Lyngdorf CD-1

Anyone compaired this unit, to more expensive dacs and/ or cdp's?
I have heard impressive things of this unit.
I am about to switch the Benchmark.
D42f0dc5 eeff 491c 92ec a58d534b32f4inpieces

I made a direct comparison between Lyngdorf Cd-1 and Naim CD5x. The rest of the system was: Lyngdorf SDAi-2175 and B&Ws 804. All Cables were Nordost (interconnects were Nordost Valhalla).

I was playing the same CDs in both players at the same time and by switching the amp's inputs could hear the differences. They were not so large but Naim had a bit more fluent sound with better bass reproduction. For those reasons I decided to go for Naim and soon after I bought it.

Lyngdorf CD-1 has an advantage though that it can be upgraded by adding an external DAC. Naim CD5x can only be upgraded by adding an external power supply, which I did later by adding Flatcap 2x.
Interesting. May i ask, if you used Nordost cables at both cdps, i guess you used balanced connection at the Lyngdorf and single ended at Naim?
From what i have heard, the CD-1 benefits greatly going balanced.
As for what i have been told, bass reproduction and extension, in particular, is what is best at the Lyngdorf.
I would not compair against units twice (or more) it's price. If so, i go for Wadia 381.
Well, i am about to use the CD-1 over my Benchmark Dac-1 usb. Hope i did a wise choice. It will be connected to Wyred4sound's sti-1000.
I will do a face to face test next week, CD-1 vs Dac-1 usb.
I guess, for me, sonics and overall presentation is the key. What i've noticed with some cdps, Gryphon CDP-1, Meridian 588 for instance, is the fact that bass can be solid and firm, with lesser texture and air.
In particular bass reproduction seems always costly.
getting both the texture, weight, 3-d and dynamical impact,... seems it's often quite subjective, which key feature that is prefered.
When it comes to air, space resolution and 3-d:
best i've heard is Teac P-70 & D-70. But then again, these units had similar (i hope you understand what i mean here) sonics as Benchmark. At times, midbass and lower midrange seemed a little lean on warmth and not so physical.
When i had P-70 & D-70, i had no chance buying a dedictaed preamp. So, i sold the Teac combo an dbought Krell KPS 25sc. This piece made bass like a sledge hammer and soundstaged like nothing else. But it was way off on all other areas compaired to the Teac combo. Resolution and 3-s was gone in compairson.

I wonder when you say fluid, do you mean it's more easy going and leaner in dynamical contrast?
Me for instance, i am a beat freak. A lesser dynamical impact and contrast is completely wrong direction for me. Dynamical outbursts, rendered with impact and texture, that is what i look for. That is without the bass is too overwhelming doing midrange blurr and boomy sound.

I remember when i used to have really expensive units, Krell 600c, 700cx, KPS 25sc, KRC-HR, KCT, KPS 28c, Teac P-70 & D-70 (previously owned). PMC MB-2 and IB-2 (2 week at home demo), Wilson Benesch ACT (owned) etc. I did many times find myself somewhat disturbed over the fact that reproduction was on a level so high, it made many cd's negative aspects very highlighted.

I had a Levinson ML 390s for a very good price going on. But i dropped out at that unit. Many customers have reported problems with drive mechanism and reading errors.
I will come back to this thread and report what i noticed beteween CD-1 and Dac-1.
I believe many users find the pricing for both Benchmark, Lyngdorf, Stello dacs etc to be in a somewhat more buyable price range.
Thanks for your input!