Review: Sony CDP-470

You´re about to read the sixth out of nine reviews. You don´t need to read them all, just pick the unit that seems to be the most interesting to you. In the weeks to follow I´ll review the following units: Kenwood DP-5090, Pioneer DV-610, Sony CDP-470, Pioneer BDP-140, iRiver IMP-550, Sony MZ-R 55, Sony MZ-R 37, Sony NW-A 1000 and the Sansa Clip+. Stay tuned and enjoy the new review: the Sony CDP-470! I also implore you to read the article describing my rigorous testing methodology before you actually start reading this one.

Sony CDP-470

This player is even older than the Kenwood, the Sony CDP-470 was released to the market in 1989. Now 23 years old it still works as a charm even though it was only a budget player. Its price range seems evidenced by its manufacturing quality at first: the front, the sides, the bottom and the rear are made out of plastic and don´t feel very nice although they are encased by the metal cover. But it´s surprisingly heavy and once you open it you are in for some surprises: the power supply is rather big, the huge CD drive is mounted on a thick metal frame, the same goes for its PCB which also shows an impressive number of parts. Just like the Kenwood DP-5090 this player uses several ICs for digital conversion: a CXD1125Q as a DSP, a CXD2550P as its filter and then the CXD1161P for D/A conversion. The higher model from the 1989-line, the CDP-670, uses two D/A converters from Burr Brown instead and also has an optical output - apart from that there are no differences. The laser for the CD drive is still available for cheap money... but not necessary because this player reads everything you throw at it with impeccable perfection, including CD-Rs ignored by other players or badly scratched CDs. Changing tracks needs an extremely short amount of time and the drive mechanism doesn´t even sound tired when the drawer opens or closes. Well, I mentionend in another review Sony once was renowned for building high quality devices - this reputation obviously was well deserved. That´s probably the reason why people try to buy old Sony CD players at eBay; they want to own well engineered players with good sound. Let´s see if they have reason to believe in the latter, shall we?

Sony CDP-470 measurments

Sony CDP-470 jitter

Measurments finally reveal its age: while jitter is remarkably absent (I expected the CDP-470 to jitter much, much more) the RMAA chart shows some severe distortions (confirmed by the plots), especially prominent are Intermodulation distortions. The sound quality reflects the measurments because this player does everything wrong a player can do wrong. Timing is horrible, the stage is constricted, instruments constantly change their colours, singers tend to be obscured by surrounding parts... well, at least the stage is consistent and extremely stable. Dynamics are explosive but seem extremely forced and not very natural. Air is almost absent which is curious considering the amount of aggressiveness in the treble. Resolution and definition are not very good either, the player also seems to distort soft parts of the music while smearing details when the music gets louder. All in all I´d say it is the most "digital" and abrasive sounding player I´ve ever heard. If only my boyfriend could have spend a bit more money all those years ago... he could have purchased the CDP-670 instead; its digital output would have enabled us to use it as a very reliable digital transport. If you still have a soft spot for a Sony player from this era and intend to use it analogue I recommend the Sony D-20 because it sounds much better. Nice mechanics, bad sound... therefore I´d recommend the CDP-670 should you plan to acquire a reliable digital transport.

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

Review: Sony NW-A 1000

You´re about to read the fifth out of nine reviews. You don´t need to read them all, just pick the unit that seems to be the most interesting to you. In the weeks to follow I´ll review the following units: Kenwood DP-5090, Pioneer DV-610, Sony CDP-470, Pioneer BDP-140, iRiver IMP-550, Sony MZ-R 55, Sony MZ-R 37, Sony NW-A 1000 and the Sansa Clip+. Stay tuned and enjoy the new review: the Sony NW-A 1000! I also implore you to read the article describing my rigorous testing methodology before you actually start reading this one.

