Is there are anyone out there who has compared the Esoteric DV-50 to a number of dedicated red book only players (or other universal's) and found one that is SIGNIFICANTLY better?
I stress significantly because in my humble opinion the redbook playback (if comparison unit is just a cd cd player only )must be significantly better to justify losing DVD-A, SACD and DVD-Video capability.
I keep hearing there are better one box solutions and being a die hard 2 channel fan I would sell my DV-50 if I found a player in the same price range that sounds significantly better. But every time I do an AB comparision to other well respected units the DV-50 has slayed each and every one.
So far, it has eaten the lunch of the Classe CDP-10, Ayre CX-7, Linn Ikemi, Cairn Fog Vers. 2, Cary 306/300, Arcam DV 27A and CD 33T, Myryad CD 600, etc. It even betters a Sony SCD 777ES/MF Tri-Vista 21 transport/dac combo that I previously owned. I'm only comparing the DV-50 to single box cd or universal players, but I just wanted to mention the Sony/MF combo. I'm sure there are some dac/transport combo's that will handily beat the DV 50.
Some may say that the DV 50 should beat all the above because the of price point ($5,500 vs. average price of $3,000 for the above players). But I disagree since conventional wisdom says that stand alone players (especially with the pedigree of those mentioned above) should produce better redbook than a universal player trying to be a jack of all trades. Only the DV 27A does video plus audio. By the way, I was very impressed with the 27A as just a cd player. Of all the above I would say the Ayre was the best.
Next on my list is the Electrocompaniet EMC 1UP and the Resolution Audio Opus 21. However, I must tell you I am really impressed with the DV 50 and all the great reviews are absolutely true. I've noticed that many people who are using it or comparing to other players are using the RCA analog outs instead of the balanced outs. There is a significant improvement in sound if you use the balanced outs and I'm only interested in hearing comments from people who have compared it against other players using the balanced outs on the DV-50.
My system components are as follows:
B&W N803's speakers & HTM-1 center Cary Cinema 5 (5 x 200) amp Anthem D1 Statement pre/pro Esoteric DV 50 Acoustic Zen Satori Shotgun speaker wire Nirvana SX balanced interconnects from DV-50 to Anthem Acoustic Zen Matrix reference II interconnects from D1 to Cary No after market power cords or isolation equipment
My system sounds great! Those who comment please make sure to specify what specific improvements you heard over the DV 50 and what cdp were you comparing it against.
Avguru, Saturday is the best time for me.I spoke to 711 already, I will bring my Sony 9000es Modwright.I am also excited to hear the DV50 and the Denon APL.Thank you in advance for the invitation.This will be very interesting. Iam sure we have differrent taste, this will be a very good experience.
AVGURU and all, I truly envy you guys! I will be watching this thread on Saturday for periodic live updates from the battlefield. In the meantime, is there any rumour afloat about any upcoming Esoteric product updates?
Guido, just talking to 711 and Avguru it excite me they are truly into this hobby,this were the type of audiophile, Iam looking for.At this point,I will find out how good is the sony mod musicality wise.
jayctoy, you, 711 and AVGURU are sure to have a load of fun on Saturday, unless of course you get snowed in once again. I wish I could be there as well! Perhaps sometimes I will be able to tweak my travel plans to accomodate some serious 'referencing' in the Chicago area--isn't where you guys all are? I always bring along the same small set of trusted CDs in my suitcase whenever I travel out of Austin, just in case I happen to find myself in an audio-friendly place. In the meantime, what is the exact model of the modified Sony you have? I know sony has both a DVD and an SACD model with the 9000 number in the product name.
Your comments about mfg voicing are dead on and accurate. I have heard many players that were overall clearly superior to another player not play a particular song as well as the lesser player. Some songs benefit from a sweeter, softer perspective while other songs benefit from a more analytical and focused perspective.
This actually happened a couple of times when 711 and I were going head to head with the APL and Exemplar 3910. There were songs where the APL sounded more musical but not as accurate or dynamic as the Exemplar.
To be honest, I'm not sure if its even fair to compare a tubed unit to a 100% solid state unit. It seems to me some of the sonic traits of tubes (warmth, airiness) can never be duplicated TO THE SAME DEGREE on solid state gear. It's already a given that the Denon's (both of which incorporate tubes) are going to sound warmer than the X01 which is not a warm player to begin with.
In my listening tests I wil try to take this into account and focus on other performance areas in making my decision.
MGotlieb, since you currently own the X01 how would you describe its sonic traits as it relates to redbook? Overall, do you like the redbook playback of the X01 better than the redbook on the Omega? Please explain in detail.
