On Saturday, February 24, a few members of the San Diego, Los Angeles and Palm Springs audio communities conducted a blind shoot-out at the home of one of the members of the San Diego Music and Audio Guild. The five CD Players selected for evaluation were: 1) a Resolution Audio Opus 21 (modified by Great Northern Sound), 2) the dcs standalone player, 3) a Meridian 808 Signature, 4) a EMM Labs Signature configuration (CDSD/DCC2 combo), and 5) an APL NWO 2.5T (the 2.5T is a 2.5 featuring a redesigned tube output stage and other improvements).
The ground rules for the shoot-out specified that two randomly draw players would be compared head-to-head, and the winner would then be compared against the next randomly drawn player, until only one unit survived (the so-called King-of-the-Hill method). One of our most knowledgeable members would set up each of the two competing pairs behind a curtain, adjust for volume, etc. and would not participate in the voting. Alex Peychev was the only manufacturer present, and he agreed to express no opinion until the completion of the formal process, and he also did not participate in the voting. The five of us who did the voting did so by an immediate and simultaneous show of hands after each pairing after each selection. Two pieces of well-recorded classical music on Red Book CDs were chosen because they offered a range of instrumental and vocal sonic charactistics. And since each participant voted for each piece separately, there was a total of 10 votes up for grabs at each head-to-head audition. Finally, although we all took informal notes, there was no attempt at detailed analysis recorded -- just the raw vote tally.
And now for the results:
In pairing number 1, the dcs won handily over the modified Opus 21, 9 votes to 1.
In pairing number 2, the dcs again came out on top, this time against the Meridian 808, 9 votes to 1.
In pairing number 3, the Meitner Signature was preferred over the dcs, by a closer but consistent margin (we repeated some of the head-to-head tests at the requests of the participants). The vote was 6 to 4.
Finally, in pairing number 5, the APL 2.5T bested the Meitner, 7 votes to 3.
In the interest of configuration consistance, all these auditions involved the use of a power regenerator supplying power to each of the players and involved going through a pre-amp.
This concluded the blind portion of the shoot-out. All expressed the view that the comparisons had been fairly conducted, and that even though one of the comparisons was close, the rankings overall represented a true consensus of the group's feelings.
Thereafter, without the use blind listening, we tried certain variations at the request of various of the particiapans. These involved the Meitner and the APL units exclusively, and may be summarized as follows:
First, when the APL 2.5T was removed from the power regenerator and plugged into the wall, its performance improved significantly. (Alex attributed this to the fact that the 2.5T features a linear power supply). When the Meitner unit(which utilizes a switching power supply) was plugged into the wall, its sonics deteriorated, and so it was restored to the power regenerator.
Second, when we auditioned a limited number of SACDs, the performance on both units was even better, but the improvement on the APL was unanimously felt to be dramatic. The group concluded we had just experienced "an SACD blowout".
The above concludes the agreed-to results on the blind shoot-out. What follows is an overview of my own personal assessment of the qualitative differences I observed in the top three performers.
First of all the dcs and the Meitner are both clearly state of the art players. That the dcs scored as well as it did in its standalone implementation is in my opinion very significant. And for those of us who have auditioned prior implementations of the Meitner in previous shoot-outs, this unit is truly at the top of its game, and although it was close, had the edge on the dcs. Both the dcs and the Meitner showed all the traits one would expect on a Class A player -- excellent tonality, imaging, soundstaging, bass extension, transparency, resolution, delineation, etc.
But from my point of view, the APL 2.5T had all of the above, plus two deminsions that I feel make it truly unique. First of all, the life-like quality of the tonality across the spectrum was spot-on on all forms of instruments and voice. An second, and more difficult to describe, I had the uncany feeling that I was in the presence of real music -- lots or "air", spatial cues, etc. that simply add up to a sense of realism that I have never experienced before. When I closed my eyes, I truly felt that I was in the room with live music. What can I say.
Obviously, I invite others of the participants to express their views on-line.
Sabai- I would bet the EMM and Powercell would still be outperformed by the APL and Powercell, and that it still wouldn't be close. That would be "apples to apples" - but in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. There is no "best", but rather what is "best for you" in your system and environment. Glad you are finally happy with your EMM - the Synergistic products you mentioned are well-known for adding the improvements you describe to most systems.
