advertisement


Naim CDi HELP

Gaius

Gaius

pfm Member
I'm trying to help someone out with their CDi (fantastic player btw).

The laser has gone.

Now from memory it is a CDM4/19 or 27 mech. Am I right in thinking the laser is the same in the original Arcam Alpha?

We are looking for a donor machine.

My thanks in advance for your help/advice.
 
First you need to confirm whether is a CDM4 or CDM9 based CDI. Then you know what donor mech you need - you will be very unlikely to get the correct CDM4 or CDM9 mech (not sure of model in 4, 9 version is CDM9PRO), as the spin motors are very different on the top end models. Luckily the lasers are the same, and it is these that generally go. If it is a CDM9 based model, I used a CDM9/44 donor mech and transferred the laser across. Grandata sold remanufactured units a few years back, but I ended up going for an original and tested item from Les.

Is it definitely the laser? The pucks have a nasty habit of slipping as they get older, turning the rubbers sometimes helps, fitting a CD5 puck always works (to a CDM9, never played with a CDM4 based CDI). If it is CDM4 based then the standard Philips servo board used has some known issues with eletrolytics that can look like a laser issue too.

Below is a list of machines I started putting together when i didn't know whether my CDI was 4 or 9 based - it is completely unverified, and based on info on the 'net;

CDM 9 and 9 Pro equiped models;

ARCAM ALPHA 5 TDA1541 CDM9
ARCAM ALPHA 5 TDA1541 CDM9
MARANTZ CD23 CDM9
PHILIPS CD-692 Bitstream ? CDM9/63
PHILIPS CD-930/1 TDA1547 CDM9/44
PHILIPS CD-940 CDM9/44
PHILIPS CD-950 TDA1547 CDM9/44
PHILIPS CD-950/1 TDA1547 CDM9/44
CYRUS dAD7 AD1861 CDM9
Rotel RCD-980 CDM9

ROTEL RCD-990 PCM63P CDM9 pro
Marantz CD10 and CD11 CDM9 Pro

Meridian 602 - CDM4 Pro!
Philips CD630 CDM4/19
Meridian 206 Delta Sigma CDM4/19
aristona 1371 cdm4/11 (with Pro motor?!)
Philips cd371 cdm4/11 (with pro motor?!)
Philips CD-471 CDM4/11
marantz cd 50 60 CDM4/19

Philips CD 371 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 373 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 471 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 472 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 473 CDM4/11 or CDM2 (** 473/30 = cdm4/19, 473/00 = cdm2!)
Philips CD 650 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 660 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 670 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Philips CD 771 CDM4/11 or CDM2
Marantz CD65DX CDM4/11 or CDM2
arantz CD75DX CDM4/11 or CDM2

Philips Cd371 CDM2/29 (driect swap with cdm4/11?!)

Lastly, if he can't fix it, I'll buy it off him :) Good luck.

Richard
 
Thanks for all that Richard. I'm pretty sure it's the CDM4 mech. It is being used with the Clamp 5 so that little trick, which is a good one, has been tried. Will bear you in mind should he want to sell.
 
Then any CDM4 based mech with a known good swing arm laser can be transplanted across as per info on the t'internet (DIY audio forum is a good source of info). I also read that CDM2 lasers go into the 4...but again that is unverified. Try talking to Les or Darren at Class A, they have probably more experience.

I would check the 2 electrolytics on the servo board though.

Richard
 
This site <http://www.lampizator.eu> has everything you will wish to know along with a link to a Russian site with a full list of basic info on transports used in virtually every known CD player!
 
It might not be the mech, but rather dried up electrolytic caps on the Phillips servo board. Fit new caps (carefully - those traces are exceptionally easy to lift) and re-adjust the laser mech and it might well be fine. I have a zip file containing info on all this if you require it. I originated the CD5i puck suggestion and it worked extremely well with my CDI. NEVER had a slip or ERR message ever again and it played absolutely anything I played on it including any brand of CD-R etc. I have a lot of respect for Naim but the top-hat puck was/is a disaster allowing the disc to vibrate slightly on the part that isn't held down by the single hoop of rubber. The CD5i puck ensures a secure reading of the disc assuming the servo mech. and laser are all fine.

- John
 
I am not trying to be controversial here but we tried the puck 5 on the CDi we have downstairs, and it killed it stone dead. Flat ain't the word for it, it was like a ton of wet sand on the thing.

I was really surprised at the difference actually, although we have two footed and single footed top hat pucks and they sound different too. Not as different as the puck 5 though.

One man's meat and all that...
 
Sorry I have to say I experienced entirely the opposite. Naim stopped using these top-hat style pucks after only 2 (or 3?) models of CD player. I think Mr Vereker was applying analogue rules in a digital medium i.e. the least amount of vibration must get to the laser, hence only applying contact with the CD in one area. What I think he failed to realise is that the discs needs to be secured securely to the drive with no margin for movement other than that desired.

