Which CD player should I turn to......?

Actually, I'm only considering Naim.

I just sold me hi-cap to a lady who planned to use it on her CD3.5 - her email to me today stated: "Everything went to plan and even after a few hours only it sounds soooooo much better. I'm very happy."

If I were you, I'd try that first..... Or even a Flatcap......

Also consider the CDi - there are currently a couple going on eBay which might be worth looking at. One appears to be green in colour though :-(

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

Bylthe.. that lady was me!!! But I put it on the 72 and that sounded fab... so maybe a f/c for the 3.5 is the next move... or the CDi but my question is.. is that an improvement on a 3.5 or should I be saving for CDS??
L

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sundance:
Bylthe.. that lady was me!!! But I put it on the 72 and that sounded fab... so maybe a f/c for the 3.5 is the next move... or the CDi but my question is.. is that an improvement on a 3.5 or should I be saving for CDS??
L

---

Oops! Sorry Sundance! *LOL*

I thought you were putting the Hi-Cap on a CD3.5 - I should have listened more carefully to you!

Have you tried the Hi-Cap on the CD3.5 instead of the 72?

I'd have thought it'd be a good excercise :-)

Regards, Martin.

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

CD3.5 with a flatcap is a good improvement, hicap gives a massive improvement though, much more detail and definately not sharp or thin.
I had a flatcap on my CD3.5 and bought a hicap for my 92 pre. I tried the hicap on the 3.5 as a test and have kept it that way round since then (with the flatcap now on the 92).

Try the hicap you have on the 3.5 as a test.

Sundance,
I'll add my recommendation to HiCap the CD3.5 - I did this with mine and it transformed the sound. Far less digititus and graininess, more controlled and musical bass, generally an excellent upgrade.

A FlatCap will get you part way there, but with the 72 HiCapped, it really does need another HiCap to bring out the best in the 3.5.

David

"Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours." :Carl Sagan

Add me to the Hi-Cap vote. I have a Flatcap on mine, but wish it was a HiCap.
You must try it.

OK I'm convinced - hicap it is. I supposed it saves me money on a more expensive CDP and I can always use hicaps!!

Thanks Gang.

I can only comment on adding a HiCap to a CD5.

WOW!

I never knew there was so much in it.

Cheers

Harry

I gotta spend another £400-500 for a hicap OR spend the same and get a CDI which was a better CDP wasn't it? Wasn't the CD3.5 more a budget player?

quote:

---

Originally posted by taymat:
From my bad experiences, don't buy a marantz cd63/7. I'd buy something more modern like a azur 540 or arcam 72.

---

These were highly respected CD players in their day. What specifically was the problem?

Nime

If you want to spend more money on a CDP, your better bet would be to put it towards a CDX. The CD1 is getting a bit 'long in the tooth' now (it was in production from '92-'95). The CD3.5, though lower in the foodchain is more recent and probably less likely to have service and maintainability issues!

If you do decide to buy a CD1, best to email Naim service and get their take on it before parting with the dosh. If parts are not available it could be a poor buy!!

David

The CD3.5 was the forerunner to the CD5.

Well suited to a Nait 3 or 92/90, but a bit thin sounding with a 72/hicap/140; which is good enough to highlights its weaknesses.

I haven't heard it with a hicap, but it would definitely be an option worth trying.

The CDI or CD2 were better CD players.

I had a CD3 on loan whilst waiting for a CD2 to be delivered and it sounded thin, the CD2 was a better player.

My CD2 at the moment is unused as I keep is as a backup just in case my CDS1 goes wrong.

So the CDS - CDS1 and now current CDS3 are the top end players?
And CD3 - CD3.5 and now CD5 entry level players.
Where does the CDX1 and now CDX2 fit in in terms of quality?

Not thinking of selling your CD2 then Peter?

quote:

---

Where does the CDX1 and now CDX2 fit in in terms of quality?

---

Between the entry level and top-end CDPs.

David

From some of the earlier posts, there appears to be some confusion (maybe because they look similar when typed into a PC)
CDI (i)
and CD1 (one)
Mind you the "Production History" doesn't mention the CDi for some reason????
I had a CDi from 1995 until 2003 and it was a great player - I reckon it would still stand up well against some newer models.
New, it cost £1862.00 and if I recall correctly, at the time, it was Naims 2nd from the top.
Can someone enlighten me if I've lost the plot (OK I know I have!) or is the Naim web site in need of a bit of attention to include the CDi?

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

CD1 = CDI

Peter

User34 at Laposte dot net

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Stockwell:
CD1 = CDI

Peter

User34 at Laposte dot net

---

I just realised that - apparently it's a typo on the Naim web site and it should say CDi in the history section.

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

Hey Sundance,

I see you're selling the CD3.5 so I presume you've already decided on which CD player your going to buy or already have......

So what's it to be??????

Martin.

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......