Avguru: Boy, you ask hard questions, which I can't answer with a simple direct comparison. I didn't listen to the Omega in redbook much, and don't listen to the X-01 in redbook much now. They both (for CD listening) functioned and function mainly as transports for the dCS Purcell/Elgar Plus. [And boy, are they both fabulous transports!] The dCS units, especially in DSD, are extremely detailed, clear and spacious, and a bit on the forward side. In redbook, the X-01 sounds very much like them, without the absolute last bit of sparkle--for want of a better word--in the highs, and maybe a bit less detail in the very lowest bass--although perhaps the X-01, which has the best dynamics in SACD I've ever heard, has a tad more bass impact in CD as well. The Omega sounded very different. It was more of an analog sound, especially when its 24/96 upconversion, which I didn't particularly like, was off, with a definite sense you were seated further back in the hall, and perhaps the sound front wasn't quite as wide (which it isn't when you sit further back in a concert hall). You could easily forget whether the Omega or an LP (mine is an SME 20.2/SME V/Koetsu Onyx Platinum/Lamm LP2 set-up) was on--not that they were equivalent, just that they sounded alike in kind. You aren't likely to make that mistake with the X-01--it's a more forward, noticeably detailed sound, you are closer to the plane of the performance, the soundfront is huge, and this mother doesn't take any prisoners. For instance, on the Omega and the DV-50, I thought the JVC transfers of RCA material were superb; through the X-01, somehow some of them at least sound a bit over-engineered, as if somebody has been fooling around with the masters just a bit too much. This is the player if you really want to know what's on the disc; maybe not if you just want everything to sound good. But all of a sudden a CD which you never paid much attention to, sonically at least, really catches your ear like it never did before, and you understand why the X-01 costs $13,000. Hope that helps.
Giudo,AVguru is from Chicago,711 and I, from the Northside of Chicago,15 minute away.No snow this Saturday. Even if there is, I will go to 711 place,I am that excited.I might bring my buddy who has a very good hear.So that I can post more accurate result here at Agon.
Mgottlieb, you have merged in your front end stack what are likely to be two of the very best CDPs on the market. Have you compared your mixed stack with X-01 augmented by the Teac Esoteric G0 clock generator, and on the other hand, with a purely DCS stack completed by the Alla Scala outboard clock?
I'm looking forward to comments regarding the Marantz SA-11 which you're including in the mix. It's on my short list, but I haven't yet found any objective reviews of it. If it betters the Marantz DV-9500 significantly, I'll be impressed. Another wrinkle for you guys. For the last several days, I've been using a Musical Fidelity X10V3 buffer stage on my very modest secondary system. I have it now on the output of a Sony NS-775 which is a very pedestrian albeit extremely competent SACD player that is dirt cheap. The X10 has done incredible things to it, very much against my otherwise deep confiction that one must not muck up the signal path with additional active components. It adds a large degree of depth and warmth to the sound while dramatically increasing the soundstage. I'd love to hear a report on how it does on the output of a truely great front end. Thanks.
Thank you very much for your detailed explanation. Its funny, you mention that the X01 was much more forward in its presentation than the Classe Omega. When I compared the DV 50 against the X01 I found the the DV 50 was much more forward than the X01! So the Omega's presentation must really be set back a foot or two behind the plane of the speakers! Very interesting. Did you like this "further back perspective" of the Omega?
My personal preference is for a less forward soundstage and that's one of the reasons why I prefer the X01 over the DV 50. Sounds like the Omega was a great redbook player also. Wish I had gooten a chance to hear it.
The one thing I'd really like to hear your comments on regarding the X01 in redbook is soundstage layering and the dimensionality of the images. I know you use the X01 more as a transport for redbook (through the Meitner) but perhaps you have enough listening experience with the X01 directly in redbook to comment.
When I talk about soundstage layering I'm refering to how the musicians line up on the soundstage in terms of imaging and depth. For example, with the modded Denon's you can clearly "hear" that the vocalist is up front, the saxophone player is slightly to the right and a foot behind her, the keyboard player is behind her and to the left slightly behind the saxophone player, and the drums are the furthest back. One thing I don't like with the DV 50 is that the brushes on snare drums sysmbols seem to share the front of the stage with the vocalist. In a real life jazz concert the brushes would sound further back.
Also, the modded denon's have a sense of palpability where it seems you can reach out and touch the vocalist. Let me re-phrase that, not only can you reach out and touch her but the voice feels "human" and the emotion is there. When I heard the X01 what I felt I heard was a greater "insight" (i.e tonal inflections, timbre, etc) into the vocal but not necessarily a sense of palpability. You can hear the air and breathiness but only as another sound rather than a sense of emotion.
Regarding the two and three dimenisonality, as you know we live in a three dimensional world where images (and especially sound) have a front, back and side. I never hear more than a one dimensional view from the DV 50 and unforunately I wasn't listening for that quality when I demoed the X01. Dimensionality in some ways goes hand in hand with soundstage layering, but it also speaks to the "full-bodiness" of the images on the soundstage.
Finally, what is it (in terms of sonic characteristics) about DVD-A playback on the 50 that you found so much more appealing than on the UX1? You keep mentioning how great DVD-A sounds on the DV-50. I will have to listen to some more discs. I don't listen to a lot of DVD-A.
