Esoteric DV-60

Anyone heard this unit yet? As many of you know, it is replacing the DV-50S and I'm looking for noticeable difference in audio/video quality as well as functionality. I know on paper the changes that have been made, but is the upgrade worth it from a user's perspective. Thanks for your opinions and experiences. Dave.
Haven't heard it but I dod speak with one of the Esoteric Techs and one major change vs. the DV50s is that it has an Esoteric built tranport where as the DV50s used the Pioneer.
True, but DV-60 still does not have a true VRDS Neo transport. . . Why not get an X-03, which is not terribly more expensive than DV-60?
I don't think there is multi channel audio with the X03.
I am wanting a universal player and enjoy the DV-50S already. I wonder if the leap to the UX-3 or UX-1 would fit the bill. I don't think these units do multi channel audio either (not that I spend alot of time listening to this mode, but the option IS nice). Any UX-3 owners out there?
Canucks0: I own a DV-50S and for the past two weeks have been breaking in my new UX-1 Limited. All I can tell you is that the difference between the 50S and the UX-1 Ltd is monumental, both in the audio and the video sections. Mind you, I was very happy with the DV-50S and I use it just for redbook and for DVD-V (so please don't ask me about the other SACD or alphabet soup options).

I think the DV-50S is a stellar performer and a piece of gear that will last you centuries. But I had a great opportunity to get the UX-1 Ltd and I just couldn't pass it up. I'm sure that you want to hear a detailed review but my reaction to the UX-1, stone cold, right out of the box was just "oh my God! Wow!" I did the classic double-take... It's amazing how much detail the UX-1 Ltd can suck out of a little disc.

Now, some may consider that too analystic or "dry" or "uninvolving" or all those other nonsensical adjectives that are bantied about but (to repeat) "Oh my God! Wow!" is the most succinct way to describe the UX-1 Ltd (and I would assume, the UX-1).
UX-1 is universal multichannel. X-01 is CD and SACD multichannel.
Hi. I just had an DV-60 on trial vs. a dealers DV-50 S as I´ve just upgraded from DV-50 S to UX-3 SE.

On SACD and CD I clearly prefer the stock DV-50 S over the DV-60 - which is - according to the dealer designed for optimized DVD playback. On DVD the DV-60 is - no surprise -better than DV-50 S as it offers 1080i with a Faroudja (wrongly spelled?) chip. BUT: The old DV-50 S is much heavier (8kgs.). 21,8kg vs. 14kg (DV-60).

Hope this helps.
Good God, maybe I should look at the UX-3 or UX-1 instead of the DV-60. 2 channel is 75% vs. 25% for video. What is the price difference b/w the DV-60 and the UX-3 and UX-1?
Canucks, I cannot comment on the differences among the UX-3, UX-1, or DV-60, but I can comment on the sound and video of the UX-3. I bought mine used, but it was apparently not fully broken in because it improved significantly over a 3 week period of running 24/7. My previous player was an APL3190 without all the most recent upgrades (not AKM DACS, but older Crystal DACS). I was pleasantly surprised on first listen with the UX-3. After 3 weeks it was not as organic sounding as the APL, but bettered it in dynamics, lows, and even the highs. I have finally broken in the statement level modifications that Steve Huntley (GNSC) did to my UX-3 and all I can say is: "WOW"!!!!! The UX-3 is clearly a great platform and very good in its own right. In stock form, it's a tossup between the older APL3910, but modified it has surpassed all of what I thought possible from a high-end player.
The price difference between DV-50 S and DV-60 is US $ 0,00 (US $ 6.000,00 vs. US $ 6.000,00).
The UX-3 SE I use is US $ 8.950,00 and is worth every penny. Mine will get the US $ 2.790,00 RAM modification by the end of the year.
Esoteric gear is great for modification - probably the last one box player you´ll need unless industry changes format specifications.
As I said - the CD/SACD performance of the DV-60 is compared to the DV-50 S quite dissapointing. DVD with DV-60 is better (colours, resolution, image stability (I use Sony Bravia flatscreen and a professional series Oehlbach interconnect)). DV-50 S casework is more robust.
I've not had an opportunity to audition a DV-60 yet. That being said Esoteric players need at least 300 hours, IMO, to begin hitting their stride. Some customers feel they need even more time. That being said, I feel it is unfair and disingenous to make any comparisons and or final evaluation unless the unit is fully broken in.

