg Paley