In short, in your opinion do you ever feel a sense of palpability, three deminsionality of images, proper soundstage layering and more importantly "emotion" when you listen to the X01 in redbook? These are the areas where (at least upon first listen) the modded Denon's excel ion comparision to the Esoteric. maybe its a function of the tubes, I don't know. Do you ever (or consistently) hear these characteristics when you listen to your turntable?
MGottlieb, sorry for the long question but it will be my last one to you as soon we will be able to hear the X01 again (directly against the denon's). I wanted to get your impressions because you have one hell of a set-up in terms of both analog and digital. More importantly, as a regular listener to "live" classical music at Carnegie hall you are much more in touch with how music "should sound" from different seating perspectives than any of us are!
This question is for all you Esoteric DV-50 owners out there: Which format does the Esoteric DV-50 have the very best sonics, detail, resolution, and transparency on: Redbook CD's, SACD's, or DVD-Audio discs? In other words, are its greatest strengths as a CD player, a SACD player, or as a DVD-Audio player.
The Marantz SA 11 was smoked on redbook by both the DV 50 and the X01. Wasn't even close. On SACD, it was 80% of the DV 50 and maybe 40% of the X01. It only took 1 minute to hear the differences and after about 5 minutes we cut off the SA 11. And that was through the Marantz's balanced outputs (yes, the SA 11 has balanced outputs).
The Esoteric players are in another league. I previously owned several Marantz units (DV 12S1, SA 12S1 and the DV 8400) and I know the Marantz "house sound" very well. All of their players are very warm, not very detailed, deep but soft bass, average dynamics, decent size soundstage with a laid back presentation (not forward). All of these characteristics are the exact opposite of the Esoteric pieces, which are extremely detailed with loads of dynamics, forward presentation and deep, powewful and detailed bass.
Had we compared the Marantz against other players in its s class I believe it would have done very well. But not against the Esoterics.
Just like the DV 8400 was no competition for the SA 14 (vers. 1 & 2), I'm sure the new DV 9500 is no competition for the SA 11. The SA 14 are SA 11 are Marantz's attempt to provide their very best audio performance in a cd player. And both signficantly improve on the performance of the 8400 and 9500. I don't need to hear the 9500 to know the SA 11 is a big improvement.
Regarding the Musical Fidelity buffer stage, when you get to cd playback on this level there is very little a $399 tube output can do for you. I use to own the MF Tri-Vista 21 dac combined with the Sony XA 777ES. It was a very good dac/ transport combination but not on the level of the DV 50. I owned both at the same time and faced them off on several occassions). So if the Tri-Vista 21 can't equal or outperfrom the DV 50 there's no way their output buffer stage can.
However, I believe it would work well on a cheaper mid-fi product like the Denon 2900 or something like that.
By the way, I have to add that the Marantz SA 11 is one beautiful looking cd player. I even like the gold color as its understated and not over done.
Guidocorona: No external clocks; too much money, not enough space in my system. Avguru: well, I listen based on what I hear live, and because I go to so many concerts, I have never found any two channel system to sound anything like what I hear in the hall. However, the modern multichannel systems don't work for me either--too software-dependent, too many mikes, and when you are supposed to use 5 identical speakers, how good are any of them going to be? For years I've used a SONY 505 ES delay/ambiance unit from the mid-'80s, which only requires a small rear channel amp and two small speakers similar to the front speakers in overall character, and what I hear through that set-up is similar in kind to a real hall, although of course not in degree. In four channels, the X-01 throws a wide, close (to my seat) soundfront, and sounds extraordinarily like my 8th row center subscription seats. The Omega presented a more blended, slightly narrower soundfront, much more like my 25th row center seats for my other subscription. The turntable is somewhere in between. General preference? Well, I did buy the X-01 and sell the Omega, yes? If I turn off the rear speakers, I hear all the things reviewers and audiophiles obsess over--layering, imaging, etc., but they generally sound somewhat artificial, because there is no sense of the hall. Sorry, I'm sure that didn't help you. Last thing you asked: I find DVD-A, sonically, noticeably better on the DV-50 than SACD: greater dynamic range, clearer midrange, definitely cleaner in the low frequencies. Better playback or better medium? Don't know. Probably doesn't matter--as a purely audio medium to me DVD-A seems too clumsy to hang on except as a marginal foremat, and where's the software?
SA11 (and all Marantz players)have inverted polarity from balanced outputs. You need to try better next time. You were listening to an inverted signal. Do you even understand what that means.......I wonder. DV-50 is the worst player I even owned for music playback. Again, home theatre is what a DVD player is made for. SA11 on the other hand, is the most neutral, detailed, open sounding machine to ever grace my system. In other words, it comes very close to analog playback. Turning a player on from cold and making a judgement call is rediculous. In fact, you must be firing up the DV-50 right before each listen. See what happens to it though after it has been on 5 hours. Closed in, with muddy/over powerful bass. One dimensional soundstage, with poor transparency. DVD audio is the only format that is truly outstanding on DV-50. I truly feel bad for those that are still in denial. Best things those types can do is to never read a stereo mag ever again. They really blew the call on the DV-50. Belongs is catagory c minus.