As for me, my UX-1 and prototype APL Super-Dac are currently being converted into the final edition - new APL-NWO 4.0 "M" as we speak. I promise to resist all "shoot-outs" because frankly I DON"T CARE!! I believe there are a few Agon reviews up on this player already, along with some commentary from Alex.
i believe that you are realistic in your statement that there is no "best" in the absolute sense, but rather what is best for the individual.
perhaps you could suggest a reason that the quest for the "best" is the subject of so many threads.
other threads concern the topic is one component better than another.
why does this happen so often.
our hobby is one where personal preference is the primary reason choices are made as to individual components and stereo systems. thus what is better does not assist a potential purchaser because the ultimate decision is so personal.
why take a poll to determine what CD player to purchase at a price point, when one should audition players when possible, or, if not possible, realize the risk that is entailed when following the dictates of others, is unkown but real ?
i believe that you are realistic in your statement that there is no "best" in the absolute sense, but rather what is best for the individual.
perhaps you could suggest a reason that the quest for the "best" is the subject of so many threads.
other threads concern the topic is one component better than another.
why does this happen so often.
our hobby is one where personal preference is the primary reason choices are made as to individual components and stereo systems. thus what is better does not assist a potential purchaser because the ultimate decision is so personal.
why take a poll to determine what CD player to purchase at a price point, when one should audition players when possible, or, if not possible, realize the risk that is entailed when following the dictates of others, is unknown but real ?
To be honest, I think a lot of this "one-upmanship" is an effort to further self-justify what is probably a pretty expensive, in relative terms, piece of equipment. I think some are looking for further reassurance they made a smart purchase, especially since "theirs is better than yours". Unfortunately, some people are really hung up on this, and go to some pretty extreme lengths in an attempt to prove something that is really too subjective to be "provable".
Audiofeil, you need to work on your sense of humor. Fplanner, Mrtennis,Sebrof, et al. I was fortunate to pick up a mint EMM CDSA SE recently at a 50% discount. Even at the price I paid it was over the top for me but I went for it because I didn't think I would be able to do better in terms of sound quality at that price point with any of the "competition". If I had a cost-no-object budget I might have gone for an APL but this was a moot point since APL is out of the ballpark for me. Although I have never auditioned an APL, from all reports it looks like it would probably better the EMM in terms of sound quality. But I have chosen my other components and cables carefully, and am tweaking my system to death to maximize its potential -- with very positive results. The latter have made a much bigger improvement than I could ever have imagined. So I am very happy with the sound quality of my system. Although a "winner" can be proclaimed in shoot-outs the point I have been making -- to the dismay of some who are tired of hearing me say what I care to say in which case they can easily skip my postings instead of complaining about them or making stupid humorless comments -- is that we are facing a real problem in today's economy. The price of top components cuts all but the rich out of the picture. The price of second and third tier components lets a few more of us in the door but we have to be careful how we spend our audio dollars before they are all spent and we find ourselves sitting at home with an inferior component or cable that brings the whole system down. So finding out as much as we can ahead of time about what our hard-earned dollars can buy is very important and that is where the Audiogon forums enter the picture -- especially for people like me who live abroad and who cannot audition equipment without getting on a plane and traveling a long distance at great expense to an audio-friendly country. The forums help people like me make important audio decisions. If shoot-outs were conducted in a more complete way -- following some of the suggestions I have made earlier -- they would help a lot of people make better choices within their budget, not simply leave us with one high five and everyone else in the dust. I will be writing a review of my system in the New Year that will include some of the amazing results I have been obtaining with a wide variety of tweaks that have made a huge difference in the sound quality of my system. I hope that my review will help others and that it will stimulate some constructive comments.
there are two issues i have with your point of view.
first, regardless of the number of recommendations, there is a risk that an individual with unique tastes and romm and stereo system won't like the recommended component.
secondly, whatever component is recommended, it is highly probable that another component, not recommended may be equally worthy of consideration.
Mrtennis, what you say is true, but how would one break through the paralysis, or ever be in a position to know that one can make the 100% perfect decision? Until there is a local store carrying every piece of equipment made, with a loaner program to listen in your room before buying - we are left with some collective wisdom deciphered with a little bit of healthy skepticism and a small grain of salt -but surely a careful reading of Audiogon comments can lead one to making some pretty good choices in buying equipment; not sure we have any better way; better than blind faith, but faith nonetheless. Is the EMM CDSA SE the best? Who knows. But if you can't be happy with it and enjoy it, there is a problem that probably can't be helped with another equipment fix.
Pubul57, I think your comments were directed at my posting, if I am not mistaken. I was not talking about a "100% perfect decision". I was talking about a well-informed decision. There is no such thing as perfection as we all know. And there is no paralysis. There is only the process of evaluation. For those who are lucky enough to be able to audition equipment evaluation is a simpler process than for people like me who cannot audition equipment without traveling abroad. So a more complete shoot-out incorporating more variables would have been more helpful. That's all I'm saying.
