"Old" vs. "new" digital equipment

I have done a lot of experimenting and I've found between most decently designed CD players, the differences are rather small. At first you might think there's a big difference but after a while, you'll find it's not as big as you thought. The first thing you have to do is make absolutely sure that the compared players are at the exact same volume. Small differences in volume make huge differences in the perceived sound.
I think the price of digital has come down with a lot of players now where you are getting close to the best for a lot less money.
The biggest differences I've noticed between expensive players like the Wadia and others is in soundstage depth and shear transparency. I just can't agree with people who come up with the HUGE differences in sound unless there is some distinct coloration they prefer.
I have never heard HUGE differences but smaller differences that add up to a better sonic presentation.
I still love my old Sony XA7es for just listening. It is one of the more analogue sounding players around.
To directly answer your question, yes, I think technology has advanced somewhat. Is it better in absolutes? Well, that depends on the player. There are some that have all this lovely technical garbage but actually don't sound as good as as some older players. So, it is a BIG DEPENDS!
You can spend 10 times the money for a 2% improvement. If it's worth that to you, go for it.
I have listened to the DCS stack at length and actually had people say they didn't like it as much as some much cheaper players. To me, on good CD it sounded great. On bad CD, well, it sounded bad!
There's a lot at play here and you really just can't make blanket statements. Is your total system resolution up to snuff? How about cables. There's so many things that can tilt to one player or another old or new technology. Unless you put the player in your enviroment and compare directly at exact levels with the exact same equipment you are not getting the true picture. So what is the answer to your question? Honestly, you need to decide!I've been at it 40+ years and they're some old players that I really like and they're some new ones I like. BUT, personal preferences play a BIG part in audio and a lot of times honest reproduction is certainly not what everyone wants. Otherwise, they wouldn't be so many pieces for sale.
BTW, I do beleive in some power conditioning with certain products but with well designed power supplies in excellent products it doesn't make all that much difference IMO.
I also feel the older transports were built better. Everybody likes to use the computer drives for all their upsampling/oversampling garbage.

Re: Wadia, which some folks think is the answer, I agree that the 860 is pretty good, once it's been modified by Great Northern Sound. I thought it was too strident in stock condition. Because of that, a couple of years back I replaced the unmodified 860 with a Linn CD12 demo, which to me seemed to sound more rich and natural. Over time, however, it still, too often, seemed unnatural in the highs. As my frustration mounted, I decided to have GNSC modify the Wadia 860 (which I'd kept). I liked the results better than the Linn. During that process, I also got hold of a used Tri-Vista SACD player. Didn't much like it for CDs, but was impressed with the SACD sound. So I started thinking SACD might be the answer. I was about to sell the Linn, but took the time to compare it with an EMM CDSA. As noted above, the EMM gave the sense of retrieving more detail than the Linn for redbook. So I sold the Linn (and also the Tri-Vista), and eventually got an EMM demo. So now I have the modded Wadia, and the EMM. And yet, neither of them are as pleasant to listen to as many, if not most, Lps, particularly when it comes to massed strings.

If this sounds like the crazed wanderings of a music junkie, you can imagine what my wife has been thinking.

But, my point is, here's at least one listener that was frustrated by the problem described by David, decided to solve it, tried several of what are supposed to be amongst the best CDP's available, and remained unsatisfied. But thank goodness somewhere in the process I decided to give Lps another try (after 15 years of nothing but CDs).

I should add that I also tried various equipment changes to try to minimize my issues as well. Tried Avalon and Harbeth speakers in addition to the Vandys (and now use the Harbeth M30's), tried VTL, BEL, Cary, Joule, BAT and ARC electronics (that I can recall), and BEL, Audioquest, Purist Audio, Kimber, Cardas and some other cables (prefer the Cardas Cross, NOT Golden Cross), tried various methods of vibration control (now using Symposium stands with BEL hard rubber feet--the Symposium metal feet were too bright and hard sounding), several different power cords (now using Cardas Cross), and have a dedicated circuit, and use PS Audio Duettes (sp?)(mainly for surge protection).

(You know, looking at that list, my wife might be right...I might be crazy...certainly was determined...)