Thank you AVGuru for your thoughtful reply to my questions. On my main system right now, I am using a Denon 2200 stock which I hate. I bought it too hastily on the strength of a brief review in TAS 149. I have yet to try the MF buffer stage on that system, but suspect it will help. However, I think it will be just a bandaid. I am currently very actively looking for a new CD/SACD player. My budget has a cap, I'd say of $4k either new or used nd I'd like to stay as much below that as possible so I can live to play another day. Audio has a relatively low WAF around here. A used DV50 is definitely still on the short list. Another machine I'm considering, and your comments would be welcome is the Underwood-modified Music Hall Maverick player. This runs $2k complete and, on paper it looks good. I think it was 6Moons that had a review of the modded machine and it went over very well. Any thoughts? My personal reference sound is that of my Linn Lp12, Ittok arm and Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood cartridge. Thanks.
REB1208, while your comments about inverted polarity on Marantz may be shedding some light on the lack of detail perceived on these devices, I must gently point out that the tone on this thread has been very enthusiastic but also extremely polite and friendly. As such I do invite you to chime in sympathic resonance with the delightful atmosphere prevalent in these posts!
That's your opinion...and it goes against the grain of 95% of the reviewers and the numerous awards that the DV 50 has received. Obviously, you're the lone person out there whose smarter than everyone else and knows audio better than than anyone.
If you love your inverted polarity SA 11 that's fine. The SA 11 is only "slighty better" than the SA 14 IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THE DV 50 IN REDBOOK PERFORMANCE..AND IN SACD ITS CLOSER BUT STILL NOT EQUAL.
Anytime you're prepared to do what I have done here..get a much of people whih different units and go head to head to see which is better and then bring us results that's fine. From the begginning you've been down on the DV 50 and that's fine.
Why don't you take your inverted polarity SA 11 and go head to head with other players its equal or better? And by the way, there is nothing neutral or tranparent about the SA 11 or any Marantz cd player that has ever been made. Their signatureound has always been warm and colored. If that's more analog to you then fine. But analog doesn't bring warmth at the expense of detail and transparency. It's obvious that's the sound you like because the Dv 50 is the exact opposite of that. So you never should have bought a DV 50 in the first place!
Next you're going to tell me the DV 9500 is as good as the DV 50 to, right?
You listened to the unit with inverted polarity, thru the balanced outputs. How can you be in a position to report on the sound. Polarity is correct thru RCA. I don't love the SA11, nor any digital device. The DV-50 is the unit that is very warm sounding. The SA11 sounds like the recording, the interconnects hooked to it and powercord providing AC. Transparency, air, ambience, detail, resolution are the hallmark "sound" of this player. Just as that I hear from my analog frontend. What analog system are you comparing DV-50 to ? Again, I am FAR from alone in my criticism of the DV-50. The DV-50 has the exact opposite sound as to what a high-end machine should do. It is not able to get out if its own way. Music should flow forth in a natural way as it was recorded. Not rammed down your throat as if it were all movie soundtracks. I do not own a Home Theatre system. Nor am I an Audio/Video Guru. I am into 2ch music reproduction on a stereo system. Perhaps that is why my views differ from the majority. I have not heard the DV-9500, but I can tell you that I even would choose a 3950 over a DV-50. Even that has a more open sound.
I am not a believer in cables,wires,cords etc.However I have tried a number of digital players and the DV-50 is an excellent machine.To deny that is ludicrous.I may even buy one in the near future.If something is good you have to give it it's due wether you like the brand or not.To knock good equipement makes no sense but one sees this all the time.
I heard the Marantz SA 11 at an authorized dealer. I requested to hear it out of the balanced outputs as have most of their customers (The dealers words exactly). I "assume" he compensated for the inverted polarity by reversing the cables around. It's a simple thing to do. He was using a $1,800 Audioquest Sky balanced interconnect. I doubt very seriously that he has been demoing this unit balanced to all of his customers incorrectly. But I will ask him and since I plan on demoing the X01 again next Monday or Teusday I will ask for another demo on the SA 11.
You know, you really need to tone down your rhetoric a little bit and have an open mind. I readily admit that when I started this thread I was extremely pro-dvd 50 and didn't want to listen to others in regards to modded units. Admittedly, I'm still pro dvd-50...but I think everyone on this thread would now agree that they've seen me do a 360 degree turnaround. I've pretty much admitted to everyone that the modded Denon's are superior.
Conversely, your first comments on this thread indicated how anti- DVD 50 you were (and still are). Comments like "over the top dynamics" , "poor bass" and "a home theater piece trying to cram high end cd playback down your throat" let everyone know how you felt about this unit. As Sean indicated, to state that this player is not a high end cd player after all of the published glowing professional reviews (I count at least 10, many of which are international),numerous posts on audiogon, audioasylum, etc and consumer praises is absolutely ludicrous. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with your unit (or maybe your dealer) or maybe you lost money when you re-sold your unit...I don't know.