Sabai, I agree that head-to-head comparisons of equipment can be helpful, and doing blind tests is the most objective way to perform the tests. I don't believe that more variables needed to be introduced (plugs, wires, etc.), though more music selections and a round-robin format would have improved things. The real problem here is that the presence of a manufacturer at the test completely invalidates the results. It is impossible to claim the tests were either blind or objective. The power of biased individuals to intentionally or unintentionally affect the results is far too great to allow them anywhere near a properly conducted blind test. The fact that the organizers thought it was appropriate to have him there is also highly suspect.
It is unfortunate that the people who conducted this test expended so much time and effort to produce a result that is so completely worthless. Hopefully their next effort will be better planned.
i think a good strategy for purchasing decisions where home audition is not possible is the following:
scan the want ads and note what components move fast. note the difference between the asking price and the retail price.
these two data points can help you make a decision, figuring that if you buy a component based upon the above, you will not be stuck with the piece and you might not lose to much.
also, as i have said in the past, many manufacturers are straight forward when asked about their designs.
now you have three factors to consider.
again, not ideal but at least its a plan.
if you want to include recommendations, that would be your choice, of course.
Cbw723, I agree that the presence of one of the makers at the shoot-out compromised the test. At least one of those present was not blind. Subconscious influence cannot be underestimated in such a situation. I also feel that a greater variety of CDs should have been tested. Testing only classical pieces was far too restrictive. But I disagree on the subject of variables. You would never recognize my EMM CDSA SE if you did a blind test before and after the improvements I made to my system. It is like night and day. The EMM has incredible potential from my personal experience. But without the right variables creating the right synergy you might easily dismiss it as an inferior CDP. Frankly, I was disappointed with its sound until I did some serious work with plugs, IECs, cables and tweaks, added the SR PowerCell 10SE, and then did a lot more work with plugs and cables and tweaking. The sound that it now produces is quite amazing, IMHO.
You can certainly hot-rod a production car to a night and day better performance, but do you think it will ever become a Rolls-Royce?
The NWO player used for this particular shootout sounds worse than a boombox compared to the current NWO-M so, in my opinion, it does not really matter what you have done or will do to the EMM box.
This said, I am extremely happy for you and your achievements! So now just put your favorite disc on, hit play, sit back, relax and enjoy!
Sabai, yes, component performance can be very system specific, and I think many of us have had the experience of needing to re-tune a system after adding a new component. But it is difficult to imagine a blind testing scenario where one could tweak each component to sound its "best" without adding a lot of other variables. And, of course, "best" would be different for different people. Still, perhaps one could design a test where each component was pre-tuned to maximize its presentation. Maybe a two-stage affair where first each component was tuned, and only later the components were compared head-to-head. That could be interesting, but would be a lot of work.
Cbw723, I really hadn't thought about the specifics of how to set up a more "revealing" shoot-out. Your suggestion makes complete sense to me. The people who know each player well could bring it to the shoot-out already tuned. This would be far better than the one-size-fits-all approach of the shoot-out that was done. There was no consideration at all given to the possibility that, for instance, a certain plug or cable used in the shoot-out might have been inappropriate for one or more of the players or might even have restricted performance. For instance, the maker of my speakers specifically recommends not using certain kinds of cables with his speakers. If inappropriate cables are used they will make the CDP in that system sound awful and one would then draw the conclusion that the CDP was not very good -- in one or more respects -- in comparison with other players which would be a totally incorrect conclusion. There is also the issue of which power conditioner works best with each player. Alex says his APLs don't need power conditioners. But I read some comments somewhere along the line from someone who said that even his APL was improved by a power conditioner they used with one of the APL models. So even the makers may not know what is best in all cases. I have come across this before with makers of various components. Sorry, I don't remember the details about the conditioner user with the APL in this case -- I'd have to go back and try to trace this information. It's easy to set up a CDP shoot-out that produces a quick "winner" through the process of elimination. It's not so easy to set up a CDP shoot-out that does justice to all the players by showing their potential through set-up that meets the specific needs of each one.
Sabai, no, I was responding to Mrtennis who was raising the difficulty with your position, I was simply saying the are always problems with seeking certainty, we can only move with accumulated personal knowledge, and reading the thought of others who seem to have good judgement (I agree with them:)), and knowing that nothing anyone says here is going to ensure with 100% certainty that a piece of equipment will be just what you are looking for.
12-26-10: Aplhifi The NWO player used for this particular shootout sounds worse than a boombox compared to the current NWO-M so, in my opinion, it does not really matter what you have done or will do to the EMM box.
This might be true, but the statement represents this manufacturer as condescending and dismissive.
I have a great respect for Ed Meitner and consider him to be one of the digital audio geniuses.
But dont you think that trying to compare the entry level CDSA to a cost-no-object digital boutique is also condescending and dismissive?