Disclaimer: I sell Esoteric.
Audiofeil, I would claim in fact that it makes no sense to evaluate an Esoteric product with any less than 800 hrs on it for RedBook alone.

DISCLAIMER: I am an X-01 owner, but wish I were also an Esoteric dealer. (chuckles!)
Off topic a bit, but I enjoy the multichannel audio environment. The UX-3 uses an I-Link from the output of the player to the processor. Do you need an input on the processor of the same variety at the processor end? I use a Myryad MDP500 G6. Is there an adapter to go from this I-Link cable to a processor or how does it hook up? Thanks. Dave
Audiofeil / Guidocorona: as an Esoteric owner I would say an Esoteric product needs at least 2 years to break in - just kidding. Both units were fully broken in - don´t worry ;)
How many hours of playing time did these devices have on them? A Fully broken in Esoteric unit would have upwards of 40 days of continuous playing time on it. Considering that the DV-60 has just reached the distribution channel, finding a broken in unit so early in the distribution cycle would be quite a feat.
You beat me to the punch Guido. I have serious doubts about the DV-60 being fully broken in. Furthermore, the folks at Teac are very careful about introducing new models. I've met the Japanese engineers and I'm convinced that any new product introduction is an improvement over the previous model. Now before I'm flamed we know that is not always the case but Esoteric is as serious as any manufacturer about their products and reputation.

Once again, I've not had an opportunity to evaluate the DV-60 yet but I hesitate to believe it is inferior to the DV-50s and anybody reading this thread should not based on one person's opinion.
the units were both spinning for 4 days 24 hours the Ayre Acoustics break in CD and a Burmester Test CD. Listening was for about four more days. So the DV-60 had about 200 hours of constant use on it. ANY item I know reaches full potential after 200 hours of constant use - even speakers with ceramique drivers.
But anybody can prove to his or her ears if they prefer the DV-60 to the DV-50 S. I don´t - but thats not important as I have upgraded to UX-3 SE which of course is better than both standard DV-50 S and DV-60 BUT my RAM modded DV-50 S smoked UX-3 SE as well as UX-1.
It all depends on what you would like to spend. Best bang for the buck is def. buying a used DV-50 S and spend some extra US $$$ on modifications and spend the price difference on a nice power cord.
Respectfully Frankpiet, with 200 hrs of playing time, Esoteric gear reaches 20% to 25% of total breakin time. 200 hrs is simply the magic moment when they no longer sound painful to the ear. Keep that creature playing for another 6 week, then bother listening to it once again.

06-27-06: Frankpiet
ANY item I know reaches full potential after 200 hours of constant use - even speakers with ceramique drivers.
I have owned several components including CD players, Universal players, preamps and amplifiers that continued to significantly improve well beyond 200 hours...well into 500+ hours. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it. In fact, at least once I ready was ready to throw in the towel on one component after 400 hours. Then, everything changed at 500 hours. The moral of the story...hang in there and give each component the full break-in time recommended by their manufacturer's. They know what they're talking about.
TVAD, that's the problem. . . so many manufacturers and dealers manage to convince and assure end users that just about 100 hrs of break-in or less are plenty, just to get those bothersome consumers out of their corporate collective hair. In the end they do themselves a royal disservice, as we are witnessing in this particular case.

As for myself, the last device I purchased that required less than 200 hrs of breakin was a bread toaster!
I agree 100% with Frank. I currently have 2 of each, of the Dv-50, Dv-60 and one UX-3.
A dv-50 is very easy to uncork the performance. Dv-60 same Pioneer drive as dv50, but the dv-60 has half the size of the Dv-50 power supply, and a 1/4 of the size what the Dv-50 uses as the HQ 2 channel output.

