IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Music Fidelity A3 CD Player
Bound2
post Jul 28 2013, 03:14
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 28-July 13
Member No.: 109332



I have a A3 Cd 24 bit player passed down to me from my uncle. I know for its time it was a great piece of equipment. In reality, I know nothing about audio. Anyone have some input if this equipment is still relevant now-a-days?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Jul 28 2013, 05:03
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 4853
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



There is not much difference between CD players. If you just want to play CDs and don't care about anything else its probably fine.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DVDdoug
post Jul 29 2013, 21:05
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 2535
Joined: 24-August 07
From: Silicon Valley
Member No.: 46454



I still have (and use) the 1st CD player I ever bought more than 20 years ago. ...Yours is not as old as mine.

If you don't hear any defects (noise, distortion, skipping), it's probably just as good as a new one. It might even be more rugged/reliable than a newer one!!! Realistically, if something goes wrong it should be obvious... Something like skipping/playing problems, no output from one side, etc.

Unless there are features you want and don't have (MP3 capability, smaller size, multi-disc changer, etc.) there is no value in upgrading.

Since most DVD & Blu-Ray players also play CDs, many people just use their video player to play CDs. When my CD player dies, I probably wont replace it.

QUOTE
I have a A3 Cd 24 bit player
FYI - Audio CDs are ALWAYS 16-bit. I don't know what "24 bit" means, but it's marketing hype.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TomasPin
post Jul 29 2013, 21:59
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 5-June 13
From: Argentina
Member No.: 108508



QUOTE (DVDdoug @ Jul 29 2013, 17:05) *
Audio CDs are ALWAYS 16-bit. I don't know what "24 bit" means, but it's marketing hype.

Or it does some sort of upsampling? I highly doubt that would be beneficial though...

This post has been edited by TomasPin: Jul 29 2013, 22:00


--------------------
A man and his music: http://tubular.net/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 30 2013, 00:12
Post #5





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



Why would they increase the bit depth? The only reason for adding more less-significant-bits is if you’re going to alter the audio to put something there, and if 24-bit is being used here as a marketing buzzword to imply high fidelity, these two things don’t jive at all.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Jul 30 2013, 00:20
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 977
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



The unit uses a 24 bit delta-sigma chip. It may use 24bit for the digital filtering. In this case their marketing would be right.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Propheticus
post Jul 30 2013, 01:35
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 219
Joined: 10-September 11
Member No.: 93615



QUOTE
The A3CD utilizes the same Burr-Brown PCM1716 24-bit Delta-Sigma D/A converter employed in Musical Fidelity’s X-Ray CD player. The DAC automatically upsamples 16-bit data to 24-bit/96kHz,....


Specs from the manual:

CODE

DAC architecture
24 bit Delta-Sigma (Bitstream)
8x oversampling

Frequency response
10Hz - 20kHz +- 0.2dB

S/N ratio
> 96dB unweighted
> 105dB 'A' weighted

THD
< 0.006% 10Hz - 20kHz unweighted
< 0.003% 10Hz - 20 kHz 'A' weighted

Total correlated jitter
< 170 pS

De-emphasis error
< + 0.1dB

Linearity
< + 0.2dB to -80dB

Wow and flutter
Unmeasurable

http://www.musicalfidelity.com/uploads/man...nglish/a3cd.pdf

All in all pretty good specs, but doubt is the 16->24 bit upsampling helps. The D/A chip used is 24-bit (Possibly to be forward compatible with 24-bit material? It was made in 2000.) so any input needs to/will be upsampled to 24-bit. Better market this as a good thing. Higher number = better,...right? Doesn't come cheap though. $1000 for a cd player, those were the times.


**edit** As it oversamples 8x, raising word-length to 24-bits first might help reduce dither noise... Am I right? Won't the noise now be in less significant bits. Or Am I mixing stuff up here?

This post has been edited by Propheticus: Jul 30 2013, 01:52
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 30 2013, 02:04
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (Propheticus @ Jul 30 2013, 01:35) *
doubt is the 16->24 bit upsampling helps.
More to the point, increasing the sampling rate after oversampling seems even more frivolous. What can that achieve? Oh, great, an extra 26 kHz of bandwidth, to preserve bits of the very same images and quantisation noise that the oversampling exists to push away into the higher frequencies…seems legit. Am I missing something? Or is this just another case of big numbers and the magic word upsampling being marketed on their own merits, regardless of sense?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th July 2014 - 09:13