Is it worth spending $10k on CD-only player today?

Not me either. I truly wonder whether the majority of folks posting here in a blind A/B test could tell the difference between a $3K player and a $10K player given a wide range of music and all the time and listening you'd like to have (given that both are well chosen players with good synergy within the same system). I'd include myself in that group as well, but perhaps that's cause I'd rather spend the extra $7K on something that matters more to me, like music (CD's), motorcycle travels, vacation, etc. Regardless of what price range I purchased in, I'd look for something used here on Audiogon...or, in the case that, at a moment of weakness, or momentary loss of perspective or sanity, I chose to drop $10k, I'd look for a "certified, pre-owned luxury CD player".

Marco

I would love to be in position to ask such a question. I have nearly 5K invested in my transport & DAC and it was the best money I've ever spent. An important thing to keep in mind is the fact that CD showed up in 1982, and now in 2004 it has become a hi-rez format. Only took twenty years. Don't think the same thing won't be true of SACD (if it hangs on). If I had 10K to spend I'd spend $8500 of it on a CD player and $1500 on an SACD player.

marco, drop one of the zeros and you'll sound like the unwashed, non-audiophiles. (what $1k for a cd player? R U nuts??!?). same argument (diabribe?), different values no?

I agree right now I'd maybe do a ca.$3k player and have some mods done do it, and spend the other $7k on music or something else like a transmission for the car, or a stereo for the jeep. Heck, I'm having a hard time upgrading from my $300 DAC. But I can see where $10k players have their place for the select few (those with means and those for whom that level of quality matters. which again is a pool of very few). I wish I was one of them. Though I am not.

The one thing for me that helps put mega-buck digital in perspective was reading about the listen tests at Albert Porter place with megabuck digital, his Lloyd Walker table, and his lowly Sony 9000ES. But I think that's mainly due to the fact I can't afford the megabuck rigs so I appreciate justification that one may not be worth it for someone also into analog.

Maybe you are right though. For most studio and electronic music we'd likely have a hard time distinguishing a $3k from a $10k player. But maybe the original poster mainly listens to unamplified acoustic music recorded in a live space (read classical, jazz, or folk/ethnic)?

Not that much for source equipment. However, first thing is to analyse what do you listen most, and for hi-rez - how many of the available titles you'd like to purchase right away. It's not about technology. It about ability to use it. I like idea of hi-rez, but would not invest 5-10K into it, unless I have truly unlimited choise of hi-rez music, which is not true at this moment. Taking into account that virtually any hi-rez player compromises redbook playback quality, which still prevails, my 2 cents - go with redbook. And ask your question again in 2-3 years. ;)

Hopefully they meet their latest promised by date.