The EMM product used for this San Diego shootout was their top-line combo CDSD/DAC6 Signature, not CDSA. Lets try comparing apples to apples.
So yes, it does not matter what Sabai has done or will do to his CDSA, it will never be as good as EMMs own top-line cost-no-object digital either.
I cannot understand what the reason for beating a long-dead horse here is, and with an entry-level product that was not originally used for this shootout.
12-26-10: Aplhifi The NWO player used for this particular shootout sounds worse than a boombox compared to the current NWO-M so, in my opinion, it does not really matter what you have done or will do to the EMM box.
This might be true, but the statement represents this manufacturer as condescending and dismissive.
Yes, and it gives you some idea of how objective a "blind" shootout would be in his presence.
Pubul57, thank you for clarifying this. You're right, there are no absolutes. The thrust of what I am talking about is the extent to which a shoot-out is helpful for those reading these forums in evaluating equipment. I don't feel the shoot-out in question was helpful in this respect. It was not designed to be helpful. It was designed to declare a quick winner. What I am saying is that this is not good enough. It is easy to create a high-five shoot-out. It is not so easy to create a shoot-out that is as 3-dimensional as the music produced by some of the best CD players. Doing a really good shoot-out requires a lot more work than "bring the machines in -- connect them -- play a couple of classical pieces -- raise your hands -- that's it we're all done now". Foster_9, I somehow missed reading this posting by Aplhifi in reply to my earlier posting. It certainly sounds condescending and dismissive to me, as well. The only thing I can say in response is that it might not matter to Aplhifi what I have done to improve my "EMM box" but it certainly sounds more than a box to me and it certainly matters to me what I have done to enhance its attributes although it may not be at the pinnacle in the world of CD players. The fact is that I have had to wait quite a few decades to be able to afford a good music system. My system may not be the best -- I cannot afford the best -- but it is the best I can afford and I am very happy with the sound it produces. Enhancing its sonic virtues is important to me. It is a labor of love because I love music. Remember, music is in your heart and soul. It is not only in the equipment. I was thrilled with the music that came out of my transistor radio in 1957 no less than I am with my new system. I don't need the best -- which I cannot afford -- to be happy. I am not beating a dead horse. The fact that Aplhifi and others are still following and responding to my comments and those of others regarding the shoot-out shows the opposite -- this horse is alive and very well. What harm is there in talking about how shoot-outs might be improved in future so that they explore the potential of the players that are auditioned to help people make the best choices within their budget? A quick shoot-out that eliminates contenders is certainly beneficial to the winner -- but it is not beneficial to those who cannot afford the winner that has, ironically, become "worse than a boombox" according to the maker. And this kind of shoot-out is not beneficial to those who would like to know more about the salient points of some of the losers that might be more affordable than the newest version of the winner that is presumably the best out there -- and is even more unaffordable than the inferior version used in the shoot-out. This shoot-out elicited the strong bias of the maker who attended it and who could have subconsciously influenced the attendees -- and it also showed us that he is not very big on humility. He may produce some of the best CD players in the world but he has a thing or two to learn yet. What he is apparently unaware of -- or possibly does not care about -- is that his attitude may put off more people than it attracts. Running a good business involves a lot more than producing good products.
Mr Peychev, I see your point about this fellow Sabai's CDSA player versus the EMM transport/DAC in that shootout, versus the NWO and the current NWO-M. I believe however, that manufacturer's need to sometimes walk a fine line in how they make their point concerning their products. If not, the impression left behind can be unintended.
12-27-10: Fplanner2010 If you were a design engineer/manufacturer, Bill, you would probably not be so smug nor disrespectful. The fact that Alex even participates in some of your baiting is remarkable to me - I certainly wouldn't.
It is always beneficial when a manufacturer is able to answer questions directly, as a number do from time to time on these forums. I find their input valuable as do many others. Your blatantly obvious "ax-to-grind" attitude towards Alex helps no one. Fplanner2010 (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread)
12-27-10: Elberoth2 Audiofeil - I think that it would be beneficial to audio community in general if you write about your audio discoveries / experiences or whatever instead of wasting your time bashing other manufacturers / products / dealers.
It is not fun to read anymore (if ever was) and is just annoying.
2-28-10: Abetz To chime in on the topic input quality here, I'm also inclined to state that, over the years, Audiofeil´s sour sarcasm and aggressiveness are hardly enjoyable. Ceaseless negative posting in the h-cat preamp thread comes to mind. Maybe Audiofeil has lost sight of the fact that he is a dealer, while AP invents and manufactures his machines. Or maybe, he rather has not? Clearly, the dealerless business model of the genius-freaks behind APL, Wyred, H-Cat, Empirical Audio, Altmann and many others is quite contrary to what might be to the liking of a noblemainstream-products retailer.
