Magnavox CDB 465 vs. CDB 650

[TAGO MAGO]

I have been doing some research on an old CD player of mine which is a Magnavox CDB 465 from around 1987 or 1988. So far I have not found much, although there is much talk about the CDB 650 that was considered one of the best players from the era. One site refers the CDB 465 as the CDB 650's little brother with less bells and whistles. I am curious if anyone knows if the overall specifications of the two players are the same. I think I found mine for less than $10 at the thrift and it was certainly a clean and tidy little machine and works flawlessly which is quite impressive for a 20 year old cd player.

 

[gearhound]

I have a Magnavox CDB-460, which I bought new in March of 1988.
From what I information I have gathered, the Magnavox CDB-460 is a stripped- down version of the Magnavox CDB-650.
Same Burr-Brown 1461 chip, same laser, same transport...........
Just less operational functions.

Steve

 

[Toasted Almond]

I had both a CDB-650 (modified by Euphonic Technology) and CDB-473. I bought 473 new around 1988. I would have liked to have that one modded. I spoke to Frank Van Alstine about it. He called it a "Ferrari with Sears tires on it" due to the inclusion of the remote volume feature. He wouldn't touch it. I believe all those machines had the Phillips CDM-4 transport.

 

[gearhound]

All the Magnavox's back then had the single-beam laser system, instead of the Sony 3-beam system.
Maybe that's why they track so well?

Steve

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Hi,

These old Magnavox CD players are superior on tracking due to that famous swing-arm single beam laser mechanism. The best of them are the CDM-0 and CDM-1 based units. My old FD 1010-SL has a CDM-0 in it. This mechanism was widely used by the likes of Marantz, McIntosh, Mission, ReVox, Tandberg, Bang & Olufsen, California Audio Labs, Conrad-Johnson, and many more high end companies. I like these machines sonically better than about anything else. Also, these units had stronger lasers and their optics were made by Rodenstock and were glass.

 

[niles300z]

Almost 10 years later... I dug this thread up looking into cdb variations, and can't help but try to see if anyone knows more about these glass optics. Does anyone still use them? A few of the companys listed are now belly up.
I sure do like the idea of a glass lens. Seems like it may be able to stand up to a good isopropyl cleaning vs plastic that probably looks like my turntable cover by now. Also, I think I can see the swing arm as a natural in provement but these are probably not made/ used anymore either? Last question as far as 3 or one beam goes, it would seem like 3 may be better is this not the case?
Thanks guys

 

[Dr Tinear]

I have a Magnavox CDB-460, which I bought new in March of 1988.
From what I information I have gathered, the Magnavox CDB-460 is a stripped- down version of the Magnavox CDB-650.
Same Burr-Brown 1461 chip, same laser, same transport...........
Just less operational functions.

Steve

I have both a CDB-460 and a CDB-650. Both use a Philips TDA1541 DAC chip -- not a Burr-Brown part -- with the Philips SAA7220 4x-oversampling digital filter chip. The disc drive in both is the CDM2/10 swing-arm drive.

The CDB-465 may be one of the later players that uses the TDA1541 dual DAC without the oversampling chip. There doesn't seem to be much information online on this model. If it is a non-oversampling player, it has a high-order brickwall filter after the DAC and will probably not sound as good as a 460 or a 650 in good working order.

 

[niles300z]

If the 465 says fourfold oversampling, maybe its the same filter as the 650? But even with a bad filter if its a swing arm, glass lens, and with digital out i may spring. Its hard to decipher all the variables on these. I do know the 465 is made in taiwan not belgium.

 

[qdrone]

The cdb650 could be hooked up to a cd rom.

 

[slow_jazz]

I still use my 650 regularly.

The Philips 650 is identical. Both made by Philips.

Lot of websites about the TDA1541 DAC chip.

Look up Lampizator guy on internet.