Old CD player/transport that still performs better than modern top players?

[Ki Choi]

Lately, I had been lazy about playing my CD collection.

What would you nominate as the best CD player/transport of the past?

Here are my favorites I used to have and miss:

1) Sony SCD-1 other than having to pack a lunch in between switching discs, it was fine hunk of metal player. I wonder how it would sound as a transport with modern DACs...

2) ML 35.1 - I don't think the 35.1 can be made these days at the price range when it was available. It may have been the best CD transport (no SACD though like SCD-1) I ever had. It should sound gloriously with a modern DAC in playing CDs.

3) Wadia 361 - just as a player, it was a beauty and a fine performer. Maybe someday, I should get one again.

4) dCS stacks - one of the finest digital sound I got. The transport was sweet and it also played SACDs.

So, as good as the above transport/players were... I wonder how they would compare to Esoteric, current dCS, Playback Designs and other top sliver disc players including the Oppo 105 (or the new 4K version)...

[JCOConnell]

bluray dvd players are not optimized for cd playback

[Tunes]

Ki, I agree that the ML was a great transport.
I had a few Meridian's and the sound and user interface was great but the cd-rom transport was problematic and I had to replace the drive more than once.
Currently I'm using a Nagra CDP which is built like a tank, though it doesn't do SACD. If SACD is a necessity for you, I'd likely look at Esoteric. They come up on the used market fairly often and are built to last. If I were able, the transport I'd look to is the CH Precision D1. They rarely come up on the used market though. The D1 also uses an Esoteric drive.
Chris

[Joe Pittman]

I had stock and hot-rodded versions of the Sony SCD-1 and 777, the SCD-1 being the better sounding of the two. I liked them most as transports feeding the DAC of the month... Ultimately I decided to part with them as lasers eventually fail and getting replacements was getting harder and harder. If I were going to get a transport, I'd get the best Esoteric I could find and have spare parts on-hand.

[MylesBAstor]

I still have an SCD-1 sitting on top of a cabinet. Bought it with the eventual intent of modding it so could just use it as a transport to feed an outboard DAC eventually. That never happened. Several people used to mod the Sonys but they eventually got away from the SCD-1.

[jonathanb]

My Resolution Audio Cesium transport was awesome until the laser died. Unfortunately, there were no replacement parts to be had so that was the end of it.

[Rob]

the CEC TL-1 was the best I owned and worth the coin at the time. I never heard the SCD-1 but i had a Sony SCD-777es and as a transport it was fine, the DAC section was thin and bright to my ears.

[dcc]

Agreed on the CEC. I used to have a CEC TL1X and it was hard finding a transport that could beat it. But there is even better than the TL-1: the TL-0 and the several iterations that followed (TL-0X etc.). A friend recently purchased a used TL-0X and he admitted that he was re-descovering his cd's that he had stowed away since he had ripped them.

[JackD201]

The one I never get tired of is the 47 Labs Shigaraki combo. The transport is a top loader and the DAC is a simple non oversampling DAC with analog filters. Not the most extended but has lovely texture.

[c1ferrari]

Esoteric P-0s
Forsell Air Reference Mk II CD Transport

Still have both :-)

[mep]

Probably the closest you will come to having glitch free digital audio is the old-fashioned method of playing CDs. Once digital audio crossed over to our computers that are used as servers running software that handshakes with a DAC, digital audio became about as stable as old dynamite and nitroglycerin riding in the front seat of a car down a dirt road with no shocks or springs. Networked digital audio is more unstable than a roomful of psychotics.

[MylesBAstor]

Well put. Just go to any audio show and at least 50% of the rooms are struggling to keep the computer digital front-ends up and running. How many times are you in the room and the exhibitor have to reboot their computer?

[JCOConnell]

Probably the closest you will come to having glitch free digital audio is the old-fashioned method of playing CDs. Once digital audio crossed over to our computers that are used as servers running software that handshakes with a DAC, digital audio became about as stable as old dynamite and nitroglycerin riding in the front seat of a car down a dirt road with no shocks or springs. Networked digital audio is more unstable than a roomful of psychotics.

