If you're that against the slot loaders, you should try the Cambridge CXC, which is in your price range. I've had one for over a year and there are many satisfied owners here. One person above posted that he felt the Audiolab was far superior in sonics to his CXC, but there is the slot-loader issue. Personally, if my CXC craps out I would probably try the Audiolab. It's supposedly very good.
SLOT LOADING CD MECHANISMS - DO THE DAMAGE CD'S?
Of recent, I have been considering the purchase of a new CD transport (no DAC). There are several that have caught my attention; - - one in particular is made by AUDIOLAB. The one factor that leaves me "hanging", conceptually speaking, is the fact that AUDIOLAB exclusively uses "slot loading" CD mechanisms.
I have owned a couple of good quality CD players employing this type mechanism, and in both cases, eventually discovered marring to the playing surface of the CD. I am fanatic about proper preservation of CD playing surfaces. I certainly don’t want more CD’s ending up in the garbage can. (and I don’t like polishing, making a bad situation, worse !)
In turn, I have read many articles and customer reports complaining of the same issue. I consider AUDIOLAB products to be of a quality and performance level that leaves me somewhat dumbfounded as to why they would employ the use of a questionable mechanism that has so many historic issues.
So, what have they done that would be any different than other companies using this concept? I can’t imagine that they would invest the R&D money to develop their own proprietary mechanism.
Anyone out there that can validify the credibility (or lack of) AUDIOLAB’S use of "slot loading ?. Direct experience would help the most.
I have owned a couple of good quality CD players employing this type mechanism, and in both cases, eventually discovered marring to the playing surface of the CD. I am fanatic about proper preservation of CD playing surfaces. I certainly don’t want more CD’s ending up in the garbage can. (and I don’t like polishing, making a bad situation, worse !)
In turn, I have read many articles and customer reports complaining of the same issue. I consider AUDIOLAB products to be of a quality and performance level that leaves me somewhat dumbfounded as to why they would employ the use of a questionable mechanism that has so many historic issues.
So, what have they done that would be any different than other companies using this concept? I can’t imagine that they would invest the R&D money to develop their own proprietary mechanism.
Anyone out there that can validify the credibility (or lack of) AUDIOLAB’S use of "slot loading ?. Direct experience would help the most.
- ...
- 43 posts total
The AudioLab 6000CT "is" that good, especially at its price point. I've owned one for over a year now and have had zero problems with it or any concerns with the slot loading. What I like most is its SILENT,, really black background, like NOTHING. I would not consider myself an audiophile as I have never had the time or sensitive hearing to hear what audiophiles confess to be able to hear, but what I hear is pretty dam good. |
I bought an Audiolab 6000CDT a couple months ago. I loved the way it sounded... solid bass and details I had not noticed before (stepping up from an Oppo 103 previously used as a transport). However, I did notice scuff marks, not scratches, on my discs. I used a new blank CD-R inserted several times to verify and noticed new scuff marks on it as well. They are a line of marks that are aligned in a row which indicated to me to be a loading mechanism issue. No way am I going to allow a product to degrade my CD collection. I returned the unit and got a Cambridge CXC v2 that uses a tray loader. No issues with the Cambridge, but I still prefer the sound of the Audiolab just a little bit more. First-world problems. |
Hello, What about Jays. It even has i2s. This is a nice top loading transport at a great price. https://www.jays-audio.com/shop I am the same way with all of my media. Clean as a whistle. |
- 43 posts total