Recently we haven't even heard from until you saw my comments regarding the Marantz SA 11...an item I guess you now own. I didn't even know you owned one (you never mentioned it on the thread) but for some reason you took my comments about your unit personally and started jumping all over the DV 50 again. Nothing that I say on this thread should be construed as being personal. I'm just trying to report the facts.
Now that I know you own the SA 11 (and vociferously praise its performance) I totally understand why you don't like the DV 50. They are at totally opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of voicing, sound characteristcs, timbre, presentation, etc. They're not even close. I described the sound of the Marantz very accurately. They try to re-create an analog sound by being overly warm, soft on dynamics and details and a laid back, less forward presentation. Absolutely no sparkle on the high end and soft,deep bass on the low end. Addtionally, Marantz has never been known for having a "highly transparent" sound. When I say that, I mean in comparision to the very best cd players, amps, etc.
There is nothing wrong with you prefering the sound of the Marantz. Many people do and that's why they're a very successfull company. But the modded Denons', Meitners, Esoteric's Reimkyo's, Burmeisters, etc are pushing the envelope trying to set new standards and levels of performance in digital cd playback. The Marantz SA 11 is nothing more than Marantz's attempt to improve on their highly sucessful SA 14 (vers. 1 & 2). It is by no means a "revoluntionary product" or a "statement piece", nor is it even the best in its class.
The DV 50 has revolutionized the industry by providing a level of performance for a universal player that was not thought possible only 2-3 years ago. As a result, other mfg's are now bringing new universal players to the market in droves trying to duplicate the success of the DV 50. The other mfg's I mentioned before have done the same (at one time or another) in their respective categories. More importantly, these level of achievements are so advanced and superior that years later the majority of their competitors still have not been able develop a product or introduce new technology that is either equal or significantly better.
The Marantz SA 11 is a good player...but on the level of the players we are talking about here. Last night I went to google and did a serarch on Esoteric DV 50. I found at least three reviews where the Marantz SA 14 was one of a list of players compared to the DV 50. In each case, the reviewers comments were "not even close". Again, the SA 11 is only slightly better than the SA 14.
Reb 1208, enjoy the music! I'm actually envious of you because you've found audio nirvana in a cd player and are now able to just sit down and enjoy the music. I, on the other hand, rue the day I started this thread and opened my mind to hear the Denon modded players. I've been miserable ever since and can no longer take solitude in the fact the DV 50 outperforms all others in its class. It doesn't...not by a long shot!
The long awaited results are here...but unfortunately I must report that the dealer sold the demo UX-1 they had on the floor a couple of days before we arrived. That was a HUGE disappointment as I really wanted to face off the DV-50 against the UX-1. Oh well, the show goes on!
Before I start lets give a quick glimpse into the demo system:
Sonus Faber Cremona speakers Hovland 2 channel sold state amp (no model #) Thor tube pre-amp (no model #) All cabling/interconnects by Cabasso/XLO Stock power cords/no line conditioning Theta Compli universal player/Audio Research cdp MK III (it was the latest version) Esoteric DV 50 Denon Exemplar 3910
This was the first auditon session (second followed at 711's house):
DV 50 vs. Theta Compli (CD/SACD)
Listeners: AVGURU,Jactoy, Audiophile friend of Jactoy, Dealer
No comparision..not even close. Theta sounded lifeless/mechanical. More importantly, it didn't sound like a high end end player. Dealer explained that the Compli was really set up to be used as a transport with the Gen V or Gen VIII dac's. In that configuration it is a deadly combo that may have no equal! Compli was only slightly better in SACD than CD. Listening results were unamimous
DV 50 vs. Audio Research CD MK III
Listeners: AVGURU, JACTOY, Audiophile friedn of Jactoy, Dealer
I've heard the AR was supposed to be a great standalone cd player but again fared poorly against the DV 50. AR had a trmendously open and wide soundsatage and a warm, analog sound. The soundstage actually curled around and enveloped you. However, inside the soundstage there was nothing there. Poor imaging, no center imaging, detail was fuzzy, definitely not 2 dimensional. Everyone agreed the DV 50 was better.
Exemplar 3910 vs. DV 50 (CD/SACD)
Listeners: Jactoy, AVGURU, Audiophile friend of Jactoy,711, Dealer
Again, the Exemplar threw a wider, more dynamic soundstage with living, breathing images that were at minimum 2 dimensional. Also surpised at the detail of the Exemplar as it was marginally more detailed ( a hard feat to accomplish against the DV 50). More air. It all adds up to a more musical presentation.
All were in agreement except for the dealer who felt the Exemplar had a "tin can" sound compard to the DV 50. We wrote it off as the dealer not being used to hearing anything remotely as "musical" on his showroom floor as the Exemplar.
NOTE: IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT ANY UNIT THE DV 50 BEAT THE EXEMPLAR DEMOLISHED! NO NEED FOR COMPARISIONS TO THOSE UNITS.