But here's something funny: Back in 2004, I moved to Holland for 18 months, and took with me only a one-box, 2 speaker, CD-only, Linn Classik system, which was fairly rolled-off seeming in the top. And night after night, I was quite happy listening to it. I could listen for hours. Fatigue was NEVER an issue. Which gets back to the point several folks have raised...the higher you go up the "hear everything accurately" chain, the more you buy trouble for a larger and larger percentage of the music you want to hear. Catch-22.

(And, in fact, it was after 18 months of music-listening happiness overseas that I came home and began the maddening quest described above.)

“OLD” vs “NEW and “LOW” vs “HIGH”
Here’s a point of view from a low end user.
System:
YBA Lecteur CD 3 Alpha (old but a bit high)
Minimax tube pre-amp
Exposure SS amp
Nordost SPM interconnect and speaker cables

When I trying to get a new CDP to feel the different between “old” vs “new” and “SS” vs “tube” technology, I got myself a MHZS 66 Chinese tube CDP (new but a bit low). Why chose MHZS*, it’s almost in same price range with old YBA for tube CDP. *3 difficult setting for up-sampling.

The new MHZS 66, gave me a very bright, detail and clear sound image during entire classical orchestral. Not just strings, everything is so clear divided--left and right, front and back. But, to me, it’s too detail and clear and doesn’t have the tube’s warmness. I lost the feeling to enjoy this new CDP. Maybe lost the feeling of the analog sounding?

So I got no choice to switch back to my YBA. It’s an old school CDP. Not as clear divided out the mass strings that you were talking about, but its warm and bit more analog sounding.

To me, vintage or “old” is always better then “new”

So......I decided to audition my first LP. It’s a very basic turntable, plug and play.
Music Hall MMF 2 (new and low), Marantz 2010B (old and low) and Nordost Red Dawn II speaker cables (mid)
I love it so much and I haven’t turn on my YBA for a period of time.

Enjoy the music

Eweedhome, And I thought I was bad. It is nuts! That's why for music (just listening and not being critical) I love my old 20 bit Sony XA7es. I've noticed a good many old 20 bit players have a nice warm, more analogue sound than 24 bit players. Most 24 bit newer players seem to be a touch strident overall which I personally think is just a by-product of the median. I can give up some transparency for a richer overall sound.
The one thing to me that divides the players is sounstaging, both height, width and depth. This is where some of the pricier players live. Of course, your speakers must be up to offering this depth. Not just in the middle between the speakers but behind and even depth outside the speakers. Some speakers offer up an inverted "V" type of soundstaging depth with the max in the middle. I like a speaker that delivers more of a square where it's the same from side to side. This will let you know about cd players. David's system above is perfectly capable of this. I would also mention your room acoustics. I know for a fact the Vandersteen's David uses will offer up more than enough depth for a realistic soundstage. Some of your edginess in the strings may be reflections in the room.

I've been listening to the Theta DS Pro Va for roughly 3 hours comparing it to the BC3. Very tough here ...I detect no grain what so ever from the Theta. It is one musical Dac for sure. It never sounds harsh or vague too me.

It has more gain than the BC3, so it is tricky getting the proper volume between the two. As far as resolution goes there's no clear winner. The Theta may be a tad warmer in sound, but not enough to distract or make the music any less enjoyable. This Dac is easy to listen too..it just flows.

By the same token the BC3 may sound a little cooler in comparison. Again this is nitpicking.

I used a Promitheus TVC preamp with both units. I prefer to use my BC3 by itself. I wish this Theta model had a built in preamp. I'm sure a separate preamp would be unnecessary for it if it did.. at least in my system.

So the bottom line is, if I were you Bikecommuter, I would either have the unit upgraded depending on cost if possible or just buy a newer version. The Theta Va is a terrific Dac! Unless you're hunting for super high sampling and bit rates other than whats currently available on the market. Once you get to this level of sound..spending more is basically pissing in the wind IMO.

If you're hearing grain something is wrong with your current Dac or another component or it is just bad recordings.

Off topic, after running back and forth from the player to change CDs...I've come to the conclusion..I'll stick with the PC server as a transport. lol
This is way more work than I've become accustom too! ;-)

Good listening!