darkblue94
The Devil made me do it.
Well one thing that's certain is that you'll be able to determine which of your CD's are good and those which are not.
Best 80's Nakamichi CD Player?
- Thread starter onanysunday
- Start date
I just compared the Nakamichi CDC-4A to a $1,000 Denon DCD-3000 I just got for free because it had a dusty laser lens and wouldn't read discs. I gently swiped the lens with a dry Q-tip and commenced listening tests. The Denon seemed veiled in comparison, duller with less air and much less 'live realism' than the Nak. Not just less bright, but much less articulate as well. I really wanted the flagship Denon to impress me. After all, who doesn't want to be blown away by a free CD player that is supposed to be very good? Maybe there was something else wrong with it..Who knows, everything appeared good under its metal cover. It has a MUCH more simplified layout compared to the CDC which I very much appreciate, as it would be easier to work on. Anyway, I highly recommend these older Nakamichi CD players to anyone interested in obtaining some pretty incredible sound for a very reasonable price on the used market. Needless to say, it was a "no-contest" with the CDC easily coming out on top, mopping the floor with the Denon.
From what I've gathered, The Nak MB, OMS and CD Player 1,2,3,4 lines were not as good or reliable as the TDA1541A(-S1) CDC line (and possibly the CDP-2A). But, to each his own I guess.. I'm very impressed with my Nakamichi and am glad to hear you are very satisfied with the Azur- it sounds like a really nice unit.
Jeesh, don't remind me...mine worked for maybe 18 months of daily use before it went strange on me. OMS-7, bought new. Finally dumped it about eight years ago for $25 to someone locally who claimed to repair and collect them. One headache out of my life.
darkblue94
The Devil made me do it.
I had a OMS-7 II for a couple of years and used it for trade fodder while it was still working because once the laser goes they become fancy door stops. It sure was a beautiful piece of gear though.
Nakamichi released a service bulletin with a few mods for the original OMS-7 (not -7 II). The mods make the deck a lot more reliable, especially with regard to reading less that perfectly pressed CDs. If you get this model, get the mods done if they weren't in the past.
The CDP-2A is worth investing in a new laser, if it is still available (although expensive) in my opinion. Same goes for the laser in my CDC-4A, it's very expensive. A far cry from the OEM Denon laser assembly I just replaced and installed for only $13!
Dandy
Addicted Member
I don't do much work on CDPs and the only thing holding me back is the possibility that it is the transport and not the laser that needs replacement. The previous owner clipped the spring and messed with it clumsily,e.g. adding oil. I cleaned up the transport and adjusted it and it works most of the time. Is there a way of checking whether the laser itself is at fault? A measurement somewhere?
And where did you "gather" this info? Have you actually done an A/B comparison between your beloved CDC and any of the CD Player models, or the OMS for that matter? It would probably be wise not to make blanket statements in that regard.
Compared to the Nak OMS-2A I just picked up last week, the Nak CDC-4A is easily the better sounding player in every category. It is more open, dynamic and crisp with better detail retrieval which amounts to more natural, livelier music with a deeper soundstage that has greater "air" or separation of instruments within a track giving you a broader sense of space within each song.
If I hadn't done a side-by-side listening test after letting the caps reform for awhile, I'd say the OMS sounded very good. However, when comparing the two side-by-side it becomes apparent. I do not believe the majority of the pre Burrr-Brown PCM56 equipped cd players can go toe to toe with the TDA1541A/S1 based ones and come out on top. In fact, I've never heard that argument made. While listening to the OMS, I was reminded of my even older (PCM53JP Hitachi based) Realistic CD-1000. It sounds pretty good while listening for a short time until listener fatigue sets in and kind of puts a damper on extended listening with some sibilance and slight harshness of sound.
The OMS uses a PCM54HP, and while it was pretty good piece of engineering for its day, it was just a pre-cursor to what would become BB's better, later DACS. This is in contrast to the TDA chips which reached their pinnacle earlier on with the 1541 and its higher tolerance derivatives.
In stock form, the OMS is easily outclassed by the CDC with its Philips chip. The OMS line uses either the PCM54HP or TDA1540 DACS in its lineup, while the CD Player series seems to have doubled-down on its use of the PCM1700. Case in point, I prefer the sound of my two PCM56P based Akai cd players (CD32 and CD52) to the OMS. Granted, the 2A was their least expensive cd player at the time but was still $499 back in '87 which was alot of money. It's a great sounding unit unless you have the luxury of directly comparing it to something better.
I am also aware of the perils of being too reductionist in terms of trying to typify one player from the next based solely on one component (DAC) when there is always system synergy in play with other onboard hardware that helps create the final listening product or outcome. But I know for me, it's been a pretty reliable bellwether for getting a sense of sound expectation from a unit that has generally proven quite consistent. Also, no matter what gear we own, there is always going to be something better than what we have. It is an inescapable truth but one that shouldn't have to prevent us from enjoying what we're currently listening to. For anyone interested, also check out the older Akai CD players and Magnavox CDB players as they are also competitive with some of the upper-end Nakamichi models.