2ND LISTENING SESSION AT 711'S HOUSE
Listeners: AVGURU, JACTOY, 711
System Set-up:
Klipsch Cornwall Speakers Tube Amps (forget name) Exemplar 3910, APL 3910, APL 1000, Sony XA9000ES/Dan Wright All cd players were direct to the amp/ no pre-pro Power cord- Virtual Dynamics Nite I No Power conditioning Generic interconnects/speaker wire
Exemplar 3910 vs. APL 3910 (CD/SACD)
Tough call and the preference varies from song to song. But in the end the APL was consistently better sounding on most cd's than the Exemplar. Both units threw 2 & 3 dimensional soundstages. The Exemplar was slightly more transparent and detailed whereas the APL was more musical and engaging. The Exemplar was slightly more extended in the highs while the APL had the better and more detailed mid-range. Bass was solid on both units with detail and slam about equal. Results/conclusions were unamimous.
Sony XA900ES (Dan Wright) vs. APL and Exemplar 3910
This was the biggest surpise of the night. The Sony gave the most musical presnetation I personally have ever heard. Soundstage was routinely 3 dimensional, palapable and believable. Dianne Schure sounded like we were at a night club listening to her. What this player really excells at is space. Each musician on the soundstage has his own open and airy space to perform. No instrument/performanceis ever crowded or drowned out by another. When an instrumentalist solo's its as if the whole soundstage opens up for them to their thing (just like in a real concert where the other players will tone down their part and just add minor support) and then when that soloist finishes another hole in the soundstage opens up and another soloist takes the spotlight.
The other characteristic it excelled at was a full bodied, harmonically rich sound where you routinely heard 2nd and heard harmonics naturally roll off and decay into one another. The full harmonics of each instrument were easily displayed.
Finally the speed of transients as well as PRAT semed to be very good. We played some very fast jazz pieces (full bands with qucik horn sections and super tight rhythm sections) and the Sony just loved that stuff.
The Exemplar (and especially the APL) shared a lot of the same traits ..air, dynamics, bass impact, detail, three dimensionality, etc but in the areas of tonal richness, speed and spacing the Sony was superior. The APL took a little longer to warm and in all fairness as our session neared its end the APL started toclose the gap in terms of the degree of separation in these three areas. But it wss also clear to me that even with more time the APL would not have closed the gap to the point where the differences were miniscule.
Some may prefer the Exemplar or APL over the Sony as there were times where it sounded more accurate in absolute terms. But with a sound this musical it is very easy to eschew any thoughts of accuracy and just enjoy the damn music!
It's time for me to go to bed. I will wrap up and summarize our listening sessions tomorrow. I have some interesting and rather favorable comments, observations and also some concerns about modded units and in particular the units that were demoed today.
AVGuru, Just to be sure I know which Sony you are praising (they have some similar model numbers, I assume you are talking about the SCD-XA9000ES that has a list price of $3000. Is that right? That one has a great review in Stereophile of 12/03, Atkinson I thinkk. I've since read some other reports which highly praise its SACD performance but are not so thrilled about it's Redbook performance. Can you add anything to your description of it; especially with respect to Redbook? I'm also wondering if you've heard the Linn players, Unidisk 1.1 and/or 2.1. I heard the 2.1 head to head with the Marantz 9500 and your comments re. Marantz seem to be on target. However, The 2.1 is 3X the price. I liked the Marantz pretty well, but the Linn was lots more detailed. I'd love to hear the SA-11 up against the DV-9500 for comparison sake. Frankly, I'm close to ordering the modded Maverick from Underwood, but, perhaps I should revisit the Sony. All this is making my head hurt...in a good way.
Don't be so "envious", my nirvana never lasts too long. I'm already thinking about the next machine.(s) Nice write up. Glad you mentioned the importance of warm-up time. Ideally, a cd player should be left on overnight to sound optimum. Some players even continue to change sound over several days (ala- wadia) The SA11 is much more detailed, transparent and sparkly than previous Marantz units, from what I am told. Again, after it is warmed up. When I had DV-50, it sounded great until 5 hours warm-up time had passed. At that time, the sound became quite full and rich. High freq extension and detail lost air/transparency. That type of sound just drives me crazy. I'm not willing to accept that for 5K or 3k for that matter. It is more a critical view on the cd medium than any particular player. Just about every cd player I have ever heard tends to sound a bit midrangey and closed in on top. When you test SA11 again, be aware that there are 3 filter options and a noise shapper on/off. This player tries to mimic the delicacy and nuance aspect of recorded music. This type of sound (there are other players like this) usually comes along with a softer bass. They do this so that the bass energy does not cover up the detail. When I compare cd players in my system, it is always against the turtable. In almost every single case, the turtable is more open and extended on top. So far, only Wadia and this new Marantz sound even more open. The Wadia didn't cut it because it sounded skeletal and amusical IMO (bass and prat were also weak on wadia). I enjoy your enthusiasm and look foward to seeing what machine you ultimately settle on to replace the Teac.
just want to add, the Hovland amp is a solid state, 12K, my Sony is a S9000es Modwright, not the XA.The cables use at the dealer were Kubala.The Thor monos are worth 17K, and the preamp 12k.The room tweak at the dealer is worth 15K, well filter.All of us enjoyed the shootout.
