 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.75.81.170
You think I should make the switch? There is nothing really wrong with the Jolida maybe a little bit warm sounding. Do you think the Apollo will be a step upward or only merely a sideway?
Follow Ups:
Hi, I've been reading the posts to your question with interest. Having experimented with a good dozen DACs and as many players, I find the Apollo, as a stand alone unit betters my Cal Labs CL-20 with Camelot Dragon Pro II Resolution Filter, Dragon 5.1 jitter filter and Arthur V3 DAC, a set-up which until now had been king of the hill.I like the Jolida 100 alot, but find the Apollo offers blacker background, solid bass and detail extraction I have not heard from players costing more. As good as the original Planet was, this Apollo leaves it in the dust.
I have tried the Apollo connected to my outboard DAC and jitter filters, and at best it is a wash. I notice no improvement. I am opting for simplicity. Rega did their homework. Piano sounds impressively lifelike on the Apollo. I didn't realize how artificial it had sounded before until I heard the Apollo. Brushes on the drums... amazing true life representation.
Frankly, I was skeptical that the Apollo could beat what I had. The Camelot jitter gear is very good. If I had a grand burning a hole in my pocket, I'd give it to Rega. A bargain at the price.
I agree with The Rube. I have the Apollo and I am amazed at how good it sounds for the money. I prefer it to my PD-65 feeding a Modwright modified P3A DAC and the Apollo also bests my modified Shanling CD-T100.
It wouldn't be worth it. All standalone players are obsolete. You should look at PC systems, or maybe better DACs. The technology of stand alone is 20 years old already, and even cheap DVD players with the high bit rates are going to be potentially better. It all depends on the implementation.In addition, I've been listening to hi-res more recently and CD doesn't even come close. There just isn't enough resolution. At the time, 16/44.1 was the most they could reasonably get out of the format. It also was barely enough to reach the theoritical threshold of our hearing. Unfortunately, in practice it sounded grainy. 24/96 sounds better, and if the CD standard were implemented to allow for expansion we would all be listening to that now.
I was an early adopter of CD, buying the original FD1000 Magnavox. It sounded bad even with mid-fi equipment. It didn't help that most of the early CDs were not done well.
In 2007, we shouldn't be dealing with a technology based on 1986 standards, but we are. Imagine buying a 1986 PC to run Vista! It wouldn't work. Why do we still buy 1986 CDs and buy 1986 players?
You can talk all you want about jitter, filtering, etc... but the technology is obsolete. So do yourself a favor and get away from players and at least get the most convenient player around, your PC with a really good DAC.
Flame suit on.
zacster I don't think your wrong. It came time to upgrade my cd player and for what I could afford nothing really won me over. So I started investigating the pc audio route. I bought an M-Audio Audiophile and thought it was good. Certainly as good as my current cd player/dac. Then I upgraded to a Scott Nixon Dac and Mac Mini and I can say that I wont be going back to a cd player ever again. The sound quality and convenience has won me over. I imaginethat the high end cd players are great but not great enough for me.
I have the Nixon USB tube DAC and an Apollo. I got the Nixon back in spring, and the apollo around thanksgiving. I love the Nixon. I think it's an incredible little unit and it's my new 'reference' piece. I recommend it to so many people i am starting to think i'm a shill for the man. It's the center of my system.But I must say that the Apollo kicks the Nixon's butt, hands down. The Nixon sounds flat and lifeless by comparison. I want to upgrade the power supply and try some tube rolling, but I don't think it will get the nixon close.
On the other hand, if i had to choose one or the other, i think i would take the Nixon. Because computer based audio is the future, there's more flexibility, and it makes internet radio sound damn good.
eric
admin - audioreview.com
If the Nixon sounds lifeless in comparision, are you sure the volumes are equal? I've had the same thing happen to me where one component sounded dead compared to another, but the volume on the "dead" component was many db lower.Just a thought.
And yes, computer is the way to go, only not in the future but right now.
I've had the early Rega Planet and then later the Jupiter. I would say that my Jolida is just plain more musical than both of those, make that way more musical, and closer to vinyl overall. Rega is one of the most overrated companies, imo, especially the CD players.
You really need to listen to both machines to decide. No one but you can tell if it's worth the money, or whether one player suits your tastes.Dan
First let me state that I dont own or have listened to either one of these CDP's. But, from what I've heard from other people that have owned them is that you would be making a lateral move.The Jolida having a warmer sound, the Rega maybe havng a little more detail and better bass performance.Hope this helps some......DK
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2013, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Take5 ]
