Esoteric DV-50: Any cdp's Significantly better?

Thank you Jayctoy for the info. Can't wait for the 'referencing' report from the whole gang!

Mgottlieb, you have merged in your front end stack what are likely to be two of the very best CDPs on the market. Have you compared your mixed stack with X-01 augmented by the Teac Esoteric G0 clock generator, and on the other hand, with a purely DCS stack completed by the Alla Scala outboard clock?

I'm looking forward to comments regarding the Marantz SA-11 which you're including in the mix. It's on my short list, but I haven't yet found any objective reviews of it. If it betters the Marantz DV-9500 significantly, I'll be impressed.
Another wrinkle for you guys. For the last several days, I've been using a Musical Fidelity X10V3 buffer stage on my very modest secondary system. I have it now on the output of a Sony NS-775 which is a very pedestrian albeit extremely competent SACD player that is dirt cheap. The X10 has done incredible things to it, very much against my otherwise deep confiction that one must not muck up the signal path with additional active components. It adds a large degree of depth and warmth to the sound while dramatically increasing the soundstage. I'd love to hear a report on how it does on the output of a truely great front end. Thanks.

Peter

MGottlieb,

Thank you very much for your detailed explanation. Its funny, you mention that the X01 was much more forward in its presentation than the Classe Omega. When I compared the DV 50 against the X01 I found the the DV 50 was much more forward than the X01! So the Omega's presentation must really be set back a foot or two behind the plane of the speakers! Very interesting. Did you like this "further back perspective" of the Omega?

My personal preference is for a less forward soundstage and that's one of the reasons why I prefer the X01 over the DV 50. Sounds like the Omega was a great redbook player also. Wish I had gooten a chance to hear it.

The one thing I'd really like to hear your comments on regarding the X01 in redbook is soundstage layering and the dimensionality of the images. I know you use the X01 more as a transport for redbook (through the Meitner) but perhaps you have enough listening experience with the X01 directly in redbook to comment.

When I talk about soundstage layering I'm refering to how the musicians line up on the soundstage in terms of imaging and depth. For example, with the modded Denon's you can clearly "hear" that the vocalist is up front, the saxophone player is slightly to the right and a foot behind her, the keyboard player is behind her and to the left slightly behind the saxophone player, and the drums are the furthest back. One thing I don't like with the DV 50 is that the brushes on snare drums sysmbols seem to share the front of the stage with the vocalist. In a real life jazz concert the brushes would sound further back.

Also, the modded denon's have a sense of palpability where it seems you can reach out and touch the vocalist. Let me re-phrase that, not only can you reach out and touch her but the voice feels "human" and the emotion is there. When I heard the X01 what I felt I heard was a greater "insight" (i.e tonal inflections, timbre, etc) into the vocal but not necessarily a sense of palpability. You can hear the air and breathiness but only as another sound rather than a sense of emotion.

Regarding the two and three dimenisonality, as you know we live in a three dimensional world where images (and especially sound) have a front, back and side. I never hear more than a one dimensional view from the DV 50 and unforunately I wasn't listening for that quality when I demoed the X01. Dimensionality in some ways goes hand in hand with soundstage layering, but it also speaks to the "full-bodiness" of the images on the soundstage.

Finally, what is it (in terms of sonic characteristics) about DVD-A playback on the 50 that you found so much more appealing than on the UX1? You keep mentioning how great DVD-A sounds on the DV-50. I will have to listen to some more discs. I don't listen to a lot of DVD-A.

In short, in your opinion do you ever feel a sense of palpability, three deminsionality of images, proper soundstage layering and more importantly "emotion" when you listen to the X01 in redbook? These are the areas where (at least upon first listen) the modded Denon's excel ion comparision to the Esoteric. maybe its a function of the tubes, I don't know. Do you ever (or consistently) hear these characteristics when you listen to your turntable?

MGottlieb, sorry for the long question but it will be my last one to you as soon we will be able to hear the X01 again (directly against the denon's). I wanted to get your impressions because you have one hell of a set-up in terms of both analog and digital. More importantly, as a regular listener to "live" classical music at Carnegie hall you are much more in touch with how music "should sound" from different seating perspectives than any of us are!

AVGURU

This question is for all you Esoteric DV-50 owners out there:
Which format does the Esoteric DV-50 have the very best sonics, detail, resolution, and transparency on: Redbook CD's, SACD's, or DVD-Audio discs?
In other words, are its greatest strengths as a CD player, a SACD player, or as a DVD-Audio player.