How can a more stable method of getting the data off a CD (digital - remember) result in the sound being slugged? Perhaps the extra demands made on the PSU from all the error correcting using a top-hat puck result in an edgier sound which some perceive as more exciting ;)

Naim haven't returned to that style of puck since the CDI/CDS...

Still, each to his/her own. All I know is that Naim said my transport would need replacing (was quoted over £500 service). Once I replaced the caps on the servo mech, adjusted it according to Phillips' service paper, and used the CD5i puck I never had any trouble again. All discs read without any noise from the mech, unlike the oft-chattering and sluggish TOC reading I used to experience from the top-hat. I think at this stage when no spares are available accept as re-manufactured or donors from other machines, it's an avenue well worth exploring. Naim would have junked my transport if I'd paid for the service when it actually worked perfectly well after some TLC.
 
Never have any trouble reading with this one ever. We are lucky really as it's effectively quite new. We sold all my partner's father's stuff for him, and we let the one we bought in 94 go and kept his. The old one used to chatter occasionally with none red book disks as it got older. But the two foot puck stopped that. I never tried the puck 5 with it.

He hardly used his so it's had very little wear.

Maybe that's why the difference in pucks is so noticeable? .:)
 
I think the condition of the CD mech. platter is vital here. Mine was pretty worn (purchased 2nd - or 3rd! - hand). Obviously that rubber gripping the CD on the platter, coupled with the rubber ring on the top of the disc, is doing a critical job. Once it, or the rubber ring lose their grip the problems begin. I just prefer peace of mind by using the CD5i puck. I'd love to see an 'eye pattern' of both types in use to see if there's a difference or not.

I still think that excess disc error correction probably results in a different 'sound' to a disc being read smoothly - perhaps this is the reason why different pucks 'sound' different.

Incidentally, place a CD into the CDI. Then - taking note where the rubber ring is positioned underneath the puck, place the puck onto the hub. Now lightly place a finger onto the outermost edge of the CD, in line with where the rubber ring is - it's so easy to move the CD up and down. No wonder many complain of chattering noises in anything less than 100% as-new examples. Imagine what it's doing when rotating at high speed...

I thoroughly regret selling on my CDI - it's the most musical player I ever heard (apart from a CDS) even though there were a few rough (multi-bit) edges at times. One of these days I'll get another one. They look super too don't they? :)
 
valveheaduk said:
I thoroughly regret selling on my CDI - it's the most musical player I ever heard (apart from a CDS) even though there were a few rough (multi-bit) edges at times. One of these days I'll get another one. They look super too don't they? :)
Click to expand...

Me too but whilst it was the best cd player I've had, and you're right about the CDS, I returned to vinyl, it went toward my LP12 which is soo much better; I like the analogue quality of these players and they do look pretty cool.

All said and done; records are better ;)



PS: The point of my original post was resolved some time ago, but thanks again to those above for the input.
 
I'd say the mastering of records is, generally, better, rather than the medium itself. People seem quick to want to proclaim one format better than the other, but to me I use/enjoy both. Neither carrier format is better than the other - it's ALL in the mastering. What (technical) faults LP does possess doesn't distract many people from the music (and in some cases add to the experience) ;)

I've heard some stunning LP rips put onto CD recently that put modern 'remastering' to shame...
 
I do agree the recording makes as much difference, indeed more so, than an expensive upgrade.
 
Has anybody actually found another machine which has the same mech as the original CDM/4 in the earlier CDi machines? I've searched all over the place but it seems the CDi and the CDS were the only machines to use this Philips CDM4 variant. I hope I'm wrong!
 
Valvehead, thanks so much for your advice concerning the Puck 5 with the CDI -- what a difference it makes! Unless I was imagining it, in addition to the end of the screeching, clunking and err messages that came with the old puck, I began to wonder if sonic imaging had improved? Bass was most certainly tighter. I have the CDI hooked up to a 42.5/110 and Linn Sara combination (was just curious to see how these vintage items got on together!), and the bass was frustratingly flabby/full of boom at higher volume settings especially. That seems to have gone with the introduction of the puck. Incidentally, to my considerable surprise, the Puck 5 engaged like a steel trap with the spindle, so one can understand in mechanical terms why there should be an improvement, the issue of digital retrieval notwithstanding. I've lived with the CDI for fifteen years, and can see myself doing so for some time to come, I daresay (assuming, of course, that the transport/laser mechanism doesn't go ... but even there, shouldn't a very firm ride for the CD result in less vibration and jarring at the business end, and therefore a smoother ride for the mechanism?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top