UX3 has serious potential, ready to be unleashed, but a major bottle neck I found within the core board prevents this beast to be unleashed. (Fix is almost there)
A big plus for the UX-3 the analog board is very similar to the UX-1, another plus the UX-3 has a New (Neo) drive assembly over the UX-1, with a final plus the UX-3 can upscale the Video, via DVI, while the UX-1 cant.

Dv-60 can upscale the video threw the much wanted HDMI,
While the others lack this feature, with the exception of the PO-1 and PO-3. What get me nuts, it has the ABT top chip that can support HDDVD and Blue Ray, looking at press photos, the Dv-60 was shown sporting the 2 optional ram chips to be used with these features to top it off. Meanwhile they disabled the chip to support these formats! :c(.....My Likes of the Dv-60 internal... Cute little R-core t-former, and despite the smaller power board section, nice to see multi - Inductor/capacitor filtration being used.
Unlike the DV-50, the rest of the video section looks great. But all analog sections are nothing like the more robust section used in the Dv-50...

My wish: Give me a dv-50 with the video section of a Dv-60 (re-worked of course)

In reality: total re-worked Dv-50

Ux-3: A beast, re-worked, but I think at this price point,
I would like to see HDMI.

Looking forward to: The Next new model to be released!

Disclaimer: This is my personal IMO, looked at from the inside and out.

All the Best!
Aberdeencomponents / mauimods!
Dv-60 same Pioneer drive as dv50, but the dv-60 has half the size of the Dv-50 power supply, and a 1/4 of the size what the Dv-50 uses as the HQ 2 channel output.

Anthony are you sure the DV-60 still uses the Pioneer transport? The sales literature claims the transport is a "newly designed,engineered and manufactured drive mechanism"

Thanks for your comments.
Tvad: I´ll double check the units again this weekend together with a friend who intends buying either used DV-50 S or new DV-60.
In the meantime the dealer promised to me that the unit will have at least another 150+ hours of spinning break-in CD´s/ music cd´s/sacd´s on it. So we talk about 350 - 400 hours of break-in time. If the unit doesn´t perform 100% after this intense treatment -then simply throw it away as it will take a normal listener several month to reach 400 hours of use.
In the meantime I´ve send my own UX-3 SE to my favourite modder to give him the ultimate treatment..
I spoke with my technical service contact this morning at Esoteric and according to him the transport in the DV-60 is indeed manufactured by them. The Pioneer info posted here previously is erroneous.
Frank, how did the UX-3 SE sound stock? THanks. Dave
it will take a normal listener several month to reach 400 hours of use.
Frankpiet (Threads | Answers)
Nonsense. 400 hours is less than 17 days of 24/7 repeat play. Less than three weeks of burn-in. Just put the player on repeat when you're not listening.
I should like to add that, having a tender heart by nature, I cannot bear the thought of any Esoteric players being thrown out the window in a tizzy after an incomplete break in period of 400 hrs or otherwise. If anyone were tempted to follow Frank's radical advice, please get in touch with me first. I will be delighted to provide you with the mailing address of my humble audiophilic abode, where your abandoned unit will be sure to find an nurturing and loving adoptive family!
Sorry, My Bag.. the Dv-60 does not use the same Pioneer drive as the DV-50. ( was a late night)
Addition: Dv-60 uses Teac's horizontal sled and vertical optical assembly. A plus over the Dv-50. Unlike the Pioneer drive, the control boards are not sandwiched under the drive assembly. They are laid out cleanly, in an uncongested manner. Again, Inductor based ground decoupling is heavily employed, showing a well designed control board. Much more Robust engineered, over the Pioneer dive assembly design. In regards to the Dv-60 power board, despite being a smaller footprint over the Dv-60, as above, inductor based filtration, is used with a well designed power board, over the Dv-50.

Again sorry for the mix-up regarding drive info.

