Redwood garden, you may also want to add to your auditioning list the TEAC X-03 SE which is in your price range when new. The X-01 gets in your range when used. Even though you listen solely to Redbooks, do not worry to much if a device sports supplementary formats capabilities. . . just choose the unit whose Redbook sound pleases you the most. . . . and remember. . . the 'best' simply does not exist! |
"keep an opened mind to the modded players,"
Right on JP, and please be understanding of those original manufacturers when they look at you real funny like, the day you bring them that little beauty under warranty, just because it stopped working prior to the expiration of the warranty. And be even more understanding of their incredible sense of humor, when -- laughing their head off -- they point at that obscure little finprint on the warranty card which -- truth to tell -- did warn all and concerned about immediate, sudden and catastrophic loss of warranty coverage upon the machine even being smelled by unauthorized hands, let alone lovingly yet radically 'improved' by a solder-gun-happy modder-genius.
As usual. . . Caveat Emptor! |
Alex, I am delighted to see that you have lately addressed some of the considerable outstanding APL customer service challenges. I do understand perfectly that not being the OEM makes it more difficult, as control of parts sourcing is per se more limited because of the additional steps of indirection. On the other hand, some of APL's service issues do not seem to have been resolved as yet, although their older e-trails have mostly being clensed from the APL fora by Mr. Rainwater, I presume.
DBLD, I am not personally interested in modders 'helping out' with a repair. I personally rather prefer a clearly defined and legally binding statement of limited warranty, from an original manufacturer. Of course, not all OEM were created equal. . . once again. . . Caveat Emptor! |
Jp1208
, I guess I do not believe in revolving-door equipment. I purchased my first CDP in 1984 (a MCIntosh MCD 7000, replaced it in 1994 with an EAD P100 D7000 Mk. 3 combo. Replaced these in 2005 with Esoteric X-01.
Alex, supply chain challenges are one thing, poor customer communications are another, both concerning units in need of repair, and new order status. I am delighted that Mr. Rainwater has taken it upon himself to freshen up APL's image by purging most traces of customer dissatisfaction from the APL fora, and that APL has since been able to address a good number -- if not the totality -- of long outstanding customer situations. |
I am always concerned when heavy and expensive equipment is running the risk of being blown away. . . must be global warming or something causing the problem. |
I find it amusing that modded units are always compared to the Esoteric UX-1, whose audio implementation is intentionally almost an afterthought, rather than with the X-01 Limited, which is optimized for Audio only. I do admit that my only exposure to modded unit is limited to A heavily reingineered APL 1000, whose Redbook and SACD performance was painfully disappointing when compared to a not even completely broken in Esoteric X-01 original version. I suppose/hope modded players have evolved since then. Yet, the owner of that APL 1000 has sold the APL very quickly and purchased the X-01. So did I, after listening to his modified 1000. . . . to state it bluntly there was no contest. |
TVAD, yes of course you are correct, the comparison of an APL 1000 vintage late 2004, even sporting the very latest engineering changes available at that time, is not a fair comparison with a player which retails for approximately twice as much, even though the latter was released in Japan at a similar time. In some sense that was my very point, the APL 1000 was quite a good performer at its price point, yet not necessarily the very last cry in performance at any price that it was sometimes claimed to be.
As you correctly also point out, I have not had the opportunity of auditioning an APL 3910, nor an NWO-1, nor an NW-02. Comparing one of them directly with an X-01 Limited -- the current latest and greatest in TEAC single-box purely audio players -- would be an extremely intriguing musical experience. Of course any unit involved would need to be completely broken in prior to any serious listening, or the entire exercise would be devoid of meaning. Still, at least in the case of an X-01 Limited pitted against the NWO-1 and NWO-2, the comparison would be in a sense that of an apple -- or at least of a tangerine -- with a couple of oranges, if you only consider the significant list price difference of a stock X-01 with these UX-1 based reingeneered units. |
Alex, only Babybear, who is currently away on vacation, has the exact list of ECs and value of his unit, which was not however a basic modified unit, but a maximized one. He only can comment on its cost further on his return. On the other hand, at the time of my audition, there was a general confidence in you and the APL tribe alike, that any APL unit would outperform any stock player of any price. A more realistic position should be that at any price point, a quality and well re-engineered unit may have a greater than average chance of outperforming a stock unit of similar market value.
I did go into the audition fully expecting the APL 1000 to outperform the X-01. It did not. The opposite was true, by a significant margin. Setting realistic customer expectation is part of Marketing/sales skill building. To tell the truth, I learned a few hard lessons in this area myself in my own work during recent times.
Concerning X-01 vs NWO-2, the issue is not so much that of NWO-2 yielding higher performance than X-01, but:
1. Does the targeted re-engineered player exceed the performance of stock players in its own market price point, where the price is the typical transaction price for such units, rather than their list price.
2. Does any performance advantage of the re-engineered player for the automatic and immediate loss of manufacturer's warranty coverage on the original unit? Please note that TEAC has stated very clearly that they will not repair any modified machines, regardless of its warranty status.
3. Will the re-engineered unit be as reliable as the original, or will it require a greater or smaller amount of maintenance?
4. Which company has the best track record for most reliable customer order/tracking/delivery management, and post sales customer service?
