Thank you TJ for this excellent thread. Not having had the opportunity of listening to the Esoteric stack, I have auditioned at length, then finally purchased the Teac Esoteric X-01 single box. My findings concur with Branimir: a type 1 sound. . . one with clenliness, ease, liquidity and a great 'heart'.
not to forget its huge 3d well focused soundstage and the ever-present sense of air and room decay around instruments. I listen only to classical music, mostly chamber and the X-01 staggers me with its nuance and microdynamics.
I have now just over 300 hrs on it and the creature is coming into its own and is still changing.
One interesting note: I recently had the opportunity to audition the X-01 augmented by the G0S masterclock. . . over the course of a whole evening I could detect a discernable improvement only on a couple of recordings. Changing IC from Panther Audioquest to Sky made instead a quantum leap improvement.
And one question: has anyone gathered any info about the brand new Esoteric P03/D03 combo? |
Alex, I suspect you may be correct. It was exactly my guess. . . that the external clock will make a difference mostly when synchronizing multiple units. But I will give the G0S another chance in a couple of weeks in a friend's system. It will be an interesting yet academic exercise, as I do not plan to get one, unless it truly blew me away, which I suspect won't be terribly likely. |
I confirm subjective impressions of redbook sound of D70/P70 so close to X-01 to make comparison a little difficult. P70/D70 withdrawn in North America. Newer VU version available only in Europ/Asia. Also fair to remember that D70/P70 approx one quarter the price of new P01/D01 combo, and likely half the price of new P03/D03 two box combo.
Guido
|
I have just posted a mini review of the sonic changes caused by Epiphany and Shunyata Python Helix VX on Esoteric X-01. See:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1126432063&openmine&zzGuidocorona&4&5#Guidocorona |
Deshapiro, if you think X-01 was good, wait until it passes the 450 hrs of break in mark.
At 300 hours mine still showed some etched treble on several of my recordings, e.g. Trevor Pinnock playing J. S. Bach Partitas on cembalo [Archiv 451-493-2]. I played the same recording again yesterday, approx at the 480 hrs mark. The etched treble has now turned into a delicate lace-like shimmer at the top.
Mgottlieb suggests the breakin process should likely be extended past the 750 hours mark. I am looking forward to it! |
I have just posted a relatively detailed listening comparison of the Shunyata Anaconda Helix Alpha and Anaconda Helix VX on a thread entitled "A Tale Of Two. . . Anacondas (Helix)". You will find it at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1146623467&openfrom&1&4#1
For the comparison Babybear and I connected the Anacondas to the X-01 Limited in his system, hence I thought of putting a pointer to the article in this thread. |
Instead of UX-1, Why not try the X-01 instead, which is optimized for audio with twice the DAC chips? You would not have experienced the residual brightness. I Agree about Shunyata Anaconda being an ideal match for UX-1/X-01. new Shunyata Python Helix even better than original Anaconda. |
No Pubul57, your notion is a fossil from several years ago. For several years now, there has been no performance penalty on twin format players. fact is that some recent design upsample Redbook to DSD with extremely good results. . . e.g. TEAC X-01 D2 |
Branimir, could you get any more info on the new devices? X-01 Limited and the new P03/D03 combo would be of particular interest. |
David, welcome to the WWX (Wonderful World of X-01)!
Seriously, put the baby on repeat play and let it play for a few weeks. Between 800 and 1000 hrs of redbook it will truly start to shine on your CDs. SACD will require somewhat shorter breakin afterwards. |
George, there is no magic change between the 800 hrs and the 1K hrs break in mark in X-01. Rather, this is the time when a user will likely lift all residual reservations or qualification on the X-01 performance. When the product is brand new, the user is likely to notice a certain amount of tightness in the overall sound and a moderate to very significant amount of harshness in the treble. This will be noticeable in most CDs. As you break in the unit, there is progressive opening of the stage, frequency range extends, mids get fleshed out, harmonics ring more openly, and treble becomes more extended and clean. More and more CD listening experiences will move to the, good/excellent/glorious categories. You will find less and less CDs that you will categorize as problematic and etched. To make an example, my recording of the Dumka Piano Quintet Op. 81A by Antonin Dvorak played by the Tokyo Quartet et al. (CBS Masterworks MK 44920)
lost its treble etch at the 500 mark. Yet Lara St. John playing Bach works for violin solo on HDCD was still very unpleasant, and became not only listenable but downright glorious after just over 900 hrs of break in. And in my collection, this was the very last CD to hold out as a residual 'problem child'.
