Review: Playback Designs MPS-5 CD Player


Category: Digital

1st impressions of the Playback Designs MPS-5.

briefly; The MPS-5 plays redbook and SACD's; it can also be used as a DAC for a music server as well as as a transport. i do plan on getting into server based music and so i like that part. the MPS-5 is also set up so it's software is easily upgradable.

Playback Designs is a new company. this is their first product.

at 1:40pm PDT today the fedex driver pulled up and dropped off the box.

finally; after 5 weeks without.....I HAVE DIGITAL AGAIN.

mine is one of the first 2 units shipped, and the first to arrive. i had heard a prototype a few months back and made a decision to replace my EMM Labs SE Combo with this new product. i had not compared the my EMM Labs Signature directly to that prototype; but i did like some things i heard and made the change.

first; the packaging was perfect and easy to unpack; i was playing music in about 2 minutes after openning the box. the player itself is very handsome; fit and finish are impeccable, a beautiful aluminum case, brushed silver metal on top and black anodized on the bottom. the remote is similarly elegant, and feels very nice in your hand. large, easy to use buttons and it's back lit.

the EMM Labs never had this level of industrial design; but prior to that i owned the Linn CD-12 and before that the Levinson dac and transport. performance is my only criteria; but i also enjoy audio jewelry assuming it can deliver the sonic goods.

how does it sound?

my very first impression in the first 30 seconds was big and bold. the Playback Designs uses a transformer based power supply instead of the switching power supply of the EMM Labs SE Combo. i wonder if that is a factor here.

i must point out that my EMM Labs SE Combo was packed up and shipped to it's new owner in late April. so my aural memory of that is 5 weeks old. OTOH i owned EMM Labs for 5 years, and the SE for the last 2 years. so my sense of that is pretty good.

i'm hearing a sound that fills the soundstage to a greater degree, and the bass seems to have more authority.

beyond that initial impression; like any brand new digital player; the sound started off somewhat congested, sluggish and closed in. after about 45 minutes things started to open up a bit and i could hear farther into the soundstage. it's now been about 90 minutes of play and things are getting more interesting.

it's still somewhat closed in on top but i'm getting more lively micro-dynamics and a bit more transparency in the mids. the bass is getting cleaner and tighter, a few more hours and.......

i like where this is going.

anyway; i'll be breaking this baby in over the next week or so and will continue to offer impressions.

Associated gear
Click to view my Virtual System

Similar products
EMM Labs CDSD SE Transport, EMM Labs DAC6 SE
mikelavigne
At a glance, the write up does indicate that the reader component is where the re-read occurs, which makes sense.

The key benefit of a music server though is to enable easy access to large amounts of music rather than having to swap CDs. I doubt there is anything inherent in the fact that it is a server alone that results in better sound. Take the ability to store large amounts of digital music on high capacity drives out of the picture and the sound should remain the same.

Looks like very well thought out and flexible design overall in this case that surely sounds very good. I'm sure that the optical drive and DAC used are major factors in the resulting superior sound.

The (server) box in this case includes what is apparently a very robust optical drive/reader component and a very sophisticated DAC, but the fact that the bits read from CD are first stored on a magnetic server drive before played probably has little or nothing to do with the sound quality.

Magnetic media server drives are inherently faster than the optical drives, which I believe are relatively slow, but proper use of caching in any practical data delivery system solves the data read rate problem.
Mapman, makes little difference. . . data cachhing does not typically perform bitwise synchronization. . . wordwise if you are lucky, probably coarser than that. The only problem I see in using hard drive servers is many seem to be operating on a born-again urban legend which states that hard drives servers are 'inherently superior' to traditional worm drives. . . meaning what? Said who? . . . if convenience were taken into account then. . . totally different ball game.

All I am saying is that the proof shall remain in the pudding. . . whose aledged supreme delicacy I have regretably not sampled as yet. . . but that I am quite willing eventually to taste test.
Guido,

sorry for the delay in my response, it's been a busy busy time.

i'm am not that knowledgable about the challenges of the PC environment....but i am quite skeptical that any hard drive can compete with the best optical drives.....particularly after living with the Playback Designs.

there is another factor which affects how i feel on this subject; which i bring up at the risk of de-railing this thread. that is how the tourmaline hair dryer tweak affects any digital disc performance. i seriously doubt any sort of hard drive server based digital or even a 'so-called' Memory Player can compete.

anyway; the bar is set very high for server based digital to reach.

i do see many logistical reasons for using a music server and do plan to pursue this direction myself to see what is possible.
Mike, I'd never say "never."

I think that all the components are there, but yet to be put together correctly. yes, optical readers have finally gotten very good, but flash hard drives have much potential.

Dave
Thank you Mike, I agree with you. I may consider a hard drive music server system in the future for pure convenience. As for its preported audio superiority. . . it is a perfectly good theory. . . and therefore can, at least in principle, be proven, or found to be flawed, provided we keep a reasonably open mind on the subjectd. Guido