I need help - Better DAC or NEW CD player?

The cambridge 840C is also one of the options I had considered, I have both a better CD player than the Rotel and a "seemingly very good" DAC looking at the specs, the chipset used and the fact that it also upsamples the signal. Considering the selling price of my almost new Rotel, it would be a very little amount of money to get an used 840C, maybe 500 bucks. To get a good DAC I am looking at 1000 bucks and still will have a "questionable" CD transport, so I am looking at 1000 bucks for the DAC and and possible CD transport change. Now it´s where the rule of diminishing returns hits me hard in the head and I question how much of a difference could I notice between the 840C and a transport with a DAC such as the benchmark or the wyred4sound one.....

Some people have pointed out that the 840C is a little thin sounding, but I also plan to experiment with a tube buffer, last week I ordered the Grant B283 MKII buffer just for kicks (to use it between the CD player or the DAC, whateven I should choose)

On the other hand, I am thinking that for only 500-600 bucks I could upgrade my Rotel in the meantime, use the 840C as standalone player and later get a better DAC and use the 840C 24bit upsampled output to the new DAC.....does this sound reasonable?

The Cambridge did not sound thin to me when I heard it. That might be partially due to the quality overall of the system I heard it on. It impressed me as much as any player I have heard.

It fruitless to assert that all source devices are created equal in any case. That's not what I'm saying.

Timing can be an issue with transports or optical drives reading optical media in real time fast enough to apply error correction and keep the bits flowing. Music servers that avoid real time reading of optical media to provide the audio datastream and devices like network music players that cache data locally before sending to the DAC help assure that all bits available from the source media get captured and sent in time.

In the case of the BEnchmark, I suspect that there are many source devices at all price points that sound essentially the same, more so than otherwise. Which ones specifically do and which ones do not? Try specific units and find out I suppose.

But I think I would apply the strategy that I would not assume I need to spend a lot or even more in order to find a suitable source with the Benchmark specifically as perhaps might be more the case with some other DACs.

Are you in a position to go listen to the 840 and compare it to other CDPs or DACs? It didn't sound "thin" to me.

Knownothing,

Did you hear the 840C? I dont know if it is really thin, I just read that from some other review but also doubt it sounds "thin" considering the great reviews for it.

I could listen to it, but the dealers where I´ve seen it do not have a good listening room to really be able to notice any difference, it´s like listening to it at bestbuy, no good at all. I´d rather jump into the pool and listen to it at home.....

Yes, I have heard it. It is very good at its price point. For comparison, most cheaper Cambridge players have a forward sonic balance with fairly flat frequency curve, meaning that bass and treble are not attenuated in favor of mid range tones, as some other manufacturers of budget players prefer to do (NAD comes to mind here). The other Cambridges tend to put their empahsis on resolution and timing over soundstage width and depth - so you get musical details and tunefulness, but not necessarily the best "hiFi" effects. The DacMagic is at the very musical end of these characters, having essentially the DACs and upsampling electronics from the CA 740C, which is one model and several hundred bucks down from the 840C.

For comparison with the player you are familiar with, I find the Rotel sound to be fairly accurate and flat in frequency resoponse, but somewhat sterile or dry (lifeless is probably too strong a term) overall in comparison to say, the Cambridge 640C, the Dac Magic or 740C.

The 840C on the other hand to me sounds warmer and more liquid through the mid range than its littler siblings. It keeps the tunefullness and resolution, but wraps it in a tropical breeze, and does a better job of building a believable soundstage. Soundstage size is still not top o0f class for the Cambridge compared to other players in its price range, but the other things it does well more than compensate in my mind.

The reason for the leap in capability for the 840 over its sibilings probably results from the fact that it uses a completely different set of DACs and I believe different algorithms for upsampling among other upgrades. In any case, your amp has balanced inputs, and if you fit the 840C with good balnaced ICs and a capable and compatible power cord like the Analysis Plus Power Oval 2 or Shunyata Diamondback Platinum or better, you can maximize the positive traits (including expanded soundstage) for both CD playback and use of the 840 as a stand alone DAC serving other sources. I think you would enjoy it.