please put them in a second video!!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

i was about to suggest that you try something with the legendary philips CDM1, but looks like you got that base covered. :)

Good video, and so truthful, that you express about the shock about the minimal differences between the CD-Transports. My experience in Comparison of two Cd-Transports was something else: McIntosh MCT 80 (5980 Euro) vs Audio Analogue AADrive (2450 Euro). The MCT 80 sounded more detailed and more fluid than the italian product. After it I heard the compact BlueRay-Player Panasonic DMB-BBT01 EG (349 Euro) via Toslink-Cable. And the difference to the MCT 80 was bigger than that of the Audio Analogue. The Panasonic is from ten years ago. Is it possible, that modern cheap transports are so much better?

CD 94? I had a CD 95 that I loved. Belts kept malfunctioning. Had to give up

The first sample sounded more dynamic with more sound stage but only marginally. The big question is how little do you have to spend to achieve the sound quality of the Ayon? If you're going to buy a CD transport it might as well have the convenience of a CD changer like the Yamaha CD-C603 or SACD Playback like the Yamaha CD-S1000 or DVD-Audio playback. I'd love to see some of these thrown into the ring and tested. Also I'd like to hear a selective range of DACs with the Ayon. €200 - €500 - €1000 price ranges Great video and thank you for taking the time to put it together.

Nice!

Fully agree, more impact is speaker, after amps. Anyway a good transport can give you a better user experience in terms of of silence of usage or appearance. I have old Technics SL-PS900 as transport. Not the best for sound but wonderful.

Solid advice. I did something similar, not extensive, and came to the same conclusion.

The honesty is invaluable here. Even to say that there is a very subtle difference or practically no difference indicates that the differences are small enough to be less important than many other much larger factors like ambient noise, the listener's level of physical fatigue, and the temperature of the drivers in the loudspeaker or headphone. Obviously many of us will still hammer away at the last tiny details, but this lets us all know that transports are not going to be big game changers. Even knowing exactly what he's listening to, Guido has no motivation to find the lack of differences that he has.

Data is data and when they are identical, so is the sound. In fact, any CD drive that can manage computer app files must have perfect data read capability or it simply won’t work. The notion you have to pay anything extra for a “transport” to sound superior is plain idiocy. Best argument for these overpriced boxes is the enclosure cosmetics.

​@@ThinkingBetter And spinner mechanical noises...

@@ity1311 Streaming win also on not having any mechanical noise besides providing much more music, costing less, provide much higher music resolution (data bandwidth) and no errors (lossless and no CD scratches).

Thanks so much for your honesty. I was expecting a significant difference through their own DAC more than the transport. I could detect a difference but not an amount I would be happy with paying the extra. I still use my CD transport and am happy with size and quality of the Project player.

Agreed. After what year would be considered modern? the early 2000s? I can't see how any transport feeding a DAC with buffered data and an internal clock would sound different from any other. It's the same bits played at the same rate.

If Modern DAC's are reclocked, how could there be any difference in the sound?

@@danielpudvay1486 Exactly my point. Any differences between any digital sources when connected to modern DACs would only be a function of the decoding (which could potentially differ if it's a non-PCM file, ie not raw CD audio), and differences in the DACs' analogue front-end and buffering circuitries. In other words, if the (modern) DAC is doing its job correctly, and both players are reading the bits correctly within certain clock tolerances, there should be no difference at all between a $20 DVD player and a $20,000 transport. As for what constitutes "modern", I'd say anything that is capable of multiple bit depth and >48kHz would qualify - anything designed in the last 20 years certainly.

I'm thinking about how the transport itself could have an effect in the sound, but yes about the DACs too.

My thoughts exactly. If there is error free transmission of the data from the source to the DAC, and the DAC buffers and retimes the data before conversion, the transport shouldn’t make any difference in the output sound. A couple of caveats, a poor transport might have loud spinning noise that is annoying, and there is the spousal approval factor of how it looks.

Indeed it's a topic that gets a lot of people worked up for reasons unknown to me. It really doesn't matter if it makes a difference. I could blindly determine which machine is which - but that is completely irrelevant for the rest of the world. Actually, the only real reason I got a (relatively) expensive transport is that I want it to last for at least 20 years - 17 to go now.

You could get two 40 euro players, just in case one goes wrong.

Thanks! Glad you did and in person it is even more noticeable but…not enough IMO, not for that kind of money

@@anadialog There’s some truth in that but i figure the price difference will be also be in how quiet the player spins, how much sturdier it is built, its longevity (my Technics, Akai, JVC, Marantz, NAD dedicated CDPs all stood the test of time. I don’t believe any of my DVD players ever did. - Van (Belgium)

Don't forget to count the number of oxygen atoms in the copper or lack of them or is that in the sterling silver in the wires.............you know oxygen pure bs yadda yadda.........