As for the nature of physical or electrical changes involved in electronics break in: I haven't the foggiest idea! |
Fcrowder, I have tried G0S on standard X-01. I found its effect to be negligible in most situations. In most cases I could not even detect when it was activated/deactivated during a blind test, that is the clock was turned on/off randomly without me meing told of thechange. |
A new Teac X-01 D2? OK, now I am officially depressed! |
Has anyone been able to compare the Teac Esoteric P03/D03 with the X-01 Limited? |
Sychdeli, are you sure your APL-modified UX-1 is truly a NWO-2 with 20 DACs per channel, and not a NWO-1 with 10 DAC chips per channel? I have read on the APL forums that Alex Peychev from APL intends to show an NWO-2 at CES 2007, but I was not aware he had even built one prototype of this machine as yet. Even in the case of NWO-1, you may be one of the very first people to take delivery of the unit. Please do let us know more about its sound as it breaks in and how it differentiates from your other players. |
Thank you KOPS, unfortunately the X-03 is not even at the sonic level of X-01, which is below sonic level of X01 Limited. If the $6K X-03 sounded just as good as the $25K P03/D-03 combo I'd be truly surprised. |
Very intriguing Branimir, would you mind elaborating sonic differences between P03/D03 combo and X-01 Limited? Thanks, Guido |
Thank you very much Branimir. Yet it would be interesting to verify if the comparison with the P03/D03 still held when the X-01 is replaced with the X-01 Limited, which is in itself a significant improvement over the original. |
Thank you Alex, this is the first time I read a good characterization of the AD sound. A twist to the whole matter though is the fact that TEAC adopted the AD chips for the $25K P03/D03 combo. Have you heard it. I wonder at this point if TEAC is abandoning Burr Brown in favor of AD throughout its Esoteric Line for the sake of facile euphony. |
Branimir, that was an amusing and fair article. My own observations on a couple of X-01 players under control of a G0s clock closely match Babybears inconclusive findings. Theory is that these external clocks have probably more impact on multibox units such as P01/D01. What's your own finding Branimir?
I especially enjoyed the article's comment in the conclusion section:
"After all, if the razzle-dazzle technology implemented in the reclocker operates with such
subtlety on the X-03, it means that the latter is scarily good on its very own terms." |
Thank you Audiofeil, did not know I had turned Japanese. A very impressive system list. I know Pass gear is fully differentially balanced, but I do not know about the rest of your gear. And have you tried to swap a balanced ICs from the X-01 to the linestage with an identical single ended one, while maintaining the rest of the fully differentially balanced system intact?
Thank you Alex, your post definitely corroborates TEAC's recommendation to run the X-01 in balanced mode for best results, as well as my own findings with the balanced/single-ended switch on the REF 3. |
My apologies Teajay, your info about XA100 and X350.5 was actually very useful. . . and a little depressing, as the implication may be that if I ever acquire MG 20.1 I may need to by amp them, keeping my Rowlands 7M on the bottom, with XA100 or similar at the top. . . which shall certainly cause She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed to come down on me with a bloody axe, or perhaps even with a rusty draguinasse! I'd love to discuss, but may be not on this thread.
