Relief? The New Digital Players


On a digital note is anyone relieved that the preliminary reports on the new digital format/players are not all that favoring IMO? I keep hearing the word "thin" used to describe the sound, both from this site as well as a few dealers that have attended trade shows. I have wanted a second CD source and have been kind of placed on hold in the interim. Thin would not be the way to go with our current system which I do not wish to change, and in which I had planned on using the new player, and the old one in a second system. If the new format does not sound miles better I do not see the industry changing formats anytime soon. How good are the new players? Are they thin sounding as I have heard to date or is there more to it?
128x128dekay

Showing 7 responses by dekay

Mfgrep: Your point and the cost now make me think that new CD's would most likely be produced in both new and "old" formats for many many years to come. I was not aware that the new players were that expensive. If they are all that high they are not exactly in a "chicken in every pot" price category. Though like anything else new they would come down in time as R & D expenses are recaptured. I can't believe that my thinking has been so off on this subject, yes I can. I have passed up a few killer deals on used CD players that friends were selling.
Jrg: Thanks for the info. and the site. $1500.00 is a real world price for a player. I will probably wait until there are a few more choices available. We are expecting a nice chunk of change and the deal is that I get to spend as much on gear as my wife does on a an English leather club chair. Pretty sweet deal, cause I like the chairs too. I have just been saying no to the purchase out of habit.
Hi Robert: My first impressions of SACD came from posts at this site and as I mentioned a few dealers (two to be exact). Since then I have been going through the threads at Audio Asylum and have been getting favorable views of the format and a better understanding of the cost of the equipment. I would now be interested in auditioning an SACD player. Unfortunately the $1500.00 Sony looks to be a top loader from the photos that I have viewed. My cats like to sack out on the top of the CD player and a top loader would not be an option for me. My smallest and "best sounding" cat has been nicknamed "Sandbag". I also kind of understand (I think) that many of these will be universal players and will do it all. As long as the one I pick is a step up from my CAL Icon II in musicality when playing standard CD's as well as doing the new format thing as an additional improvement I figure that I can't really lose. The SACD's at $30.00+ would be a treat as apposed to the norm as long as they remain at such prices. Right now as it stands "there are no treats". The views in this thread have helped straighten my thinking on the subject of SACD and hopefully I will be able to curb my fears of the other formats (DVD-A, and any others) mentioned that I know nothing about with added knowledge. By the way the more expensive versions that I have seen on the web are awsome looking players and would really place my cats on a pedestal.
The Meridians etc. are more than I would like to pay. My real world favorites have been the Theta Miles and the older Audio Resolution which are still a stretch budget wise even used but are still tempting. If I considered either I would want to compare a cheaper SACD to put my mind at rest. My favorite new inexpensive and "musical" player has been the Audio Refinement which I had for a couple of weeks but ended up giving it to my stepson. It was not any better than my CAL II though. I guess that I will just have to talk myself into spending a little more on the next player.
Hi Sedond: I have a bare bones system. A Musical Fidelity X-A1 integrated now with the X-A50 mono blocks on order in Canada that should arrive in a couple of weeks to bi-amp a pair of Castle Isis moniters. The player is a CAL Icon MkII with vibropods and an HT power cord as well as the Monster 2000 power conditioner. Speaker cable is Kimber 4VS which will be addressed when I bi-amp. Interconnects are Homregrown Super Silver's and HT Truthlinks. This is our living room system. I have thought about halting my plans for the MF gear (the power amps will be around $800.00) and going with your suggestion, but I really want to finish this system as it was first imagined. The snag was that the X series power amps were no longer available in the US after I picked up the X-A1. Now that I have located a pair I am compelled to complete what I started out to do in the beginning. I suspect that I will eventually end up with a tube preamp SS amp combo in the living room someway down the line but am having fun with the MF gear and would like to work it to the bone before I go into something else. I have also been unemployed the past year and will wait until I get back on my feet before I drop big bucks into equipment (by big bucks I probably mean half of what most of the people at this site spend on gear). Out of boredom I am planning a little SET system for the spare bedroom that we may move the computer into. This is where I will need a second player and figured that I may as well upgrade the CAL in the living room system when I buy it. The CAL will go into the bedroom system. Curiously enough if I buy Reynaud or Coincident for the SET setup I will have my better speakers in the bedroom which bothers me for some reason. Also of interest are the DIY personal nearfield planar speakers noted at the Decware site which would eliminate the need for expensive speakers in the SET system if the computer goes into that room, you should check them out if you use computer speakers. Anyway I totally agree with your suggestion and hopefully will be able to implement it at a future date. I have a nice little list of tube preamps and their characteristics (prepared from the posts at this site) tucked away for when that time comes. I really enjoy the "Top Ten" threads.
I guess that I stopped auditioning to soon with the Arcam players, they did have the model 9 in stock. The 8SE had more detail than my CAL and almost as much bass, it just did not sound as musical. I do not know how to desrcibe what it missed that I am looking for. I have the same problem with describing cables. Sam at this site once used the word "organic" when reviewing something and that seems like a good word for it. Though I would still be unable to describe in other words what "organic" sounds like. I have noticed that they get a little stressed out at the shops when I end an audition after a cut or two. But at least I know what I am looking for, I just don't know how to desribe it. Craig, we only have around 100 CD's to date 75% of them from flea markets and thrift stores. I buy both music that I am familiar with and like as well as stuff that looks interesting that I do not have a clue about, since the price is right. Yesterday I picked up a Forever Tango CD that turned out to be a "keeper" as you say. I am fortunate in that I am less than an hours drive from Uscale Audio that I read about at this site. I have not gone down there yet, but will do so before I commit to a SET or new player. I get the impression that he has gobs of good used gear on a continuous basis. Anyway I thank you all for your different viewpoints on this subject and now feel much clearer in my perspective. I am certain that you have also helped a lot of lookylous that read but do not write.
Mf claims that the output/input of all their equipment is matched for this purpose. Though I do not know if they are talking inter species - X vs A. I have looked at the A line but cannot stand the appearance. Gold and stainless steel together looks like a cheap and or overpriced watch to me. I have ruled it out because of this. I also believe that it is more neutral sounding which I will admit is not my taste in electonics. I have always preferred tube gear and find the X series to be a compromise that I can live with for now. The midrange of the X gear is very nice.