Yes, some inventor-entrepreneur´s model politics and marketing slogans (New World Order and the like) may be questionable or well over the top. However I find the existence of those tiny avantgarde/non mainstream companies refreshing and vital. As well as their founder´s contributions in the forums, as long as sales intentions are not blindingly obvious. Abetz (Answers | This Thread)
I really appreciate the participation of manufacturers on these forums. I think they can add information about their products and their approach to design, and that benefits all of us greatly. But the internecine squabbling I'm seeing here is just depressing. I mean, Alex and Bill were bad enough, but now Ted? From Synergistic? Synergistic? I used to respect that company...
Do none of you understand public relations?
Wow.
Yours in depression, CBW Just a guy who likes audio, not-Inc.
Cbw723, Depression? Certainly not. We're just telling it like it is. Ted is right about Bill (Audiofeil) who went to the trouble to send me a PM the other day when I made a comment about his sense of humor needing some work. Frankly, I feel there is something seriously wrong with him. Ted, I just picked up my PowerCell 10SE in Singapore and am a very happy audio camper with it in my system. The clincher was having a dedicated 20-amp line installed from the pole outside the house into my music room. The wall receptacle is my original Tesla Plex. I have it in series with my new Tesla Plex SE. The electrician installed a stock PC with a stock plug from the latter into the Tesla Plex wall receptacle. I got down on the floor yesterday and replaced that stock plug with an Oyaide P-004. SUPER WOW !! The Oyaide elevated the PowerCell to a whole new level -- transparency and dynamics and bass and fullness of sound and sound stage. Installing Oyaide plugs throughout my system has transformed it completely. I think Ted understands the importance of these plugs -- he used to have the Oyaide P-079 on the end of one or two of the top-of-the-line SR PCs. He has developed the G-07 plug and maybe it will rival the Oyaides but the G-07 is not yet available for the DIY market so I cannot make any direct comparisons. Even though my system is not 100% SR-cabled the PowerCell 10SE and Oyaide plugs have helped transform my EMM CDSA SE. It's all about synergy. This is the same EMM that Alex Peychev of APL recently called a "box" in this thread. Well, let me say that this box is actually capable of producing some very beautiful music -- maybe not the best that money can buy but nonetheless very beautiful music -- thanks in no small part to Oyaide plugs and the PowerCell 10SE. Even if you cannot afford the very best in all areas of your system you can have a system that allows you to enjoy beautiful music.
How did this thread go from a report on the differences between CD players at one's home to a report over three years later on how phenomenal Sabai is at assembling an audio system? Ugh!
Jafox, It's prestidigitation. Transmutation of elements. Seriously, if you follow my postings I never lose the plot. I have been commenting consistently on the shortcomings IMHO of the so-called blind shoot-out and how it could have been improved. It did not do justice to all the players that participated in the event. Explaining how I improved the sound of my EMM is offered as proof. Not proof that it is better than the APL but proof that you can do a lot with it to take the sound to a much higher level -- which the shoot-out made no attempt to do. That's all I am saying.
Yes Sabai, I have followed your comments here. And right out of the gate, you wasted no time to bash the report of the shootout. I found it rather disrespectful and ignorant as you disregarded much of what I and others found to be of value.
I could understand if the shootout was a tube preamp loaded with various tube types. My own experience tells me that it can take months to find a tube set that brings such a product to a new level, often never even being heard by its designer. But the shootout was CD players not loaded with tubes.
Adding/trying all sorts of combinations of footers on all the players could take a lot of time. I have heard the benefits of such products (Stillpoints) on the APL player and the Aria/Counterpoint components. They brought on greater decays which can not be explained but I heard what I heard. But they did not turn a dimensionally flat component into sudden magical 3D. This is what you are implying here with your experience and I just don't buy it.
Of course cable changes make a difference here, whether ICs or PCs. But again, there's just no way anyone can be expected to have the time or opportunity to try everything out there. How is this report different from any audio magazine review out there when a comparative product is brought into the picture? The shootout went far beyond any magazine review to report how the players sounded in one system in their stock format, no footers, tweaks, etc. Once the baselines had been achieved, another round could have been made for each player to try various ICs and PCs. But considering all that had been done and was reported, I was very appreciative for the time that Pete took to share with the A'gon members here.
As for this report here not doing "any justice" to a component, again, how is this different from any other review. All such a report can do is expose the rest of us to an introduction to a product. It is up to us to get the product, try it in our system. And if we sense it may stand out from the crowd, live with it longer and go through the refinement process of tube-rolling, various cable trials, footers, etc. Using your philosophy of needing to try every cable and tweak out there before a review/report is made, all such reports from the past are null and void.