On X-01 vs X-01 LTD, I have heard both, on the same system, but not during the same session. I have the suspicion that the difference may be relatively significant. Ltd seems to have even greater grace, authority detail, and musicality than original X-01, but until Babybear and I get both units on the same system for a good comparison session, I can only give educated memory driven impressions. On P03/D03 vs X-01 Limited, my experience is solely hearsay by dereferencing. I have heard from one experienced listener who is familiar with both models in very similar systems, but not played in an a/b situation. They appear to favor X-01 over P03/D03: the combo may be perhaps sweeter, or slightly euphonic, while the X-01 may have an edge in detail, authority and realism. Yet, until I have the opportunity of trying things for myself, I will truly not know even my own brand of totally subjective truth. |
Germanboxer, as far as I know the X-03 uses a lighter, cost engineered version of the VRDS transport mechanism, which may explain the sonic difference with UX-1 that Branimir is suggesting. As far as I know, this is the simplified/cheaper VRDS that TEAC also sells to other manufacturers, such as WADIA. |
Germanboxers, I believe you correct about DAC config. Yet, I seem to recall Tim Crable at TEAC telling me that the transports on X-03 is a lesser brother of those found on X-01 and UX-1. |
Audiofail, could you qualify your statement further? What where the components downchain from the Esoteric gear with which you experienced no difference running balanced or single ended. I do admit I am slightly surprised at your findings. X-01 for one is a fully differential balanced design. I am personally running it on a fully differentially balanced system comprising of an X-01, ARC Ref 3 and Rowland 7M monos with Audioquest Sky XLR ICs. If I turn off the balanced signal on the Ref 3, there is a huge sonic difference. Admittedly, I have not tried to use a single ended length of Sky between my X-01 and the Ref 3 for validation. |
AudioFail, I admire your sense of fairplay, but. . . you would not be commenting between what you sell and some other player. You would be telling us your impression between two current versions of a device you sell. . . thus no unfair competition. Please do tell us about your comparative impressions of X-01 Ltd and X-01 D2. And as you are at it, you might as well comment on the differences you perceive between X-01 D2 and the mighty P03/D03 combo. Saluti, Guido |
Crushes? Is it that heavy? Sounds ominous! |
Lush, the friendly audiofools gathering at this particular watering hole have intentionally avoided those more earthy metaphores that happily remind us of highway wrecks, RobotWars, pro wrestling matches, and roaches and stinkbugs making a satisfying 'krunch' underfoot. Yet, if you have the opportunity of listening and comparing this device directly against some of the units being discussed here, please do post to this thread and share with us your weighty findings. |
Lush, no comment was meant 'ad hominem.' The only experience I have with modded players is limited to a late model of the APL 1000. It performed below my hope and expectations when compared directly to an original X-01, even though the APL 1000 was well broken in and the X-01 was rather new. Being the pedigrees of the APL 1000 and X-01 not at the same level, the comparison may not have a lot of meaning. I would not want to apply the induction step at this point and come up with a generalized statement about inherent superiority of stock machines though. Each instance of modded player can be only evaluated on its own merits. It is worth mentioning however that any third party modification to a stock unit is likely to void the original manufacturer's warranty. As for playing another round of 'Ma' CDp's More Heavier'n Yourn', my X-01 hovers around the 60 Lbs mark, which makes it quite a potential 'crusher' of various features of gender-neutral human anatomy, when not handled carefully, that is. |
Chris, how do the DC-91 and the Stello differ sonically? And how are they alike? |
Henryhk, you may want to contact Jonathan Tinn directly at (503) 221-0465. Or send him a private message. MikeLavigne had also created a short lived thread discussing the EMM Signature. While the thread has since been pulled, he can send you his findings privately if you contact him via email. |
You may be able to find the info you are seeking on Weiss Media and Accustic by reading this thread from the very beginning. |
Teajay
, unfortunately there are no Pass dealers in Austin. I'll try to get to a Pass dealer in one of my next trips around the country. Yes I'd love to listen to an XA, but as for being in the market for an amp upgrade. . . only in my wildest dreams. . . 'cause of WAF and all She Who Must Be Obeyed entails! |
Pardales, what DACs have you compared the Altmann Attraction directly against? The page you kindly pointed us to is certainly interesting, yet statements like the following concern me:
"Like the BYOB amplifier, the complete electronic assembly of the Attraction DAC is vibrationally optimized, as the pcb is flat-press-mounted on a specially
treated spruce-board. This construction is time-consuming during manufacture, but improves sound quality, as all components are mechanically coupled to
a musical sound board."
