CD Player for Krell 400Xi integrated amp?

crazy

Greetings!

I'm looking for a CD player to go along with my Krell 400Xi integrated amp. Since I spent all my money on my speakers and the amp, my budget is rather limited. I would be stretched to even spend $1K on it - looking for something more in the $400-500 range.

Also, I noticed that the Krell has something called "balanced inputs". Do I need a CD player which has balanced outputs? What are balanced inputs/outputs anyway??

Thanks!

adam2434

CA players are worth considering in that price range for new gear.

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/productdetail.asp?Variant=1&AttribNum=1&pf_id=8930&sku=CAMB640V2C&selAttribute_1=Silver

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/productdetail.asp?sku=CAMB540V2C&product_name=540C%20v2%2E0%20CD%20Player

LuSh

Are you ok with buying used? If so i'd check out these.

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlplay&1148905942

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlplay&1148166908

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlplay&1148480749

Failing that there is always a Rega 2000 planet. At the price you're looking at for CDP's balanced connections will almost certainly do nothing for you, unless of course you need a run of 30ft or so.

I-SIG

Thanks, Lush.

Wes

crazy

Thank you for all those links - that is definitely helpful!!

crazy

How does the Rotel RCD 02 compare to the RCD 1072? My dealer can get me the RCD 02 for real cheap.

Also, is it important to get balanced outputs from the CD player (since the Krell has balanced input)?

crazy

Ok, last post of the day ...

Has anyone used or heard the Rega Jupiter CD Player?

audiobliss

Here's basically what I've been told and how I understand it. If I've missed, misinterpreted, or mistated something, I'm sure someone will point it out.

First off, the 02 and 1072 are quite different from most other CDPs out there. They both implement the same Burr-Brown (PCM1732 I believe?) 18-bit DAC. Why an 18-bit DAC did you say? It was explained to me that Rotel tried to copy the sound vinyl offers when designing their current series of CDPs. The 18-bit DAC doesn't offer the same peaks in dynamics currently popular 20 and 24-bit DACs offer, but the noise floor is extrememly low compared to most other DACs, thereby making the effective dynamics comparable. In doing this, the energy and impact vinyl offers has, supposedly, been closely approximated.

Now, on to the differences between the 1072 and 02. The 1072 obviously has a stouter chasis. The 1072 also adds a toroidal transformer and some nicer capacitors in the output stage. Beyond that, they use the same DAC and the same transport. Someplaces are saying the 1072 adds a second DAC, but they both only have one DAC.

I hope at least some of that's true, and I hope it is of some help. I'm certainly excited as I await the arrival of my RCD-02 sometime later this week.

I-SIG

Damn. Y'all got me looking at that NAD hard!

Wes

tryrrthg

Arcam CD73! I love mine.


I-Sig,

Don't you have a Bel Canto DAC 2? If so and you're looking to buy a CD player to use as a transport I'd look at the Arcam CD73 or the Rotel. I had an NAD C521 and the transport is loud and clunky. The 541 might be better but my Arcam is silky smooth and displays text (CD track names, etc).

When I had my NAD running as a transport into my Bel Canto DAC there wasn't a HUGE difference in sound between the DAC in the NAD and the BC. After upgrading my transport there was a much bigger difference IMHO.

I-SIG

tryrrthg wrote:

Arcam CD73! I love mine.


I-Sig,

Don't you have a Bel Canto DAC 2? If so and you're looking to buy a CD player to use as a transport I'd look at the Arcam CD73 or the Rotel. I had an NAD C521 and the transport is loud and clunky. The 541 might be better but my Arcam is silky smooth and displays text (CD track names, etc).

When I had my NAD running as a transport into my Bel Canto DAC there wasn't a HUGE difference in sound between the DAC in the NAD and the BC. After upgrading my transport there was a much bigger difference IMHO.

Thanks for the tips. That's interesting that that was the case.

Wes

tryrrthg

I-SIG wrote:

Thanks for the tips. That's interesting that that was the case.

Wes

No problem. I should have mentioned that my upgraded transport was a McCormack SST-1, not the Arcam. I never really got to do a fair assesmant of the Arcam used as a transport for a DAC. However, the Arcam is a nicer unit than the NAD. I "downgraded" from a DAC/trans combo to the Arcam because of some home renovations. I still have the McCormack and I'd like to put it to use some day as it did make a nice difference.

Hawkeye

I can't help you on a CD player recommendation.

Balanced inputs are XLR connectors with 3 pins in a circular housing. Google Neutrik connectors. If you are going to run the CD directly to your amp, provided the cd will allow this, Balanced/XLR is the way to go. There is a shield in the wire to eliminate RF. If you are going to run it through your pre, does your pre have XLR connectors? If so,run XLR from CD to Pre to amp.

It may start a wire war, but I have found that XLR will not color the sound the way RCA's will. Using XLR will show the good and bad of all equipment and recordings. RCA and the various wire manufacturers allow us to tune out or in things we percieve we want/need.

I have a set of Cardas XLR connectors I paid $300 for 1 meter. Built my own with Neutrik and Mogami microphone wire for $29.00. No difference to my ears. Except the name on the wire. I don't like to play the wire game all the time. XLR for me on everything. Gordon

I-SIG

tryrrthg wrote:

No problem. I should have mentioned that my upgraded transport was a McCormack SST-1, not the Arcam. I never really got to do a fair assesmant of the Arcam used as a transport for a DAC. However, the Arcam is a nicer unit than the NAD. I "downgraded" from a DAC/trans combo to the Arcam because of some home renovations. I still have the McCormack and I'd like to put it to use some day as it did make a nice difference.

That McCormack seems to be a really nice unit. I read the little review you linked. So there was even a big difference between the McCormack and the Arcam? I know those are supposed to be in different leagues, but just curious. Thanks.

Wes

steveinaz

My next transport will either be the CEC TL-51x or a Musical Fidelity CDP. I'm leaning towards the CEC. But that's waaaayyyyy down the road.

tryrrthg

I-SIG wrote:

That McCormack seems to be a really nice unit. I read the little review you linked. So there was even a big difference between the McCormack and the Arcam? I know those are supposed to be in different leagues, but just curious. Thanks.

Wes

I never really got to compare the Arcam as a transport vs the McCormack. When the Arcam arrived I was too busy working on remodeling our bathroom to listen to everything. I sold my Bel Canto DAC shortly after, so I never got a good listen. However, going off memory, the Arcam (running as a CD player only) is SLIGHTLY more "electronic" sounding than the BC/McCormack combo. There was just an ease/lushness/musical sound to the BC/McCormack combo. The Arcam is a tad bit more "exciting" - I guess that's the word I would chose. I guess it's more of a rock'n out type of sound than a smooth effortless sound of the BC/McCormack combo. My soundstage also got a bit deeper, extending beyond the back wall when using the BC/McCormack combo. In a nutshell the BC/McCormack combo sounded more natural/musical with slightly better seperation, depth, and focus. The Arcam is no slouch though, especially at the used price.

I-SIG

Thanks for the quick synopsis. I eventually want to get the new tweeters, so a little bit of the rockin' characteristics in the ousrce balanced out by smoothness in the speakers seems like it might be a good combo to me if I go with the Arcam.

Wes

Joey_V

Rotel 1072 would be an awesome addition to your stellar system.