I am one of those who tried a power conditioner (RS Haley) on the APL Denon player and got quite a boost in performance. I also concluded that the system sounded better with the player into a line stage (Aesthetix Callisto Sig) or the Bent Silver TVC. And then my discovery of the tube change on the player too. This was contrary to the view of Alex P.
Explaining how I improved the sound of my EMM is offered as proof.
Everyone in this thread is well aware of finding ways to improve the performance of each component in their system. We were all "there" before you joined this thread.
but proof that you can do a lot with it to take the sound to a much higher level -- which the shoot-out made no attempt to do. That's all I am saying.
No, essentially what you said was that the shootout was worthless since it did not go through months and months of time to try out all the combinations of external products to "optimize" each CD player. And I do not agree with your conclusion. I simply saw the shootout as a first pass of the products in review.
Perhaps one thing to do in the future when such a shootout is made is to contact each manufacturer to get the recommended footer (if any) and PC and perhaps the IC. But unless those cables are tonally coherent (neutral) and the rest of the system is as well (highly unlikely except in the top-tier of systems), cable changes are likely to just be complimentary to other flaws in the system....a concept often referred to as synergy but I consider a tonal bandaid.
The only reviewer out there that I know of that comes even close to doing what you "require" is Roy Gregory of HiFi+. It's a daunting effort to do this each and every time a product is evaluated.
Sorry Mr Tennis but I disagree. There might be 1000s of great italian restaurants out there but there are maybe a dozen "great" CD players out there. And to read about a comparison of a handful of these I find to be of great value.
these tests are just entertainment.
Hello! The threads here are all about entertainment.
Jafox, Right out of the gate I bashed the way the shoot-out was set up. I stand by my stance. Disrespectful? Not at all -- unless you call challenging the set-up disrespectful. Ignorant? Well everyone has the right to his and her opinion. The word ignorant connotes not knowing what you're talking about. I don't believe this applies to me because I do know what I am talking about when it comes to improving the sound of the EMM because I have done just that. Whether you "buy" it or not is irrelevant. The fact is that I have done it. What you found "of value" in the shoot-out I found to be of entertainment value and nothing more. Your reference to tubes is a digression. You have lost the plot. Taking "a lot of time" is exactly what I am saying the shoot-out did not do. "Connect -- listen to a couple of classical pieces -- raise your hands" is not my idea of anything "of value". It was a one-size-fits-all set-up. What value was there in it -- except to the maker whose machine was declared "the winner"? Nothing at all was elucidated about the true value of the machines in the "test" because the potential sonic virtues of each player were not tested. The "test" was skewed by its rigid set-up. Yes, what I am precisely saying -- not implying -- is that I have turned "a dimensionally flat component into sudden magical 3D". Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. This is precisely what I have done. Which is why the shoot-out was valueless because the way it was set up, having the EMM transformed right in front of you would have been unimaginable. The fact that it didn't happen at the shoot-out proves that the people who set it up were woefully lacking in knowledge about the EMM's potential as well as imagination. I never said or implied anywhere in this thread that you should have tried "everything out there" or you should have tried "every cable and tweak out there". You are putting my words in my mouth and that is a cop-out. What I said was that there was no attempt to make the shoot-out anything but a one-dimensional event. That's what it was -- a one-dimensional event. I have the proof before me right here at home in my listening room. The EMM you heard was not the EMM you might have heard had you had enough imagination and taken the time to make the shoot-out a really great event. In defense of the shoot-out you compare it to magazine reviews. This is totally irrelevant. If magazine reviews are skewed -- which most are -- and the shoot-out was no different then how can that possibly justify anything at all -- except that in both cases you are justifying a dumbing-down effect. Everyone in this thread is not "well aware of finding ways to improve" the EMM. That's for sure. They may not even be aware of special ways to optimize their own equipment. If those at the shoot-out had been "well aware of finding ways to improve" the EMM then no one would have accepted that it be presented in a one-dimensional way that minimized its potential. How can there be "value" in a shoot-out that minimizes the true value of one of the participants? The shoot-out was not a first pass at anything. This is re-writing history. It was set up to declare a "winner" -- to eliminate all comers -- not as a first pass. On the contrary, it was set up to appear as a last pass. An earlier poster in this thread suggested that those who are expert in optimizing each participant should have presented to the group an optimized version of the machine being entered in the competition. Now that makes sense to me. You would not have to change the least tweak or cord. Each machine would be brought in ready to go. If Roy Gregory who I have not heard of before has the guts to suggest going to all the trouble of doing what you claim I "require" but which I never even implied requiring then he's the sort of serious audiophile I'd like to know more about. It sounds like he is not daunted by a "daunting effort". I think the folks at Synergistic Research would be amused by your comment that you consider synergy a "tonal bandaid". IMHO, this comment of yours is more than ample proof that the now-famous shoot-out in San Diego really was valueless. How any serious audiophile could possibly make such an obviously preposterous statement is beyond me. The skewing that this attitude brought to the shoot-out is quite revealing and it is one that I am sure many of those who have been following this thread will be interested to know.