Thanks for adding needed detail about the dealers set-up. Regarding the Thor mono's, remember we disconnected those and did the majority of our listening with the Hovland Amp. Is that correct? Also, how much did the Thor pre-amp cost? I don't remember. Finally, sorry about the spelling of the cables/interconnects.
You are correct that they had many room treatments (echo busters, bass traps and others). So you can say the listening tests were were under almost ideal room treatment conditions.
Jactoy, please feel free to add any comments you may have regarding the listening tests. People on this forum are probably tired of just hearing my comments/observations!
Thanks for the info. I didn't know about the three filters or the noise shaper. The dealer should have told me about that. Since the DV 50 has similar filters which I do change on a regular basis (depending on the type of music played) I understand the importance of using these correctly. The Marantz may be one of those machines that needs to be taken home for a demo to properly evaluate its performance. Ideally, all equipment should be taken home if possible but some units need it more than others to make a proper assessment.
When I go back to the dealer this week I will give it a more detailed listen, double check the polarity issue and play with the filters.
Regarding the DV 50, I've never experienced the sound changes you describe after the unit stays on for a considerable length of time. When my dealer sold me the DV 50 he did tell me from his own persnonal experience (and Tac's recommendation) is that the DV 50 be given 200 hours of break-in time in EACH FORMAT! I don't know if you were able to do that.
Anyway, I'm just glad we're talking civilly again as I consider you a valuable assest towards my search for digital nirvana audio and I value your input. If you feel the Marantz equals your turn table rig in terms of openess on the top end then that says alot. Are you talking in SACD or CD playback? Also, how do you like the Marantz in SACD? Is the Marantz still breaking in or are you past the break-in period?
Please keep me and this forum posted regarding your findings and successes!
...AVGURU wrote: "The DV-50 transport (while not their famed VRDS one) is still clearly superior to the off the shelf one denon uses (either Pioneer or Philips). The 3910's build quality, while decent, is nowhere on the level of the DV-50's. Finally the DV-50 upsamples to some ungodly frequency rate (1,700) while the Denon (even with the mods) doesn't upsample at all."
The DV-50 uses unmodified (except for the clamper) off the shelf Pioneer transport as found in the $150 Pioneer 563a and 578a. This transport is also used in their top of the line DV-59AVi. It is nice transport, but it is not better than the Denon transports. Denon DOES NOT use off the shelf transport, they use their own, it's really nice and more solid than the Pioneer transport found in DV-50.
Sure, DV-50 enclosure is nicer than the Denon, but I doubt that DV-50 DSP is anywhere near the Denon. The Denon does not upsample because there is no theoretical or practical benefit of upsamppling the CD. The Denon expands the 16 bit CD data to 24 bit using World's best Analog Devices 32 bit floating point SHARC Audio DSP. The same DSP takes care of the HDCD decoding too.
I have a few DV-50 owners who have contacted me asking if I can implement the mod into their players. One of them is sending me his DV-50 next week. This should be interesting!
I hope you do not mind my intrusion! Please feel free to ask questions.
The tube power amps that 711smilin uses, that Avguru couldn't remember the name of, are NOS Valves VRDs. They are excellent monoblocks handmade by Craig Ostby in Michigan.
You can see photos and read the specs at his webpage, www.nosvalves.com
Avguru,your review is very accurate,and thorough,one aspect that we forget to mention is the Sony mod, bass wise is deeper and it flows to the music,also we all agree that the Sony gave 711 system more musicality, and the quality of music is just totally out of my disbelief.One thing I would like to add the Denon is very consistent both with Dealer and 711 system.Also the VD nite pc gave all three CDP huge improvement.I would also be helping 711, to find the right cabling,and I will visit AVguru"s place. This are true audiophile.I am glad I met them. Before I forgot the slam of Sony is world class.Both Denon are very good unit also.That shoot out tell us that modified unit can compete with at least 2 to 3 times the price of any other unit. Anyone who own Meitner in Chicago, I would love to hear it.
AVGURU, Curious about your opinion of 711Smilin's system OTHER than the CD players. Seems the results were similiar at both your places. What did you think of the cornwalls and VRDs?
Denon uses their famed ALU processing (an arithmetic logarithm) to "interpolate" a word length of 24 bits from a standard 16 bit redbook cd. They've been using this technology for the last 10 years in everything from their recievers to their dvd players to their cd players.
This is a proprietary process that Denon has developed. Other more "hi-fi" companies such as Ayre, Cary, Arcam etc accomplish the same feat through a different process that I'm not technical enough to explain. But the results speak for themselves and I don't think most people reading this post feel that Denon's sound is anywhere close to the performance levels of the companies mentioned above. And to be honest, there are great 1 bit cd players on the market today that sound incredibly good. So I'm not even sure if interpolating data to a larger bit stream is critical to obtaining great sound.