Sony NW-A 1000

I admit it: I´m a Sony fan. Sue me. What other reason would I have to purchase a portable player that is forced to use the dreaded piece of software called SonicStage? Yeah, go ahead and ask "Why?" I wanted to try out something different than mp3 or AAC: because of my good experiences with ATRAC DSP Type-R I thought that the more modern ATRAC3Plus would be an improved version combining less space requirements with equally high sound quality. Boy, was I wrong! After I received the used NW-A 1000 I started to convert several albums to ATRAC3Plus using 256 kBit/s CBR (VBR doesn´t exist) with SonicStage and transferred them to this glossy gadget. While I admired the amount of definition and crispness upon listening to it I noticed a lack of impact, punch and snap. All the transients seemed to have been transformed into cute kittens instead of the wild cat they were before encoding. It didn´t take long for me to discover that the codec itself was the culprit: Sound Forge offers the very same ATRAC3Plus codec as an encoding option (why I didn´t think of testing the codec before purchasing the NW-A 1000 escapes me). With these files encoded by Sound Forge I was able to find out that the codec is neither transparent at 256 kBit/s nor at 352 kBit/s (both have exactly the same quality but the latter uses more space for no reason). Sound Forge also offers a "High Quality" setting for the codec which takes a bit longer to encode; only then will the ATRAC3Plus codec be finally transparent. SonicStage sadly doesn´t offer this option when transferring from PC to portable player, it just encodes with "Normal Quality". You could now say "Why don´t you encode with Sound Forge all the time?" I would if I would keep tagging options! Without tags embedded in the files the Sony won´t show anything on its display, I wouldn´t know what album I´d be picking. CDDB tagging doesn´t help either since SonicStage always messes up the tags (how can someone engineer a software as stupid as this one?). After a firmware update it was able to play AAC files - but that didn´t help either because SonicStage ignores embedded AAC tags, it has to tag itself using its own scheme. The only option I have been left with is to use mp3 which I finally accepted begrudgingly - I´ve started to use 256 kBit/s or 320 kBit/s files CBR (VBR drains the battery faster) using the -q0 switch... it takes forever to encode but the difference in quality is audible (I did a DBT to confirm this).

Sony NW-A 1000 backside: heavy metal

When it was released to the market in 2006 Sony very much desired for it to kill the iPod. Several journalists indeed described the NW-A1000 as being capable of being an "iPod killer" and Sony did everything in their power to make it last inside a highly competitive market being ruled by Apple products since 2001 (for starters they should have terminated SonicStage). As typical for Sony they approached this goal by assuming that customers would be interested in a high quality device that was combined with wonderful sound. It is in fact one of the best manufactured portable players I´ve ever seen, everything fits tightly together, the two (!) transparent layers of plastic acting as the upper shell with the backside being constructed out of thick aluminum. When you touch a button the player doesn´t light up immediately, it takes half a second to light up completely. The same happens when it deactivates or saves power: it slowly dims lights down, with different timings for display and buttons, creating a nice effect. Everything about this player suggests "I´m a high quality device, better than the iPod - love me and abandon Apple." Its design even won a prestigious award from the International Forum Design (I still don´t find it THAT beautiful). It looks and feels like an expensive & heavy space age cigarette case, revealing its true function only at the touch - nifty.

Sony NW-A 1000 closeup

When I took it apart I found that the inside looks pristine as well: Sony seems to have used a bunch of quality parts for it. One example is its D/A converter which is a Burr Brown PCM1772 (still in production), a 24/48 capable high quality converter developed by Texas Instruments with portable gear in mind. Sony combined it with 16 MB RAM and an AN17020A from Panasonic, a headphone amp with additional line-out function. Because in 2006 solid stage cards were still expensive Sony decided to use the Microdrive, produced by IBM. Should a person desire more space than the 6 GB the NW-A 1000 provides one could use of course a CF Card with 16 GB or more (they are really cheap nowadays) - sadly that doesn´t work; the player will accept it but SonicStage won´t. BTW, the Sony really does put out signals with 24 bits - but only for AAC and ATRAC3Plus, not with mp3. Together with the line-out function this creates a tiny portable high end machine. Kudos to Sony for wisely choosing the best hardware the price range allowed. But since customers are more interested in convenience than sound quality this strategy didn´t work because in the end Sony wouldn´t take the market by storm with this player.