Aberdeencomponents /Mauimods
Tvad: you´re a luky man. With my working hours I´m happy if I find an hour time per day for intense listening - as many friends of mine. So one hour per day times 400 is ... ;)
Guidocorona: I hope nobody follows my "radical advice" - but which manufacturer produces stuff that only performs at its best after hundreds of hours of use? Just imagine a BMW 650ci would only accelerate properly after 10.000km driving or a Pateck watch that shows the corretc time after a month of constant wearing.. ??
Don´t forget: most high-end units have already surpassed 30 to 100 hours of break in at the factory due to intense testing and listening tests.

06-28-06: Frankpiet
Tvad: you´re a luky man. With my working hours I´m happy if I find an hour time per day for intense listening - as many friends of mine. So one hour per day times 400 is ... ;)
Frank, do we have a language barrier here? Am I being unclear, or are you just being obstinate? Play the darn thing 24/7 for 17 days. The rest of your system does not have to powered up, and you do not have to be present. Viola! 400+ hours of burn in in less than three weeks.

I'm done trying to explain this elementary concept.

06-28-06: Chichiuno
Sorry, My Bag.. the Dv-60 does not use the same Pioneer drive as the DV-50. ( was a late night)

Thanks for the clarification, I hope the new transport proves reliable.

Anthony, after reading all your comments on the new DV-60, I'm wondering where the big reduction in overal weight (47 lbs. vs 31 lbs.) comes from? I read that Teac claims to be using aluminum top and side panels on the DV-60. That would account for some weight reduction. Perhaps the new transport is substantialy lighter?
Sorry Frankpiet, I have no interest in cars.I broke in My X-01 for approx 850 hrs of almost uninterrupted playing time, while I left the rest of the system turned off days at a time. It turns out I should have broken it in for a couple of more hundred hrs, as the sound actually still kept refining after that milestone.

The DV50(s) units weight comes from the heavy metal (lol) bottom panel (mostly), and middle top panel and some from the two side panels. When one removes the panels and side covers, the unit is actually pretty light after that point. The new DV-60 uses a one peice lighter aluminum top cover and apparently lighter (and thinner) bottom plate. The DV-50(s) feels more like a tank in comparison.
How did you confirm it took 850 hrs+, for the X-01 to break in?

Me/myself/and I
Thanks Fly, that makes sense, with the bottom plate in particular would make a big difference.

Here are some weights (in LBS.) of other machines for kicks:

Esoteric DV-50 47#
Esoteric DV-60 31#
Esoteric UX-3SE 52#
Esoteric UX-1 55#

AYRE C-5XE 26# (No Video)
DENON 3910 21#
MARANTZ DV-9600 19#
Keep in mind that the Linn Unidisc weighs something like 20# or less...and most folks really like the way it sounds too. I gather several Esoteric units use very thick solid steel cases which is where the bulk of the weight comes from. Does this help with vibration control? Who knows...?

In the end, I feel the weight has little bearing on the actual CDP performance. Nevertheless you certainly do "feel" like you're getting your money's worth when it's heavy.
Anthony, After 850 hrs of playing time I thought the X-01 sound had stopped changing. However, with hindsight, I realize now that a subtle evolution still took place until the unit had approx 1200 hours of playing time on it.
How the heck do you keep track of the playing time?!!

Jeeze, after I break something in for a couple of days in the beginning, I loose track completely. I guess I just can't count past about 200. ;-)
Ah yes of course DBLD, no magic to it. . . up to 800 hrs the beast was on full time almost 24/7 for almost 6 weeks, with the rest of the system turned off unless I wanted to do some listening. After that point I slowed down a little.
DBLD, the weight DOES help alot. Bass, and focus some of the gains noticed One really nice feature is the 3 footers. Integrated cones with bases. In a triangular configuration.

