wrote:


"On 30/05/2017 9:13 PM, Phil Allison wrote:


In terms of tech specs, sound quality, features and ease of use - it
is still one of the best CD players ever made.


**Sound quality? Nope. The CDP701 (released close to the same time as
the 101) was far better. I recall listening to both at a Sony demo,
through their ES series Sony electronics and those very good flat
diaphragm Sony speakers. The 701 completely outclassed the 101. One of
my clients had both machines and we listened extensively to them
(compared them with 2nd generation master tapes of Hot August Night on
his Studer) and the 701 was a far better sounding machine. Even the Sony
demo guy, who claimed that there would be no sonic difference, was
surprised. That said, a decent multibit machine (like the early Sony and
Philips machines) will sound better than those horrible single bit ones
released in the late 1980s.


Was the CDP101 vs 701 test
done with the same exact source
(CD) in the same listening environment,
connected to the same system?

Otherwise such tests are invalid.



** TWs listening tests are totally invalid - cos he used the audiophool method.

Machine A plays, stop, muck about, have a chat then machine B plays.

Absolute ********.

As a matter of fact, I carried out a blind testing session between my CDP101 and a borrowed CDP701 for a customer. He had a well damped room with Quad ESL63s at the time driven by an expensive Sony amp. It was all nicely set up for best imaging etc.

Both CD players were out in the hallway, so he could not see them or me. All I had to do was swap RCA leads and CDs between machines.

Try as he might, using his favourite classical tracks, he could not tell the machines apart.

Happy that there was no audible difference, he opted to buy the more expensive model.

He merely wanted to be *certain* the cheaper model was not actually better.



...... Phil