Regarding upsampling (atually there's no such thing and it should be referred to as oversampling)your comment "there's no theoretical or practical advantadge to upsampling the cd" is not true. While Denon may have come to this decision after reviewing the overall design and performance criteria of their units, there are many other companies (including Marantz which is now owned by Denon) that are very high on the concept and use it with regularity. Ayre, Arcam, Cary, Musical Fidelity, Esoteric, etc are but a few of the companies that routinely use oversampling in their cd players and with GREAT RESULTS! All of the above companies are much more highly respected than Denon when it comes to their engineering design and "know how".
I agree that oversampling is not always necessary to achieve good sounding cd playback. But I just want to make it clear to everyone reading your comments that was a decision Denon made and reasons could be varied...anywhere from cost concerns to the design of their unit not being compatible with oversampling. You will note that on Esoterics's UX1 player they decided not provide all of the oversampling options available on the DV 50. One of the primary reasons for this was the design of their transport made it unnecessary to do so.
Regarding the DV-50's transport being the same as the Pioneers, please do not understate the importance/impact of adding the clamping mechanism...which reduces jitter and allows the laser mechanism to track the disc in a more linear and accurate fashion. In my mind this modification alone puts the Esoteric transport on a higher level above the Pioneer. Furthermore, the laser tracking mechansim and the laser wavelengths (which are adjustable) help by determining how far the player is capable of digging in to the "cd pits" and obtaining the recorded information.
As you know, many laser tracking mechanisms travel on a thin wire that in itself is subject to vibration. The better companies such as Esoteric do not use this method..or they use a better version. In my mind the outer housing,laser mechansim, etc are all part of the transport and in this regard the Esoteric does have a better transport than the Denon. You are free to disagree as I'm sure you will.
Regarding comparing the DSP (Digital Surround processing)chips in both units that really doesn't concern me as I'm much more interested in analog audio performance (op amps, DAC's and their associated filtering processes) than I am with digital processing..most of which is associated with video and digital processing speed. Is the Denon the better DVD player? Probably.
Do I care? NO!
Is HDCD a nice feature to have? Maybe to some but not to me since the in my listening tests the use of the three oversampling filters can bring a level of resolution to cd's that's better than HDCD.
Alex, 711 has given me several extended listening auditions of your units and I think they sound incredible..much better than the DV 50 in terms of musicality. And if you are successful in bringing the DV 50 to a level of performance on par with your APL 3910 I will gladly be one of your next customers requesting an upgrade. But I just had to respond to your comments and imho the build quality, transport and overall engineering found in the DV 50 is on a much higher level than the 3910. To be able to use the lesser Denon platform and take it to a level of performance that surpasses the DV 50 is high praise indeed and a testament to your modding skills!
APLHIFI, are you sure Teac is using third party transports in DV-50? As Teac is a relatively broad-spectrum vertical integrator, the hypothesis about Teac using Pioneer parts seems--prima face--somewhat unusual. By the way what is a DV-59AVI? The product is not on the US Esoteric site. Is it something new we should know about, or is it a Pioneer product?
711 has been requesting that we meet to compare his 3910 and my Sony Sony SCD-777ES - Richard Kern modded into the test mix. I was reluctant before because I felt the results would be meaningless if it were just him and I. Since there are more ears now, I would be willing to participate.
I've got plenty of room so we could do it here. I'm in Elgin.
Sounds as though you all had fun. Although the overall results aren't too surprising they're quite interesting. Seems the modded players did at least as well as the other units auditioned. But then I'd have to hear it for myself in a high resolution system. For what it's worth, I'd put my tweaked, no longer available, redbook gear up against anything else out there regardless of cost. I have nothing to gain by saying this since I don't currently sell any digital equipment unless you count cables, but you're all welcome to bring on all challengers sometime and see how they do. Allow plenty of time for equipment warmup (my transport takes a long time which is why it's always on) and stay for pizza. I'm in the northwest suburbs. My system listing can be found at http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/237.html
Can any of you guys provide some meaningful commentary about the similiarities, contrasts and preferences between the Exemplar 3910, the APL 3910 and the Modwright 9000ES (I'm actually considering the 999ES)? Your first hand listening experiences speak volumes!
I'm currently running an Audio Aero 24/192k DAC, so if you have any opinions on it vs. these other three, I would be interested in hearing about that as well.
Thanks for all your digitial efforts! Mark - Northbrook, IL
Can you guys share the music used to evaluate the machines? Specific CDs, SA-CD would be helpful. Any comments comparing the sounds of the different players referenced to the specific CDs/Music would go a long way to helping me understand more of your comments.
Interesting comments on the Denon's transport and DSP -- are there many differences between the Denon 2900 and 3910? In terms of final product, we have read here on audiogon that your modded 3910 is better than your 2900.
I have no poblem doing another audition at your place in Elgin. The only Dali dealer in the Chicago area is in Elgin (I forget the name of the audio store). I've been dying to hear some Dali speakers. They consistently receive killer reviews!
Before I come I'd like to know the components in your system (speakers, amps, etc) so I can prepare myself accordingly.
Avguru, Bravo..great review. When you compared the Dan Wright Modded Sony to the other players, could you comment on the differences that was heard when playing and comparing CD's...and SACD's.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