DV-60 update!
Using the Dv-60 as a "TRANSPORT ONLY", proved to be superior over the Dv-50. The sound quality is quite stunning. Even, when compared to a highly Modded Dv-50s. Its quite obvious, as it should, since it spins the Cd at a higher rate, loading Bit perfect extractments in to memory buffers. The buffers are large enough to hold about 8 to 10 seconds of Redbook. What really surprised me, it was the best buffer driven transport I heard to date. Usually, with other buffer driven digital sources, Especially, like with the SB3, and other "bit perfect" COMPUTER based sources, there is such a noticeble "grunge" with in soundstage that made the music hard on the ears. I always ended up hitting "next" on the remote, or turned the volume down, or just shut it off altogether.
This is what the Dv-60 Transport mechanism lacks, and it’s that grudge. (YES! A GOOD THING.)
So, where did that grunge go? Looking at the transport control boards, I see a very well laid out, un-conjested PC board design. It’s not the conventional "sandwiched" design, under the transport mechanism kinds..... Instead, it's mounted away from the transport, by its side. Designs as such are noted for a much lower HF noise floor. I can say this has a major impact to do with the maintaining the data integrity that is extracted from the Cd.
And this is why the sound quality is fabulous.
I have yet to fully tap the potential of the Video, due to my HDTV lacking a HDMI input. What I heard from "my contact" when the video is upscale threw the HDMI output, a DVD would look like it was HDTV. And from the Dv-60's digital output, standpoint alone, I see no reason to doubt it!

Like I said, I like more weight just because it make me feel like I am getting what I'm paying for...totally a psychological thing with me. Nevertheless, I have had lighter weight gear crush heavy gear when listened to, so it is not at all a consideration/deciding factor for me. Besides, once it is in place, no one knows the weight.

Funny thing - another AgoNer has pointed out that all my gear is big, heavy, or ugly…or some combination thereof. :-)
DV-60 vs. DV-50 S vs. UX-3 SE update. After now roughly 450hrs. of playing time the DV-60 S is still inferior to the DV-50 S playing CD and SACD and still far away from a UX-3 SE performance. Regarding DVD-video DV-60 is quite a bit better than DV-50 S and more flexible.
Frankpiet, on 6/27, you posted the following:
06-27-06: Frankpiet
the units were both spinning for 4 days 24 hours the Ayre Acoustics break in CD and a Burmester Test CD. Listening was for about four more days. So the DV-60 had about 200 hours of constant use on it.
That was 5 days ago...120 hours ago. How could the DV-60 now have 450 hours on it? 200+120=320 hours. 130 hours short of 450 by my calculation.
Play the darn thing 24/7 for 17 days.

Since lots of people are dumping their DV50S models to buy a DV60, I was thinking about picking up a used one. You just talked me out of it. 400 hours of constant spinning is abuse, not break-in.
>>After now roughly 450hrs. of playing time the DV-60 S is still inferior to the DV-50 S<<

I doubt both the hours and the product evaluation.
Regarding my post above - before anyone jumps all over me - I don't question that Esoteric has done more to change the DV-60 from the DV-50, I just feel that what I mentioned would be the big points that alone would warrant a new model.
rest assured that the DV-50(S) is built very well and will easily handle many more hours than just 400.

Hello Dlbd - I'm not questioning the overall build quality of the DV-50S. Nor do I think that a DV-50S can't handle 400 hours of total playing time. That's not at all what I was referring to.

The post I responded to recommended "break-in" via 400 hours of UNINTERRUPTED playback. I do not think it was designed for this. I don't care how good the build quality is, it's still an electromechanical device with a limited lifespan. 400 hours of uninterrupted playback isn't break-in, it's accelerated wear.

So, if this has been the standard "break-in" regimen that most DV-50S owners have followed, I won't be buying a used one. That was my point.
So, if this has been the standard "break-in" regimen that most DV-50S owners have followed, I won't be buying a used one. That was my point.
Rex (System | Threads | Answers)
I understand your concern, Rex, but I think you're safe. The accelerated method has been suggested by several modifiers, and I've used this method on five of my digital players with absolutely no deleterious effect. If you're concerned about a particular unit, then simply ask the owner how the unit was broken in.

As an alternative, one can use a semi-accelerated method by running the player on repeat overnight and turning it off in the morning. The process three times as long, but still faster than normal listening sessions.