Sony NW-A 1000 measurments (line-out)

Sony NW-A 1000 jitter (with AAC encoded test file)

For a portable player using a lossy compression scheme it behaves quite well. Measurment differences between mp3 or AAC were negligible, ATRAC3Plus encoded test signals on the other hand measured horribly, especially at distortions (not caused by the player, the codec just sucks). Jitter however is not so good, the spread around the sine at 11.025 Hz indicates low frequency jitter and has the potential to become audible. I doubt that all other peaks are high frequency jitter, most likely these spikes have been introduced by lossy compression.

Sony NW-A 1000: glossy perfection

How does it sound? It's hardly noticeable that the NW-A 1000 reduces impact of transients and that snap & punch do not completely sound like the reference. The same goes for the speediness of the material: it´s a bit slower compared to the source. But all of this is only valid when music is loud; should it be soft everything is allright. The frequency response diminishes deep bass and treble marginally which might also be responsible for an insignificant loss of resolution and definition. The amount of details on the other hand is pure bliss and a perfect match. Staging sounds like a carbon copy - except for a slight forwardness of everything that´s in the center. It also sounds instable, instruments are wandering around a bit and changing their size slightly. The result of this characteristic is that the NW-A 1000 sometimes sounds "small", too nice and too confused. Well... I have to say that I was somewhat disappointed, I expected it to sound better. Don´t get me wrong, it fares really well, certainly better than the Sansa Clip+, the iRiver IMP-550 or the Kenwood DP-5090. We also have to consider that those three players were reviewed with lossless material while this one used lossy mp3 files! But I still had hoped that this unit would finally be THE ONE with the perfect mixture of convenience, available space and sound. It´s really good and I´ll probably use it often... but I nevertheless will seek an even better player.

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

Sony NW-A 1000

Review: Sansa Clip+

You´re about to read the fourth out of nine reviews. You don´t need to read them all, just pick the unit that seems to be the most interesting to you. In the weeks to follow I´ll review the following units: Kenwood DP-5090, Pioneer DV-610, Sony CDP-470, Pioneer BDP-140, iRiver IMP-550, Sony MZ-R 55, Sony MZ-R 37, Sony NW-A 1000 and the Sansa Clip+. Stay tuned and enjoy the new review: the Sansa Clip+! I also implore you to read the article describing my rigorous testing methodology before you actually start reading this one.

Sansa Clip+

EDIT 14.01.2013: Several people on the Sansa forum were doubting my measurment results. As it turned out they were right. I´ve updated this article accordingly.

One shouldn´t believe what all others are saying, really not. For years I and countless others have been lead to believe that Rockbox is an awesome alternate firmware created to improve certain portable media players. As you will read in this now updated review of the Sansa Clip+ it in reality isn´t what everyone thinks it is. For comparison I´ll leave the original text of this review online for everyone to read. When I reviewed this unit in October 2012 I had just installed the newest Rockbox firmware for the first time. I did not use it in the two years prior because the original Clip+ firmware by Sansa was working fine and without flaw. My decision to finally install it was based on numerous positive remarks about Rockbox and as I wanted my Clip+ to be at its best I thought that I had a valid argument in favor of using it. Because of that I tested this tiny player with 48 kHz material only when instead I should have used 44.1 kHz material. You´ll see why:

You know how often I´ve talked about the Sansa Clip+ being a decent player in almost every review I´ve written for this blog? I´m actually very ashamed of myself because of that, also because I trusted NwAvGuy's measurment and conclusions when he reviewed it. Well, I have to be realistic: his player was much newer than mine which now is over two years old. It´s likely that it has aged during this short time... which does render it unreliable and a waste of money. Using lossless FLAC files it also should have an advantage over, say, the MZ-R 55 which works with lossy ATRAC compression. But there you have it: bad hardware destroys the best possible theoretical advantage. Just for your information, I did my measurments two times: the first with volume at maximum output (0 dB), the second with -3 dB reduced gain. You´ll see why:

Comparison, FLAC 44.1 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

Comparison, FLAC 48 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

Frequency response, FLAC 44.1 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

Frequency response, FLAC 48 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

Intermodulation distortion, FLAC 44.1 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

