Old Philips CD as transport or new playe


I need help with an upgrade. I have a 10 year old Philips CD-50 CD player, which happens to have a digital out. I see my options as:
1. Use the Philips as a transport and buy a reasonable (e.g, MSB or Perpetual) DAC; or
2. Toss the Philips and get a new player or transport-DAC combo.

Can I get some input on whether a 10 year old player (original retail about $300) will mate well with a new DAC or is it too old to be worthwhile and I should buy a new player/transport-DAC? Prefer to stay around $1,500.

BTW, the rest of my system is Plinius SA-100 Mk III amp, Rogue 99 pre-amp, into Coincident Super Eclipse speakers.

Thanks for the help!!
seldenr
Dekay, did you compare the 506.24 as a standalone to your Cal/Bel Canto? How did that comparison go?

-Another fence sitter with a 6 yo. CDP(micromega2)

PF
I was once told by a technician that a Phillips CDM9 transport, which was one of their better mechanisms had an estimated useful life of about 3500-4000 hours. Whether that is true or not, I don't know. If your player has a lot of hours on it, I would consider replacing it. I have a 10 year old Marantz cd94 that I have used for many years as a transport with Theta and Micromega dacs. However, I could not stand to listen to it without a jitter reduction device.
The Aiwa mentioned above, in its stock form, is comparable as a transport to the Marantz (not bad considering its price). A used Theta Data Basic (mentioned above) will imho outperform the Marantz and many other transports.
I am in the same boat. I have phillips cd-80 about 10 years old and am considering upgrading to a tubed unit either a CJ or sonic frontiers unit any suggestions? Thanks
Prfont: Of course I did, are you kidding? When I get any piece of gear in my home (especially one that does not cost me anything) I audition it up one leg and then down the other. I preferred the sound of the Icon II to that of the 506.24 in my system (when running them om their own). The CAL was richer and a tiny bit more forward sounding with a heavier bottom end and fuller mids. The 506.24 had more detail going for it but was just not the sound that I like in my setup. However in my friends system which has full range speakers, and is a SS amp/tube pre combo system, the 506.24 was my preference as the CAL had too much bass and on this we both agreed. I guess that it is always best to audition first.