Did the same but with a Macbook Pro and a Cambridge DAC Magic. The difference was substantial.

The ones and zeros might come in a different font that's about it.. I'm joking right, it's digital data it should sound the same.

Yes, fortunately the T+A D200 has a HDMI input only for audio.

Thank you so much! Love “ear opening video” 😂

The hdmi cable that came with the player

Thanks! I actually did, I also tested my Marantz CD-94 MKII (which includes a TDA1541 single crown) as a transport but not much of a difference once again. As a player, sure! Here is the video of the Marantz: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eN9zn7mCytzcoaM.htmlsi=PN8n4DDK5JMtGhRX

@@anadialog My friend's Arcam Alpha 5+ that he uses a transport (or CD player) uses the same DAC chip and Philips CDM 9 mechanism. It sounds great as a transport. Maybe it's missing some resolution but I could listen to his system all day. He is a boutique cable manufacturer and electronic maven who built very fine electronics and modified the Arcam (5 Sparkos regulators, Panasonic storage caps, etc). Big difference is in bass-his $1000 mini-monitors have a 4.5" mid-woofer and a high end soft dome tweeter, me-$110,000 Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 with 15" Foundation Class D amp powered built-in subs. First time he recognized that someone has a better sounding system.

Hey! Thanks for sharing your experience. For me the question of the video is still standing because I am sure that others like you are genuinely experiencing a more pronounced difference

@@anadialog As a wise man once said "If you want to listen to great digital, don't listen to great vinyl"

FM....I used to live very close to New York City and used to listen to fm all the time on either a McIntosh 65b tuner or to go back a bit further a McIntosh MR55a tuner. To me they both sounded great. I also used to listen to AM on a Fisher TA600 which had great bass and made AM stations sound marvelous.

Absolutely agree, at least using (very good) headphones. Maybe with speakers the difference is less noticeable (?!?)

I noticed no real difference between the two when used as transports but I didn't use headphones. When the players used their internal DACs I spotted the Ayon but the difference was subtle.

The main problem is that low-end appliances are noisy, you can often hear the mechanism turning !

This is true. Improvements in CD technology and error correction means that most equipment can do a bit-perfect transfer. In the early days, there were a lot of variations between players but that's more or less gone.

True but to do that you need a USB output that the Ayon does not have or a special interface that can capture pure digital from coax (hdmi is easy).

True!

I think you're right, the gulf is not enormous but it can be significant between players. (The difference between enjoyable and compelling.) For phonos, a better question might be about whether the difference between a Linn Sondek and a nicely equipped Pro-ject Carbon is "massive."

The difference between the players is much more noticeable but once again not as much as you would expect exactly because of the crazy price of the Ayon. This was not happening when I had low-mid quality gear. Differences were much more evident but they weren’t high-end players/transports…

@@anadialog Thanks for your reply. When you say 'this was not happening when you had low-mid quality gear and differences were much more evident but they weren't high-end players/transports', do you mean that it was hard to hear differences between low-mid priced cd players when used with their internal dacs ?

It’s a bit like wine tasting, if you drink it immediately and compare and concentrate, maybe spit it out after you can tell the difference. Start drinking and multitasking and getting drunk off it and it becomes less apparent. Same goes for music, the less you focus on the details the more it sounds the same.

How about the differences between cd players using their internal dacs through their rca outputs. Presumably you would say there would be little difference in sound quality between ones of the same price, say around £700. What about the differences between one at £700 and one at £2000 ?

@@Chris-nd5se it depends on the individual products themselves. Some CD players have legitimately good DACs. As for DACs, find one that is measurably transparent, and that’s all you need. For example an Eversolo A8 or an RME ADI-2 sounds better to me though subtlety than some much more expensive DACs. And those two are measurably transparent. In my experience stuff that falls into the “mid-fi” price bracket tends to be the best value. A lot of entry level stuff leaves much to be desired but a lot of Uber hi-fi stuff is just ridiculous.

@@lukerestlessstudios Thank you for your response. What price bracket would you say is mid-fi for cd players ?

Thanks Carlos, as explained in the video I used the HDMI output since the T+A D200 has a dedicated input.

I had the prior version of the Jay’s and sent it back the day after. I can only say that this DAC (the T+A D200) really makes everything shine but it is also probably smoothing out all imperfections.