A certain amount of research online and offline may assist a consumer in making a decision. Ultimately, it may simply come to personal taste, preferences, or beliefs. |
Brent, I am in fact delighted you joined APL and that you are heading the company's transformation into a successful OEM. I did witness a marked reduction in public customer gripes on the APL forum over the last few months. and am confident you will be able to address the few residuals over the next several weeks. I also understand the need to purge the forum from old diatribes that were at the time all but festering. On the other hand, myself working for a large company, I do appreciate that the market communications specialist attempts to 'move things in a positiv direction' are most invariably perceived by the outsider as 'spin', or at least as artful redirections, and that this alternative perception is not of necessity flawed.
I do not give a terrible amount of credit to editorial reviews, and unfortunately I have not listened to the UX-1 myself. I have selected the X-01 based on my own listening experiences and comparisons with several other reputed players, such as the APL 1000 and several others, rather than any editorial reviews. I am however thoroughly familiar with X-01 and X-01 Limited. In addition, audiophiles in the know, habitually posting to these pages, while conceding that the UX-1 yields a significant fraction of the performance of the original X-01 in RedBook and SACD, tend to indicate that there still exists an appreciable gap between the two models in audio performance. As such, in my view, the X-01 Limited and even more so the P03/D03 combo are at this time more valid benchmarks against the APL NWO family than the UX-1, while the X-03 SE should be used as a benchmark against the APL 3910, which according to what I have been reading on the APL fora, has recently been discontinued.
The UX-1's audio design is essentially a stripped down version of the X-01 design, rather than the two devices having 'identical topologies', with the UX-1 sporting half the number of DACs than the X-01. It is fair to point out however, that both devices are differentially balanced in the audio section, as you can read on the UX-1 page on the TEAC site: "A Burr-Brown 24-bit D/A converter is used as the audio D/A converter on all channels. In addition, a two-chip-per-channel differential configuration is
used on the front L/R channels for improved linearity."
Yes, I also remember reading the report of the X-01 being removed from an audio booth at CES. Was the X-01 brand new or was it fully broken in? As I stated so many times, a brand new X-01 sounds hideous, and only after 500 hrs of break in the device is significantly good, with optimum performance being yielded somewhat after the 800 hours mark. Yes I do agree that the APL was a very good unit for its time and at its price point. It is also true its sound was engagingly sweet, and captivating, if slightly euphonic. Conversely, the X-01 is said to be accurate but 'merciless', with awesome macro and micro dynamics. I will take merciless anytime over slight euphony, but I do recognize that this is entirely a personal preference and decision. And about the X-01 sounding 'mechanical', I am quite befuddled. I have not heard a single CD player sounding mechanical in recent years, perhaps with the sole exception of the Accuphase DP-77, which while not exactly mechanical, does sound like a very expensive music synthesizer to me.
Looking forward to the opportunity of eventually hearing a member of the NWO product family in person,
Best,
Guido |
Leonx, what's 'better' in this particular case. Pls do expand. G. |
John, reality is always more complex than we'd like it to be. There is no contraddiction in what I wrote. Brent has wisely introduced standard business management techniques at APL. He has raised customer satisfaction by introducing clear scheduling and customer service methodologies. At the same time he has very rapidly removed most traces of gangrenous discussions on customer service issues from the APL fora to 'move things along', as he said. While consumers would like to think the contrary, businesses do not survive by 'peaches & cream' alone. A small amount of draconian marketing communications measures are occasionally required to refloat an enterprise, such as pruning surface evidence of mixed past record of customer sat. |
TVAD, the controversy seems to have started by a generic remark I posted on 06/14, which was not at all mentioning APL, nor it was especially written with APL in mind. While other modifiers took the high road, APL took exception to my statement. That was their right and they exercised it. So did I exercise my own right to pursue the subsequent discussion. A healthy debate between manufacturers and consumers can only benefit the hobby as a whole. The exchange between ALEX, Brent and I has been quite placid and urbane, and I hope relatively informative. I only regret that the three of us ended up highjacking this perfectly good thread with our side discussion. What do you say Brent and Alex, should we now retire in good order, pay for broken bottles and stools, and leave this particular watering hole in peace?
Before someone calls in the Audiogon MPs, that is? |
Thank you TVAD, you are correct, the discussion started on 06-30, not on 06-14. My mistake. |
Thank you Alex, I will drink to that gladly!
My recent barbules aside, for which I apologize, I am truly happy that Brent is part of the APL tribe. A creator of your caliber does need and deserve a business manager of the same stature for the company to thrive and grow.
And yes, I do confess a little pride for my 60Lbs bundle of joy X-01 Limited. What ;utterly amazes me is that as good as it is, I fully realize there is already something even better out there, stock or modified as it may be. And the trend of rapid improvement in the digital arena will continue for the foreseeable future. . . mind boggling indeed!
If the creature were not so darn heavy I would likely take my X-01 with me in my next trip to SF. I would love to use it as a benchmark while listening to your NWO-2 creation, which has undoubtedly exceeded the X-01 Limited's already considerable musical prowers. more realistically however, I will wait for an APL tribesman to materialize in Austin with an NWO-2 in his system for some cheery cross-auditioning fun!
Your admittedly cantankerous friend, Guido |
Thank you Brent, much appreciated! Guido |
Congrats Redwoodgarden! Just in case you missed it, there is an updated version of the UX-3 called the UX-3 SE. You will find details at:
http://www.teac.com/esoteric/UX-3_SpecialEdition.html |