Wow. Are we all bored (or boring) or what. IMHO this 'shoot out' was always a very flawed attempt at a double blind test. For a long list of reasons! And that was, or should have been, obvious to anyone reading the thread. Perhaps interesting though if you can get by that.
Sabai, I have to give you credit for trying to breath life into a stale post. But you really must have something better to do with your time. Nobody really cares, I don't think, about what you are trying to do to maximize your digital system, let alone critique this old so called 'double blind' test.
I am one of those who tried a power conditioner (RS Haley) on the APL Denon player and got quite a boost in performance. I also concluded that the system sounded better with the player into a line stage (Aesthetix Callisto Sig) or the Bent Silver TVC. And then my discovery of the tube change on the player too. This was contrary to the view of Alex P.
I am very happy that you have positive results using power conditioner with the Denon! The player used for this particular shootout was the NWO-2.5T (24bit AK4396 DACs, ECC99 tube stage). It had linear power using three (3) R-Core transformers (same with the current NWO-M). The Denon also has 2 R-Cores, but there is still a switching power supply in it, so yes, It does benefit from a power conditioner just like any EMM Labs digital product does since there are no transformers inside; it is all switching powered.
To all:
I was not let in the room at the shootout and the two gentlemen behind the curtain hiding the audio gear in test did not own APL equipment, and they did not participate in the voting. These guys from San Diego are very particular about those things and for a good reason, so they wanted a real shootout, and all other members present there agreed. All players were under exact same conditions using the same power re-generator, preamp, cables, 845 monoblock amplifiers and speakers. The NWO-2.5T was sitting in its shipping box and was not even warmed-up. The contender that won against everything else was the EMM Labs CDSD/DAC6e Signature (with ceramic PCBs upgrade and the whole 9 yards). The cold 2.5T was elected a winner but not with 100% votes.
When the official shootout was over, I've asked 2 things: Plug the NWO directly to the wall bypassing the regenerator. Everyone agreed (100%) that it sounded a lot better. Then I asked to bypass the tube preamp (expensive with NOS tubes) and connect the NWO directly to the 845 amps. This brought another level of improvement that again everyone (100%) agreed on. Of course, the player was warm already too. But someone said: wait, what if the EMM also sounds better without the power regenerator. So, we tried but it didnt work out in a positive direction, sorry to say. This is how we all learned how important a conditioner or regenerator is for the EMM gear.
Next day we went to a movie director's house in Hollywood. He attended the shootout in Sand Diego and brought two digital boxes (the Meridian and the dCS), so he wanted to hear the two winners (EMM and NWO) in his own listening room that he calls the Audio Bunker. It is a dedicated facility besides his house. The EMM played with an expensive conditioner that the owner thought brings best results at that time. The NWO was plugged directly to the wall. The EMM Labs combo owner was obviously also present at both shootouts. I just upgraded his NWO-4.0-SE to NWO-M today.
If someone here still doubts this shootout or the NWO player qualities in general, I will be more than happy and very delighted to arrange an NWO-M for a shootout with any other digital (cost-no-object, and with all possible upgrades done to it). Just let me know.
Lastly, Sabai, I personally think that you are not only insulting everyone present at this shootout, but also the majority of Audiophiles. Do you really think that you are the only one who knows about the benefits of dedicated power lines, cables, IEC and Signal connectors, regenerators, conditioners, etc.? Of course, I am very happy for your audio system achievements so enjoy the music!
I think I've made myself clear enough so I rest my case.
Seconded. Can't remember the last time I've seen so many, many, many, many words used to address such a simple position in such an old thread by 1 person. Such a highly critical and zealous dissection of an obviously subjective event 5 years ago is approaching absurdity and not doing EMM any favors either.