@@anadialog My retail audio dealer indicated that I should investigate the mid-line T+A digital gear; in particular, their CD transport. It is a drawer loader and is slightly more expensive than the Jay's Audio CDt3. I listen to many acoustic "78" recordings. Many imperfections become superfluous in a high resolution audio system. Record noise in my analog LP system is either low or most commonly, non-existent. Friends often don't know whether I'm playing an LP or CD. The worst problem in digital is the mastering that makes a recording less listenable on a high resolution system. Compression, excessive noise-gating, added electronic reverb, improper gain levels (too bright, too dull, lack of bass, too much bass) are the considerable problems of digital recording playback. When digitizing analog recordings, there are also numerous problems from the tape playback from azimuth, bias, tape shedding/splices, etc. to recalibrating for a pre-cut LP mastertape adjustments if necessary. I have found a significant number of recordings (I have over 55,000) on 78, LP and digital that were virtually unlistenable/not enjoyable in my less resolving former equipment/systems which were very good on good recordings but just elevate all music now. That is why an "hot stamper" LP are so much more involving than a 3rd generation cassette copy version (many foreign countries not of the recording origin received lesser quality tapes for making an LP in their own country). In music, I don't seek to smooth out the recording engineer's sound (adulterating the performance/recording). Better yet, in analog, the mastertape used prior to cutting the record which generally entailed bass cuts, dynamic compression, treble boost, etc. sounds better. Often, digital transfers direct from the pre-record cut mastertape is better. It certainly is cheaper to buy a well recorded and mastered CD than the equivalent hot stamper/early stamper of a record (I've purchased many more jazz CDs than very expensive LPs of the same title and find them perfectly enjoyable and sometimes even better).

I went on their site, very interesting products at a very good price!

Pardon my inorance, kind person. Why use the streamer as opposed to a PC? I noticed recently many ppl swear by these devices & I have been looking into them but not getting the point of them. Thanks (I'm not dissing u, I'm genuinely curious)

@@ShazeemKhan My first streaming/NAS system was based on Mac Mini, but the problem with that was music sounded strident and flat. But as my system got upgraded, you really begin to hear the differences in soundstaging, layering, smooth but with high resolution. The system no longer needed to be warm to sound smooth i.e. neutral and smooth is attainable. Several factors played into this: jitter performance with a good clock (external in my case), less EMI interference, no longer needing to rely on noisy switching power supplies. Again I think PC/Mac based servers/streamers are fine, it seems all the elements of music are there at first, but once I switched over to a good transport, music sounded more whole and has more ability to move you emotionally because all the missing elements I didn't realize were missing became more obvious. Hope that helps

My friend has a dac and external clock, i must say i was shocked how analog and good it sounded compared his other dacs.. At some point i must look into these external clocks..

I think he had clocked the dac and streamer to same clock, or something similar..

Ivansfchan, you seem to be a very easily influenced person, I must say...

same!

🤣🤣🤣

Welcome aboard! The whole difference here, as we have established in the comments, is the reclocking of the DAC. That is why differences are so subtle. Apart from that, it's difficult to suggest a good converter on a budget. I noticed significant improvement only in high-end models besides beeing a segment in constant evolution. The good suggestion in this sense is probably a TOTL Topping. For transports I made a dedicated video some time ago to which I would add the Shangling ET3 (not cheap): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fdJlaZag0-DboYk.htmlsi=41mLlPi7iKTAMwVu Apart from that, I suggest getting a vintage player. Excellent value for money and excellent sonics! And you can always add a DAC to it just make sure it has at least a SPDIF output.

This price range is pretty low to make valid conclusions, believe me...

High-end cars can be similar. But most enthusiasts know well the difference between a Maserati and a Lamborghini. Some people want status and luxury. Others want the highest possible performance. And they are both correct.

Yes, but there is interpolation and other filters that do have an impact, plus digital signals travel in an analog form (voltage) so many things can go wrong and change. But I guess that the T+A DAC and modern drives are so good that this is greatly reduce now.

I don’t, sorry!

The T+A D200 has a hdmi port, one of the reasons why I wanted to test it. Otherwise I made a video with some other solutions here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gaehpZt-tZPNnmg.htmlsi=dAKop7_HuWGg7FjX

It’s normal HDMI. A feature that I greatly wanted and found on the T+A. Yes, pure digital rips from the DAC can be a topic for a new video, regardless the connection.

I agree with you 💯 I have a 1989 Sony cpd 605esd $1k in 1989 used as transport only vs 6000cdt and cdt6000 has better rhythm n pace and Glare with 6000cdt wasn't as bad My Sony came with Bu1 mech one of the best made (later kss190a) my 7000cdt even better I a/b tested with Ares2 then I got 9000cdt ' which I will compare against new cdt7000 my results may shock people 😆 coming soon

Yes, I have compared it with the Marantz CD 94 MKII and my audiocom signature modified Oppo 105d. Results are similar, meaning that used as transports there are differences and the Ayon is always better but not as much as you would expect. I guess it’s the converter it’s the only novelty compared to the older tests.