If I hadn't done a side-by-side listening test after letting the caps reform for awhile, I'd say the OMS sounded very good. However, when comparing the two side-by-side it becomes apparent. I do not believe the majority of the pre Burrr-Brown PCM56 equipped cd players can go toe to toe with the TDA1541A/S1 based ones and come out on top. In fact, I've never heard that argument made. While listening to the OMS, I was reminded of my even older (PCM53JP Hitachi based) Realistic CD-1000. It sounds pretty good while listening for a short time until listener fatigue sets in and kind of puts a damper on extended listening with some sibilance and slight harshness of sound.
The OMS uses a PCM54HP, and while it was pretty good piece of engineering for its day, it was just a pre-cursor to what would become BB's better, later DACS. This is in contrast to the TDA chips which reached their pinnacle earlier on with the 1541 and its higher tolerance derivatives.
In stock form, the OMS is easily outclassed by the CDC with its Philips chip. The OMS line uses either the PCM54HP or TDA1540 DACS in its lineup, while the CD Player series seems to have doubled-down on its use of the PCM1700. Case in point, I prefer the sound of my two PCM56P based Akai cd players (CD32 and CD52) to the OMS. Granted, the 2A was their least expensive cd player at the time but was still $499 back in '87 which was alot of money. It's a great sounding unit unless you have the luxury of directly comparing it to something better.
I am also aware of the perils of being too reductionist in terms of trying to typify one player from the next based solely on one component (DAC) when there is always system synergy in play with other onboard hardware that helps create the final listening product or outcome. But I know for me, it's been a pretty reliable bellwether for getting a sense of sound expectation from a unit that has generally proven quite consistent. Also, no matter what gear we own, there is always going to be something better than what we have. It is an inescapable truth but one that shouldn't have to prevent us from enjoying what we're currently listening to. For anyone interested, also check out the older Akai CD players and Magnavox CDB players as they are also competitive with some of the upper-end Nakamichi models.
Last edited:
Djcoolray
Addicted Member
You know what would be cool, a comparison between the best Nak you can come up with and the Onkyo C-7030. Be fore warned that the Onkyo takes every bit of six weeks to completely break in. The Onkyo is very easy to sell since so many people are wanting them so you wouldn't loose a dime. Because if the Nak is truly better who wouldn't want one...then your the man with the Nak and the Onkyo can be found for as little as $135 !!
What does Onkyo have anything to do with anything in this thread? perhaps you missed the title of this thread, Best 80s NAKAMICHI Cd player.
I'm sure the C-7030 is a fine unit, that said I don't understand the point of a 24/192 DAC chip in today's players since most everyone will have a similar hi res output receiver that they can just connect the Cd player to digitally.
darkblue94
The Devil made me do it.
A ridiculous statement. "Most everyone?" Most serious enthusiasts would not likely be using a receiver of any kind, hi res output or not.
More likely they would use the CD player as a transport and decode the digital signal via an outboard DAC.
Djcoolray
Addicted Member
It's like comparing yesteryear to today comparing analog output...
A ridiculous statement. "Most everyone?" Most serious enthusiasts would not likely be using a receiver of any kind, hi res output or not.
Not so ridiculous. Most serious enthusiasts would not likely be buying an Onkyo either.
And my point still holds- if they are using the CD player as a transport the conversion still occurs outside the player, and most outboard DACs today would still be hi res.
I just recapped an Akai CD-32 with hand selected caps for each section so that I could try and tailor up its analog section a bit more to my liking to contrast it with its digital coax out as a control experiment to really try and differentiate sonic characteristics of its prime sounding PCM56P to begin to understand this DAC, will report back with what I find. The CD-32 only has 2x digital oversampling and I am on to a serious hunch that the lower sampling players sound better, and are more pleasing to the ear. Things are related to one another in the sense that if you like 'x', you may also like 'y' which is perfectly harmless and worth sharing in a friendly quest to obtain a sound signature we like from the older players. That's why I created the thread and mentioned the Akai's and Magnavox's in this thread for their competitive performance. I am sure there are many, many more out there I've never heard that are excellent and am interested in hearing people's take on the Nakamichi sound or anything else they've found they like that is complimentary or recommended.
damacman
Resident Psycho
My CDP was cutting edge in the early '90s ... Still have not heard another unit that has dethroned it. Honestly, this has colored my opinion of modern DAC technology as I've been unable to better its internal D/A via anything connected to its digital output. This permits real time comparisons.
The romance with vintage CDPs is a real one. It has been my experience that some of the TOTL machines from the '90s can be very smooth indeed. The build quality of some of them obviously contributes.
@onanysunday - enjoy the quest.
The romance with vintage CDPs is a real one. It has been my experience that some of the TOTL machines from the '90s can be very smooth indeed. The build quality of some of them obviously contributes.
@onanysunday - enjoy the quest.