Tvad, the issue is still alive and well even though it is related to an event that happened 3 years ago -- because it reveals how we still think about audio matters today. Mrtennis, consensus in the case of the shoot-out was elicited by a skewed set-up. Subjectivity, as you rightly point, out is a very big factor regarding sonic preferences. But hearing the best sound, or even "the better" sound that a given player can can produce can affect subjectivity very strongly. If the pizza lacks basic ingredients it cannot be enjoyed as much as when it has special spices and herbs added. Newbee, how can you be bored at improving the sound of your system? I disagree than no one cares. If this were true why do my postings elicit such a strong reaction? And why do people with EMMs email me with questions about what I did to improve my EMM and my system? They have an EMM at home. They want to know how to elevate the sound that it produces. That's what it is all about. A dead issue? Far from it. We all, myself included, of course, have a lot to learn and we can help the learning process for others by making these postings -- and by making shoot-outs part of that learning process. The issue is alive and well because it pertains to every system owned by each person reading this thread and the entire audiophile community who have not read it. The issue is how to maximize the performance of your system. This is something I am always working on and have had great success in doing. I am surprised at the sonic improvement that the changes I have made to my system have created. I am happy that others are benefiting from my experience. A power conditioner is a very important part of improving the sound of the EMM. This does not diminish the sonic results of adding a power conditioner to it. It is possible that a different power conditioner might have produced superior results with the EMM. IMHO, the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE does just that. I find it interesting that Alex is now talking about "two winners". Actually there was a split vote of 7 to 3 in favor of the APL which I find interesting. If the vote had been 10 to 0 in favor of the APL that would have told a different story. I assume that the power conditioner used at the movie director's house was not the PowerCell. I may be wrong. If it was not the PowerCell this shows that even though someone may think a certain power conditioner may be the best with his system he or she may be mistaken. I had an excellent power conditioner in my system -- from one of the top makers who produces a very expensive line of equipment -- before I installed the PowerCell. It was night and day after installing the PowerCell. And, furthermore, there is a LOT more that I did to my system than just adding the PowerCell that transformed the sound. This does not change the fact that APL makes world-class equipment. This fact is not in question and I have never stated otherwise in this thread. The gist of what I am saying is that where the APL may perform well with no power conditioner or "tweaks", other players may need them to optimize their sound. While this speaks loudly in favor of APL it does not diminish the sonic improvements that are the result of this process with other players. APL guts the Esoteric and does "mods". You might call my approach "external mods". In both cases the word "modification" or "change" is the operative word. Alex states I am "insulting everyone at the shoot-out". I believe I have been polite through-out this thread so it is a mystery to me how my remarks can be construed as "insulting" -- unless the meaning of the word "insult" is broadened to include calling into question the set-up used to arrive at the outcome. The set-up was obviously highly flawed. Alex would like us to accept the outcome of the shoot-out because his APL was the "winner". I do not doubt the merits of the APL line (even though earlier in this thread Alex himself ironically denigrated the APL 2.5 that was used in the shoot-out). But the set-up of the shoot-out remains highly flawed. Which does not mean that the same outcome would not have resulted from a better set-up. Of course, I am not "the only one who knows" about the benefits of various external modifications. That is not the point. The point is the extent to which such modifications can transform the EMM which is the point that is ignored by not only Alex in this thread but also by others. If the EMM had been elevated in the shoot-out the vote might have been closer, IMHO, and there would have been more positive comments about the EMM, as well. For all I know other participating CD players in the shoot-out might have benefited from "external modifications", as well. But my experience is with modifying the EMM so I confine my remarks to what I know. Fplanner, I think that being a zealous audiophile is a wonderful thing. How it could be considered absurd is beyond me -- after all this is an audiophile forum, if I am not mistaken. Are the zealous to be excluded? As regards "doing EMM any favors" may I point out that I have absolutely no ties whatsoever to the audio industry. In any case, how could pointing out that the EMM can be elevated to a much higher level be bad news for EMM? It is like saying that modifying the Esoteric is bad news for Esoteric. I don't think that Alex would agree. On the contrary, I think it is very good news for EMM to know that their player has much more potential than is obvious. This good news has the potential to attract more people to the EMM CDSA SE, IMHO -- people who might have turned away after a first pass because I assume that the EMM CDSA SE has a much broader customer base than their new model -- the far more expensive $25,000 EMM XDS1. If I had the budget I would be looking at the latter or an APL model to replace my EMM CDSA SE. Unfortunately, I am not in that league.
Sabai - None of us really care about your claimed "mods" - we've all been doing them for years and its getting very tiresome hearing how clever you are. Alex does a complete re-design, not a "mod". You are an authority on nothing, yet you just blather on and on. You are insulting everyone with your condescending attitude and its not good PR for EMM. Your need to have the "last word" is also painfully puerile. Enough already.
"The issue is how to maximize the performance of your system. "
Sabai, yours is a very commendable goal indeed... May I suggest, or better strongly recommend--I should even say urge--for you to open a dedicated thread, where you will impart and share your magisterial knowledge on the subject... An thence leave this old thread to its original intended topic.
Unfortunately, OT posts are fun for a spell, but they share a remarkable lot with house guests and fresh fish alike... You know, after three days....
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.
