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

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.

Until someone has heard the latest generation of bleeding edge CD players, the question cannot be answered accurately. After they've been carefully auditioned, then all the discussion about how much to spend, how much is too much, etc. can take place- not before. Putting the cart before the horse didn't work 100 years ago and still doesn't work today.

Well I asked that same question about 4 years ago and decided with some advice from my dealer to go with CD only.

Here it is 4 years later and SACD is still struggling to get shelf space. There is still no certainty about it. There are still few titles outside of classical ones that I'd even be interested in listening to and most of those are on LP.

Where is the marketing for SACD. I hear nothing about it. I don't see any push by Sony to market or hype it up. Most of my non-audiophile friends have never heard of it. All this doesn't give me confidence in its future. Not to mention that a newer, better format may be in the works before SACD ever gains ground on redbook.

I personaly would put the money into a good TT. But I would feel confident that CD will be around for a long time as well.

IMHO

Rob