Intermodulation distortion, FLAC 48 kHz, original firmware vs. Rockbox

As you can see on the pictures above 48 kHz performs just horrible when using Rockbox. Intermodulation distortions and frequency response deviations are so strong that they WILL be audible. With 44.1 kHz material it´s - sort of - the other way round, Rockbox performs slightly better. Now it´s also evident that the Clip+ actually performs very well, it certainly doesn´t show age related imperfections as I was boldly stating in my original review! It escapes me why so many people programming Rockbox get something basic as playback of 48 kHz so badly wrong. This means that I´ll have to update the conclusion to this and the other articles accordingly, it also means that I won´t use Rockbox with 48 kHz material. Since now everything has changed I have to do my listening tests again, using 44.1 and Rockbox.

Stage impression is a bit more compact than the reference but very stable and more holographic. Everything in the center is pronounced slightly and more forward while at the same time instruments don´t wander around or change their size. There´s one obstacle though: the Clip+ fails to render reverberation convincingly, recording venues sound drier than usual. While dynamics are very good they are too aggressive and a tad contrived. This aggressivness doesn´t extend to timing and snap though; mids and treble are a bit slower while bass is a bit faster than the reference. Furthermore, the Clip+ pronounces upper bass and diminishes deep bass, which - when combined - helps punch and snap but occasionally hurts stage impression. Treble is pronounced as well; that should help resolution & detail but instead it adds to its aggresiveness and dynamic impression, music sounds a bit more strident and 'glassy' as a result. One thing however is crystal clear: compared to my original review it sounds much, much better. It´s almost as good as the very balanced and somewhat boring sounding Sony NW-A 1000; I assume that the sound of the Clip+ will appeal to more people. Recommended - but please remember to use 44.1 kHz material only.

The sharp high frequency dropoff will be audible. It isn´t a misinterpretation of RMAA, I confirmed the results with iZotopes Ozone 4 and its EQ Matching function. The awful amount of intermodulation distortion will be audible too, it reaches alarming -6 dB at 20 kHz. You might understand that I didn´t do a jitter test, it would have been pointless anyway. With distortions as severe as these jitter related artifacts will be obscured completely. Less gain on the output lowers distortions somewhat, the high frequency drop off however stays. It´s no wonder that this player has a reputation of having a very strong and deep bass: when treble gets reduced the perception of deeper frequencies will of course be different! BTW, these are not the first measurments I have done - when I got it two years ago I measured it to compare it to my Creative Zen Mosaic and back then it still had an extremely flat frequency response and less distortions. Which means only one thing: the parts used on its mainboard have aged during the course of only two years. How does it sound? Well, considering the distortions and the high frequency dropoff it still sounds ok - surprisingly so. One of its sonic advantages always were its explosive dynamics... they are nice if you´re able to ignore their artificial character. I´ve complained numerous times about a flat and constricted stage that was not even able to render reverb convincingly. The stage is its weakest aspect; it sounds nothing like the reference because it´s way too compact and very flat. Crispness always seems forced upon the sound and "faked" (distortions can leave that impression if applied improperly - if you don´t know what I´m talking about try an Exciter). The Sansa Clip+ combines a grungy signature with dryness, grainyness and an aggressive, ostensibly analytical sound. It was better when it was new but it has aged considerably during a short amount of time, therefore I can´t recommend it. I´m appalled of myself that I´ve spent money for it, that I´ve trusted it, that I´ve used it.

Rockbox, 44.1 kHz:

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

Rockbox, 48 kHz:

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

Sansa Clip+

Review: iRiver IMP-550

You´re about to read the third out of nine reviews. You don´t need to read them all, just pick the unit that seems to be the most interesting to you. In the weeks to follow I´ll review the following units: Kenwood DP-5090, Pioneer DV-610, Sony CDP-470, Pioneer BDP-140, iRiver IMP-550, Sony MZ-R 55, Sony MZ-R 37, Sony NW-A 1000 and the Sansa Clip+. Stay tuned and enjoy the third review: the iRiver IMP-550! I also implore you to read the article describing my rigorous testing methodology before you actually start reading this one.

iRiver IMP-550

Back in 2003 when portable CD players started a second (but brief) life as mp3 players a small company named iRiver rose to prominence and became the darling of PC magazines journalists and geeks alike. They combined a spectacular number of features (even unnecessary ones) with supposedly great sound and a superior manufacturing quality. The IMP-550 from their SlimX line seems to express iRivers' approach nicely: apart from a lovely finish it also sports features more akin to a PC, features I´ve never ever seen on a portable CD player before. You can update its firmware, change scroll speed, alter playback speed, are able to choose between several DSPs, for example a 3D effect or several equalizers. Since it lacks a display iRiver equipped the remote integrated into the headphone cable with a huge display capable of showing ID Tags as well as CD-Text information. I got it for surprisingly little money, especially when I consider the state it was in when it arrived: my unit doesn´t seem to have been used often and if, it apparently has been treated very well. The main reason to own it was the desire to try something else; my motto was "not another Sony." To be perfectly honest, I don´t like the design of the iRiver that much, it tries to look elegant but in my opinion it looks boring and uninspired. But being the owner of a portable player isn´t about design only, isn´t it?

iRiver IMP-550 closeup - Who the hell is "INNO"?

The promise of a well execuited finish certainly is fulfilled: iRiver incorporated several - I assume - quality parts onto its mainboard. The main processor of the IMP-550 is the SAA7750 by Philips (now NXP Semiconductors), it is responsible for decoding lossy audio material, DSP functions - in short all the functions you´d need for a portable multicodec CD player. D/A conversion is achieved by a Sony CXD3023R, regrettably I couldn´t find any information about it. The CD drive itself is manufactured by Samsung and it looks a lot like a drive designed for laptops. While layout and manufacturing of the mainboard certainly look gorgeous this Samsung drive seems to play in another league because it gets very loud when working. But let´s have a look at my measurments now, shall we?

iRiver IMP-550 measurments

iRiver IMP-550 jitter

Wow, I think that these are the best measurments for a portable player I´ve ever seen. No distortions, very little noise, inaudible jitter artifacts - perfect. This should be mirrored by its sound, shouldn´t it? Sadly it doesn´t sound as well as I had hoped after reading all the glowing reviews written by others. It smears details and transients, shows a compressed and not very wide stage while having a preference for very high frequencies. The latter should help definition and resolution but instead it sounds rather opaque. On occasion high frequency details feel as if they´re dissolving into noise, the other end of the spectrum is too thick, obscuring bass punches a bit. The presence range seems diminished which probably is the reason for a sound that never sizzles or seagues into strident territory, its missing attack turns every kind of music into easy listening. The extreme high frequency definition from Episode II soundtrack for example turns into noise, it looses its crispness. The track from "Ray of Light" sounds much too nice and removes the rest of attack this warm and calm sounding album has. I´ve had players like this before; but they at least combined a similar sound with a much better stage impression while also adding a lovely euphonic colour and a certain kind of soothing warmth. Before I measured it I listened to it so I expected it to measure badly, I was surprised when it didn´t. I´m not exactly disappointed by this result because it could be particularly advantageous for albums that have been engineered to sound too aggressive. Yes, it might be a solution for "Loudness War" music - but not for anything else so you, dear reader, decide for yourself.

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

iRiver IMP-550 Samsung drive

iRiver IMP-550 line out (with S/PDIF)

Review: Sony MZ-R 55

You´re about to read the second out of nine reviews. You don´t need to read them all, just pick the unit that seems to be the most interesting to you. In the weeks to follow I´ll review the following units: Kenwood DP-5090, Pioneer DV-610, Sony CDP-470, Pioneer BDP-140, iRiver IMP-550, Sony MZ-R 55, Sony MZ-R 37, Sony NW-A 1000 and the Sansa Clip+. Stay tuned and enjoy the second review, the Sony MZ-R 55! I also implore you to read the article describing my rigorous testing methodology before you actually start reading this one.

Sony MZ-R 55

The Sony MZ-R 55 was released to the market in 1998, it was the direct successor to the very famous and reliable Sony MZ-R 50. Both players have many things in common, they each share roughly half of the same parts. Sony reorganized the mainboard design for the MZ-R 55 in order for it to be much smaller, they also altered the power supply so that it would work fine with 3 Volts only. But both players still carry many of the genes from the Sony MZ-R 30. In fact, the MZ-R 50 carried over much of the same parts from the MZ-R 30, only the laser, the drive mechanism (smaller) and the amount of RAM were different. The MZ-R 55 continued that scheme and shrinked the MZ-R 50 drive mechanism further (retaining the high quality laser with its die-cast frame). Sony also changed the headphone amp, the A/D/D/A converter (AK-4517) and drive related ICs. The amount of parts however remained the same with the result that the MZ-R 55 has a tightly packed PCB filled to the brink with parts using all available space inside the small shell. When new it cost around 350,- Euros which is a lot considering it can only record and play MiniDiscs.

Sony MZ-R 55 closeup

While the MZ-R 30 and the MZ-R 50 are famous for their reliability the MZ-R 55 is not 'cause it has a reputation for being extremely vulnerable to anything out of the ordinary. For example David Popovits wrote at Minidisc.org: "A small machine. It looks nice but nothing more. Press stop and in many cases it will start recording. Leave a recorded, unprotected, disc inside the MD during charging and you may find the disc was erased. Drop the machine from a few inches and it will stop recording completely. Use a non-exact power source and it will die partially or completely. Press a bit too hard on the keys and the whole cover will bend. How can we take such a creature seriously?" I don´t want to disagree with David, he seems to be a very experienced fella. Nevertheless I do have a different opinion (until mine will break of course). Its outer metal shell looks exquisite and while it doesn´t seem to be as thick as the one from my MZ-R 30 it nevertheless feels heavy and luxurious. The finish of its entrails looks marvellous too, its drive seems as if built to last forever. The mechanics are also one of the most quiet I´ve heard from an MD recorder... lovely. I would have loved to own the silver/gold version but I´m very happy with its lilac colour scheme too (remember: in Japan this colour is associated with wealth and power; go figure). It looks and feels like a very expensive and heavy cigarette case, albeit one with a conservative purple design. I really enjoy holding it in my hands, to touch it, to press its buttons, to open its lid... ah yes, opening the lid feels great. It doesn´t really pop open with a loud crash like on the MZ-R 30, it just clicks open and you then have to apply slight force so that it finally opens with a soft slide. Boy, I could open and close the lid the whole day!

Sony MZ-R 55 closeup

Running time with the chewing gum battery is ridiculous, it´ll play for two hours before it has to be charged again. Because of that I tend to use it with the attachable battery case (which sadly makes it much bigger) equipped with two batteries. Since I use the wonderful Sanyo Eneloop it can play for hours and hours. BTW, I wonder why Sony supplied a battery case that can hold two batteries - one 1.5 V battery is enough for the MZ-R 55 to function perfectly. Most of the time however the player resides on my Desktop connected to its power supply because I fear that it´ll break in case I use it outside... its bad reputation might be true. But off to measurments:

Sony MZ-R 55 measurments

Sony MZ-R 55 jitter

Apparently it doesn´t have high frequency jitter, only the spread around the base sine indicates some slight low frequency jitter; this might be audible since some peaks are just below -100 dB. The RMAA chart reveals that it is relatively noisy and also has slight problems with distortions (except IMD, those are non-existent). Its sound is... well, very good. The only real problem of the MZ-R 55 is the timidness of the bass, punches at lower frequencies loose their might and impact. Apart from that it´s very balanced, retains much of the character from the reference files and shows a similar level of resolution and definition. Details are never smeared or lost, they show an articulation close to the source. Its dynamic problems do not extend to mids and treble, at these bands it almost sounds like the reference. The stage is way too compact but presents an incredibly holographic depth with lots of focus and an excellent sense of space: far from being a close match but an elegant deviation. Fairly well done, Sony!

Sonic Balance:

Dynamics:

Resolution:

Stage / Ambiance:

Character:

Sony MZ-R 55 in-/outputs

Sony MZ-R 55 closeup