Sound boards are part of the mechanical sound amplifier -- also called resonator -- found in most acoustic string instruments. They operate on mechanical vibrations ranging roughly from 20Hz to 20Khz, depending on size etc. . . I am not aware the operation of precision electronic is improved by having the chips tossed about on a surface tuned to vibrate at audible frequencies. If the Altmann design truly works, it may be one of those cases where a device excels in spite of its engineering principles, rather than because of them. |
Audiofeil, TEAC does not list the DV50 as yet on its USA site. Do you have any info on it? |
Thank you pardales, I read some of Altmann's articles. I would characterize them as brilliant pseudoscientific pieces of misdirection. Caveat emptor! |
My apologies to Bill. Once again I have accidentally mistyped your moniker. Please rest assured that no pun, misplaced jocularity, nor artful slight was intended. However, given the fact that I do not see what I type, some occasional annoying homophonic typos may reoccur in the future. GApologies in advance. . |
Teajay, your impressions of DP-78 match exactly my own on the older DP-77. Definitely sweet. . . but very euphonic. While I have commented elsewhere that the faithful reproduction of live music is a pipe dream at best, and that the best gear aims much more at hyperrealism than at pure realism, nevertheless, music reproduction attempts to capture or glorify the essence or 'soul' of a performance or of an instrument. Conversely, I found the sound of the Accuphase DP-77 to be a delightful yet arbitrary fantasy over what instruments do for living, almost slightly cartoonish in its glossy appearance. |
Thank you Fsarc, I assume that by not denying the identity of 'brand B', you confirm my hypothesis of it being a PD MPS-5. Do you know if both configurations were equally broken in?
I'd be interesting in you commenting further about the sonic advantages that you found in removing the ARC Ref 3 from the system.
Guido |
Marti, have you consider just experimenting and finding out what setting you enjoy the best? You can't break the machine no matter what settings you select. . . let us know your findings. |
Is the contrast of a compressed digital format with the sound of an uncompressed source on vinyl a meaningful instantiation of the digital vs analog debate? |
Fsarc, what combination of transport, ICs and PCs did you use with the Theta Gen VIII? And could you give us some detail on how this combination may have exceeded in your view the performance of the single box PD MPS-5? [I can only guess that this is the single box player you are referring to] G. |
Pupil57, there seems to be now a clear trend toward flexible front end devices that supply both digital inputs and outputs.... Example is the Esoteric K-01 and K-03 I believe. Furthermore, manufacturers that have traditionally stayed out of the front end arena because of sheer distrust of moving parts, are starting to introduce DAC-only products... see for example the $10K Rowland Aeris shown at CES, fed by Mac minis with Amara.
Considering that I have historically kept my front end players for 5 to 10 years each, I venture to suspect that my next front end will be flexible enough to accomodate a server-based transport. Whether the connection between transport and DAC will be USB, HDMI, Wi-Fi, Ethernet, Light Peak, or other.... is still undetermined. |
Esoteric appears to have introduced its newest 2-box reference combo.... P-02/D02. It is still unclear if in the USA P-02/D-02 replaces P-03/D-03, or they bridge the gap with the P-01/D-01 combo. The US Esoteric site has not yet been updated with the new devices, but the Japanese site features an English section with all the info. Alex Peychev has kindly provided a link to the P-02/D-02 page in another thread, which I have copied below:
http://www.esoteric.jp/products/esoteric/d02/indexe.html
If anyone has the opportunity to see/listen to these new devices, please post your impressions.
G. |
Lloydelee21, it is most probable that the auditorily obsessive contributors to this august thread mostly listen with their ears. you may have noted that I have deliberately asked for listening impressions of P02/D02, as technology by itself does not always correlate to sound... On the other hand, my own admittedly modest experience with Esoteric gear suggests there exists at least a partial correlation of technology deployed by Esoteric with their sound. As such, am admittedly intrigued by any possible effect of hopefully well executed 35 bit processing on P02/D02. |
Thank you Lloydelee21, if I ever manage to do some serious listening of P02/D02, I will definitely post my totally subjective findings on the combo. G. |
Hi Highfidelitea, what is your budget for transport? Budget for DAC? Are you looking for new or used? |
