• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Vintage CD Players?

ron-c said:
All Laser diodes eventually fail in CD players. The older the player the more likely this will be. Spindle motors are the next thing to go. I would buy new If it were me..

Thanks,
Ron-C
Click to expand...

I've had a motor start to squeak, but a drop of oil and off it went.

What is the half-life of a laser diode? :scratch2:
 
I also have a Yamaha CD-37 from '85 that still works. The motors are pretty much worn out but it still plays CDs just fine.
 
RE: "Vintage" CD Players

I still have my first CD player from the '80s, a 16-bit, "programmable", 3-beam laser diode Scott 959DA...the cheapest, best player I could afford at the time. I splurged and got the one with the remote control! The Scott 949DA did not have a remote, otherwise it's identical to the 959DA. It still works fine, so I haven't been looking.

Personally, I would get a newer CD player...not a vintage one from the '80s. Unless, you just like the novelty of having a working vintage CD player...
 
MitsuMan said:
I just picked this up and I'm very impressed with it. :yes: Built in 1991 and heavy as hell.

[URL=http://img143.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sonycdpvj6.jpg][/URL]
Click to expand...


That's a sweet unit, I am sitting next to my Sony CDP-X777es tank I picked up a couple of years ago that I keep in my all music vintage system. I think the sony es units from this era are incredible except parts are an issue and laser assemblys are impossible to find.
 
Vintage OK for some models?

I have a Kyocera DA-310cx that sounds really good. Getting a little long in the tooth and cranky (pause is gone), but still plays fine sound - for the CD format that is. Broc :)
 
I know that some of you will think I'm nuts, but my son picked up a Mintek dvd player from the side of the road. Has no working video output. I decided to try it to play music cd's. I have to tell you, I was very surprised at how nice it sounds. They sell on the auction site for 10 - 20 bucks average. It has 24bit/192kHz Burr Brown audio DAC. I decided to keep it to use in my bedroom system as my main system already has a Pioneer PD-59 and PD-M90x cdp's.

My point is if you are on a super tight budget or looking for a cd player for a second system, a low priced dvd player may be for you. My brother didn't believe me until I brought it to his house and played it. Now he sings a different tune.

Paul
 
still have my sony d5 portable from '84. first portable IIRC, and only 300 bux, while home units were still in the 7-900 buck range. its got thousands of miles logged while sitting in my car, and was also used while i mowed the lawn.

thats the only cd player left in the house. everything else is dvd.
 
What a coincidence, I was just about to mention the Kyocera players as well. I have a DA-610cx, and worked on the flagship model, the DA-910cx once. They sound amazing for their age, and still hold their own against a lot of other newer offerings. Based on the drive in the 610, there should be no spindle motor issues. The 610cx, I did re-cap the analog section with Elna cerafines, which wasn't too expensive, and helped quite a bit, mostly just because they were a refresh.

The current CD player in my main system though is an NAD monitor series 5000. Stock, it sounds great, and after an upgrade in the output section, and servicing the spindle motor, it's pretty amazing. One key tip: if you pick one up, it inverts signal polarity. If you look at the schematic, it shouldn't, so evidently the blame lies on the DAC chip. If you have someone mod it, it shouldn't be too difficult to have the tech "invert" the output, which mean it will actually play correct polarity. THEN, the player will knock your socks off!

BT

(if I remember correctly, the Kyoceras invert also. In fact, MOST CD players invert, which is one reason some vinyl people don't like them)
 
Awhile back I was thinking how unhappy I really was with all of my various CD players. They were all "ok", but none of them could handle the really difficult CDs with any aplomb. I thought about getting something new, but anything that sounded anything like I wanted it to ran to 3G or so, not a possibility. I started looking at vintage machines to upgrade instead.

I picked up a Sony 608ESD. It is a beautifully made piece (the heatsinks are copper fer cryin' out loud!), the transport is fantastic and fast. A friend did some fairly serious mods for me (major diode upgrade, replaced 80+ post connections with silver solder and short runs etc.). The machine now blows away any number of machines I've heard costing 10G or more. Incredibly detailed and musical. I'm saving up for a clock upgrade. Having all of the controls on the remote duplicated on the front panel is nice, too. First time I've ever really appreciated CDs....

I've never been a Sony fan, but if you can find one of these machines in good shape for the right price I don't think you'll be disappointed.
 
OK, I don't mean to be a reverse snob here.
A cdplayer should read zeros and ones. As long as the laser and transport are good, there you go.
The "vintage" cdplayers from the early and mid 80s are built like tanks. If anything else, they may make great transports for newer DACs.
Yeah, build quality differences, but I'm not sure I've heard differences in sound output.
 
When I first got involved with digital media I didn't think there would be much difference either. All of the CD players I've had until recently have been decent quality, but there were certain CDs (pretty much all classical) that none of them could play in a way that was anything but painful to listen to, glaring, no detail, etc. I would have presumed they were just badly produced CDs except that I heard them sounding wonderful when played on-air. Since I got the 608ESD and had the mods done those CDs all sound excellent. The nature of the signal derived from a CD, both digital and converted to analogue is easily effected by the clarity of the signal path it follows. Starting with a machine with (as you said) good laser and transport is of course necessary, but having clean electronics the rest of the way makes a huge difference. If I hadn't heard it myself (and have the pleasure of listening to it every day now) I'd never have believed it either. Following the route I did was a result of being really dissatisfied with what I had and not having the money to buy anything that would make my ears happy. I've discovered that even the CDs that sounded ok on my old machines contained a whole lot that I was missing that dealt with soundstage and other ambient information. Money well spent as far as I'm concerned.
 
Onkyo DX-788F with XLR balanced connection. Great with Onk P-388F preamp. I believe that the cdp came out in '93-sold thru '96. Someone told me the new cost was around $1100.00, but I'm not sure.
 
I just picked up (as part of a package deal actually) a Mission PCM-7000 cd player (mid 80s). Appears to actually be overbuilt with nice size heat sinks and an overall build quality that just oozes vintage appeal. Doesn't sound bad either. I know the newer 'disposable' ones have better chips sets, etc, but they sure don't build them this way (except for higher end models of course) anymore.
 
I have several old 1st/2nd generation Magnavox (Phillips) players - while I can't testify to better sound, I do like the fact that these units are stubborn, hard headed units when it comes to tracking through scratches. Where modern players go into stuttering fits, these old guys just plow right on through. I have an old Peter Gabriel CD that is unplayable except on these old guys - its funny, they play through the scratch with a loud POP!, just as though its an album with a scratch. Very cool.
 
I had one of the first Magnavox CD players. As I recall, these units used the single laser approach vs. the split laser. All the same laser. Split took laser beam and split it into three. Middle section read the data and outer two wee used for tracking. The single laser therefore was more powerful as it used the entire laser spectrum for reading and could "read through" more defects. Split approach was better for tracking especiall on portable devices.

Just what I remember reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom