2. digital
  3. 1393650200

ARC Ref CD-8 compared to CD-6 and/or Ref CD-9

Looking for comments from members who might have compared the ARC Ref CD-8 to the newly minted CD-6 and/or Ref CD-9, principally focusing on the redbook CDP function.

Based on a conversation with ARC, I understand that the redbook CD playback circuitry in the 3 models is similar, but not exact. Principal differences are upgraded coupling caps and the DAC configuration.

The Ref CD-8 used Burr Brown PCM 1792 chips configured in stereo mode. By contrast, the CD-6 and Ref CD-9 use the BB PCM 1792A, but configured in quad mono mode.

Also, the CD-6 and Ref CD-9 upsample and have fast/slow filter options. The Ref CD-8 does not offer these options.

Obviously, techno-babble aside, what counts most is how the CDPs sound. ARC says the CD-6 and Ref CD-9 have better dynamics and bandwidth, and lower distortion than the Ref CD-8. Not surprisingly, the new issues sound better.

So ... has anyone had a chance to road test the new players. Even better, compare them to the Ref CD-8. If they newest offerings are markedly better, maybe I should put on the bucket list. Oh ... mainly interested in the redbook functionality.

Thanks

BIF
bifwynne
bifwynne OP
2,206 posts
 
Jafant ... one member sent me a private message with some reactions. He thought the CD-9 might edge out the CD-8 on the redbook CD side of the house, but not enough to justify buying the CD-9 just to achieve better redbook CD playback. Although I have been, and am, a bit curious about other digital input sources that would require a DAC, ... not that much where I am willing to drop thousands of bucks to find out ... at least not yet.

ARC suggested that I road test the CD-6, which has the same circuitry as the CD-9, just minus the tubes. So, still hoping to read comments from our fellow members about their reactions.

Jafant, for some reason I seem to recall that the CD-5 is basically a Ref CD-8, but sans the tubes. What are your thoughts about the CD-9 versus the CD-5, but only as far as the redbook CD function is concerned?

Thanks
jafant's avatar
jafant
20,127 posts
 
Hello BIF,

sure, at more than twice the price, the CD9 will sound better than the CD5. If you do not need a killer DAC, go for a CD5 or CD7- that is the better money spent.

I would be interested in the newer CD6- it is priced way too high at $8K retail. If I were ARC, I would have set the price at $4995 = better value, IMO.
jafant's avatar
jafant
20,127 posts
 
BIF-

the CD5 is a killer player, no frills, best money spent.
The CD9 is more than 2x the price, will sound a bit better (my ears) abd has the killer DAC (really what one pays).

ARC could have done better on the new CD6 price-wise as it is over priced at suggested $8K retail?
bifwynne OP
2,206 posts
 
Jafant ... the Ref CD-8 is a hot-rodded up CD-5 with tubes. They use the same BB 1796 PCM DAC chip. I gather from your posts that if I am not really interested in picking up a general purpose DAC, it might not make much sense to go with either the CD-6 or CD-9. Is that your view?
jafant's avatar
jafant
20,127 posts
 
Yes BIF. In the CD9 one is paying for a DAC (first) and CD transport (second). Nothing wrong w/ this, as many competitors are building the very same.

If you like tubes, buy a CD7 used and spend the leftover $$$$ elsewhere.
More to discover