I never switched over to playing CDs with a computer. I still use a conventional CD player/transport and an external DAC connected to the SPDIF output. Zero problems.

[mep]

I wouldn't expect any in that setup. No computer and software connected to your DAC.

[Alrainbow]

I have an old denon cd player it can be. A transport of a anolog output. No blue rays though. Very nice sound really most cd sound good but the same of you get my point. It's was big bucks at the time. I also still have a Sony es CD player but that brick wall filter really stinks by today's sound.

[Per Sundell]

The few ttimes I play CDs I play them on a Micromega Duo CD-3 transport. Still works great.

[MylesBAstor]

Lately, I had been lazy about playing my CD collection.

What would you nominate as the best CD player/transport of the past?

Here are my favorites I used to have and miss:

1) Sony SCD-1 other than having to pack a lunch in between switching discs, it was fine hunk of metal player. I wonder how it would sound as a transport with modern DACs...

2) ML 35.1 - I don't think the 35.1 can be made these days at the price range when it was available. It may have been the best CD transport (no SACD though like SCD-1) I ever had. It should sound gloriously with a modern DAC in playing CDs.

3) Wadia 361 - just as a player, it was a beauty and a fine performer. Maybe someday, I should get one again.

4) dCS stacks - one of the finest digital sound I got. The transport was sweet and it also played SACDs.

So, as good as the above transport/players were... I wonder how they would compare to Esoteric, current dCS, Playback Designs and other top sliver disc players including the Oppo 105 (or the new 4K version)...

I was never crazy about the sound of the early DCS digital gear. Know everyone raved about the Delius (had it in for review even) but my Altis gear just blew it away. Burred and closed in sounding as I remember. Not ever funny. New DCS another story.

Had the SCD-1 and like you said, it tried your patience loading a disc. Wasn't bad sounding but a little thin in the mids and etched. But showed the promise of higher rez digital even if many of the SACDs were converted to PCM.

ML was good but I always thought possessed a tailored sound. Like much of the older ML electronics. And not very open.

One that I liked back then that would still probably hold it's own was the Audio Note DAC 3 (?) that I reviewed for TAS years ago. And the CEC that people also mentioned.

I just think that most of these old DACs would fail though especially when compared to newer digital gear in the area of upper octaves and transparency. Just listen to some of the early digital recordings and their upper octaves. Take cymbals for example. Everything is just kind of crunchy sounding. And weird sounding. Like its being overloaded. Not to mention etched and sizzly.

[Alrainbow]

It seems by reading this there is plenty of reasons why you guys love analog over digital
of the shows I have gone to digital sounds just as good as analog if done right. While shows overall are a crap shoot
digital is much easier and does not wear out like tape or vinyl. Something else to add to this. Some here and else where have a analog front end costing many thousands
and pass judgment on digital from basically crap lol. A completely unfair judgement. I get why Ina way you guys and gals love vinyl or tape and it's wonderful. I considered that but was happy to forgo the drama of keeping it and using it. It's why I own a few hundred rips of them maybe more. But chose to go digital for convince
and ease of operation. I do know plenty of analog people who have done as me and keep it too. They admit when transfersed it's a bit changed but better. Yes doing s rip or tape transfer does improve if done in dsd and right. I hesitate to say better as it alone is choice. But being there did shiw me it's true.
No bidy should give up on digital simply because of ignorance in using it. If I bought a VPI flagship and some ultra hi end arm , cartridge and preamp would I get it right ? I doubt that. But digital is much more simple and does not cost nearly as much and can come plug and play like your CD players.
Please done take this post as being rude just an honest view of what I see and read. Rhapsody has both go there and hear how great both are then comment.
Be fair in comments please in the end it's all we have anyway.

[MylesBAstor]

Al, not quite sure what you are getting at. It's really not about digital vs. analog but what older digital products stand the test of time. Which do justice to the music.

[JCOConnell]

Just listen to some of the early digital recordings and their upper octaves. Take cymbals for example. Everything is just kind of crunchy sounding. And weird sounding. Like its being overloaded. Not to mention etched and sizzly.

I'd rather not.