Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Are you using seperate DVD/CD players

Kid, CDs require a laser with a wavelength of about 780nm to be read accurately, while DVDs(as well as DVD-As and SACDs)require one of about 650nm. However, for years CD/DVD players have used dual 780/650nm lasers which are optimal for reading each type if disc. A separate CD player has no advantage in sound quality.

As SutterCane brought to our attention about a week ago, the new Onkyo DV-CP802 just out is a universal 6-disc changer. It lists at $500 and will be available at lower prices through the usual sources. That's one possibility, but I agree with Dr. Mark that a megachanger, such as those available from Sony, is substantially greater in convenience and is something that you should seriously consider(there is yet no universal megachanger).

I have an Onkyo Integra DX-706 (before Onkyo and Integra became different entities) For CD's. Which is connected using the toslink. I use my Pioneer DV-563a for DVD’s, which is also connected using a toslink. I feel that the Onkyo sounds better for CD's. I don't know if it's psychological or a fact. A blind test might be in order…

I’m considering a jukebox system like Mark. I wish the technology were a bit better though. What I mean to say is that it would be nice if these systems had some sort of cddb lookup ability like Gracenote. That way lazy people like me wouldn’t have to manually enter data into a database. This is not enough to prevent me from buying one though

As of today I'm using a Denon 2800MKII for CD's and a Denon DVM-2815 5 Disc for DVD's and DVDA. I'm still playing with this set-up but for now that is it. The main reason for the 2815 is my kids. When they watch there movies or listen to music, they use the 2815 and the 2800 is hands off. I don't have the time to do much critical listening anymore and find myself listening to MP3's more and more. I have a Sound Blaster Audigy piped to my Denon 3805 via an optical cable and if the MP3 is of decent quality it sounds not to bad.

dmn23,

I would wager that your Pioneer has no trouble reading the first split-second of audio tracks, but it's your receiver that takes a split second to detect and translate the digital signal it's getting. This phenomenon is pretty common and often occurs with the audio contained on DVD video discs.

I use a Pioneer 563a universal for everything, hooked up via optical to utilize the better DACs in my pre/pro.

For endless music, I rip my CDs to MP3's and stream them to my audio system using a Linksys Wireless Media Adapter. I then put the CDs away until I need them for critical listening.

What I like about the Linksys/MP3 solution is the fact that I can get full artist, album, and song title info right on the TV if I need it, no lag time between discs/songs, I can level match CDs when ripped to MP3(I don't have to mess with the volume control if one CD is recorded louder than another), vitually endless storage, and the Linksys makes no mechanical noise.

The downside, the sound quality is not quite as good as CD....hard to tell...but there is a difference. It is probably more of a issue of the playback device though. There are similar units that can be connected digitally....that should probably help...but for now, I am happy.

I opt for the *digital Jukebox* myself (server with big hdds). Those media players for your HT system are nice, I just go the next step and do an all out HTPC. I however encode my CDs into mp3 at very high settings (LAME, EAC). I'm very excited to see how they stand up to the real thing on some good speakers.

If there is no sound quality in using a seperate CD player, is there a difference in using different cd players for better sound quality?

In reply to:

---

Kid, CDs require a laser with a wavelength of about 780nm to be read accurately, while DVDs(as well as DVD-As and SACDs)require one of about 650nm. However, for years CD/DVD players have used dual 780/650nm lasers which are optimal for reading each type if disc. A separate CD player has no advantage in sound quality.

---

With all your profound knowledge I respectfully do not agree with you. We have thread on this before and I see you point when you compare a $100-$800 player ... not much difference. But when you compare your everyday $100 DVD/CD player to like a Musical Fidelity Tri-Vista player I would definitely disagree. I do not know if you have visited your local shop 'lately' but you should bring in your player and compare it against something in the likes of the above or any player from Krell, Classe, Cary audio and see if your ear can not tell the difference. Unless you have actually tried to do that lately your thinking behind having a separate CD player has no advantage in sound quality is pure bunk.

Convenience is convenience but what Kid was asking is there was any sound advantage (if any) was possible. If he was going to spend under $800 sure...there not much difference...but players in $800+ can really be surprising...maybe not gigantic differences but subtle differences nonetheless.

Even using my Cambridge CD player via optical which uses my Pioneer Elite 43TX DACs sounds different than using the same CD players DACs going through a passive preamp sound different. I have it always on A/B mode so I would challenge anyone to demo them at my place and see if they do not hear any difference. All someone has to do is come over.

In reply to:

---

All someone has to do is come over.

---

Well, I'm game! Maybe craigsub can subsidize my plane ticket.

Saturn, I think what he is saying is, there is no compromise from the fact that you have two lasers in the system. Personally, I think if you use a digital connection to your reciever, a player is a player as far as sound is concerned. Any difference in sound is going to come from DACs and processing, not from the laser. You may have a problem with build quality and system longevity though. My vote tends to be for separate components for each role. Mostly this is because I feel a well made cd player will be better at playing cds than a well made cd/dvd player. I know this is not always the case though. Similarly I don't like to buy multipurpose tools if I can buy the "correct" individual tools. I figure this way each component sees the appropriate amount of wear and tear, and if one thing goes bad I am not screwed until I can replace it.