|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.110.80.127
In Reply to: RE: Esoteric DV-60 vs. SCD-1 with VSEI mods posted by Silver Circle on March 25, 2009 at 07:07:06
To answer your question #1, performance of a CDP is to a great degree determined by the quality of power supplies and analog section. Evolution of digital technology is fun to talk about, but in the overall scheme this is mostly marketspeak-- most players remain compromised in other critical areas. That's why a well-modded SCD-1 still competes with the latest top CDPs.
Follow Ups:
I fully agree with Dave. I have compared my modded SCD-1 (done by myself) to the Esoteric DV-60 and my SCD-1 sound much much better to me and to other people with demanding ears who has witness the comparison.
I have said this in previous post, the SCD-1 when properly modded can sound many times better than any CDP costing over 15K.
"I have said this in previous post, the SCD-1 when properly modded can sound many times better than any CDP costing over 15K."
So you've heard every CDP over 15K in the same system?
If you haven't your statement is clearly misleading and false.
My own CDP is almost at that price level and competes with the multi-box Zanden costing a great deal more, but you are saying a modded SCD-1 can sound - and here's the critical bit - "MANY times better" than even the Zanden?
Where did you hear the Zanden?
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
“So you've heard every CDP over 15K in the same system?”
No I have not heard every CDP costing over 15K but I have compared many on my own system including the multibox Zanden against my modded SCD-1. BTW to my knowledge the number of players in the market costing over 15K is not that big.
I am not in the business of selling upgrades, I do this because I have the skills to do it, and the reason for sharing my experience is to make people aware that it is possible to have a great sound CDP without spending ridicules amounts of money. Sure for some equipment you will pay for beautiful design (there is nothing wrong with that) but to me that is not that important, I care more for the sound quality.
What kind of player do you have?
YES, the SCD-1 when properly modded can sound MANY TIMES better than the Zanden which is a beautiful looking design player and most of the cost has to do with that.
Bottom line, if you are happy with your CPD that is all that you should care about.
Best regards,
Felix
"No I have not heard every CDP costing over 15K".
That's all I wanted to know, and confirms you should have written that your SCD-1 sounded better than every player you'd heard, not every player on the market.
"BTW to my knowledge the number of players in the market costing over 15K is not that big."
So you don't even know what players there are over 15K, but you know what they sound like?
"What kind of player do you have?"
My system is registered so is accessible to anyone who wants to click on my 'R'. For the record it's an AMR CD-77 which your modified SCD-1 is 'many times better than', whether you've heard it or not.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
“So you don't even know what players there are over 15K, but you know what they sound like?”
Sounds to me that you don’t think that a well modded SCD-1 can sound better than your AMR CD-77. Well are you ready for this…
I first heard this player at the Munich high-end show and I happen to have a good customer relationship with a local dealer who sells this CDP. When I first heard this player I thought that it had very good sound but when I learned the retail price I questioned the value so I borrowed a demo unit from the local dealer and I hate to be the one o give you this news BUT
There is no F.. way this player worth the asking price. And YES I compared to my modded SCD-1, my SCD-1 outperformed the AMR on the following,
- Better resolution
- Better sound stage
- Better sound detail
- Better dynamics and button line a more natural sound (voices sound very natural on my SCD-1)
If you really really want to convince yourself, I welcome you to visit me in Germany and bring your player with you (you are not that far).
Cheers,
Felix
Hi Felix,
What happened - cat got your tongue?
In future keep your made up crap to yourself and don't waste mine or anybody elses's time.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
For someone who wrote "bottom line, if you are happy with your CPD that is all that you should care about", you do seem to spend a lot of time posting that your player is many times better than other players - which you haven't heard.
"so I borrowed a demo unit from the local dealer and I hate to be the one o give you this news BUT".
Well, I said to my friend Max who was taking an interest in this discussion that you would definitely say that you had compared your SCD-1 to the AMR CD-77 and that the SCD-1 was 'many times' better.I win.
That being said, I may be in Germany this next month and if so will pay you a visit, so please email me your address and I will make arrangements.
If you also let me know the local dealer who loaned you the AMR CD-77 I will see if they are willing to allow the same comparison.Could I also trouble you to tell me when you modded your SCD-1?
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Edits: 03/29/09
My modded SCD-1 equals or surpasses the DCS stack and Zanden player that I heard demoed through VTL electronics and Escalante Fremont speakers by Sound by Singer. My thinking is that above a certain level of performance, auditions outside one's own system are primarily helpful in judging speakers and source. It's hard to get RBCD "perfect", which makes it easier to identify differences between players when away from home.
"My thinking is that above a certain level of performance, auditions outside one's own system are primarily helpful in judging speakers and source."
I can see your thinking, though for me it is impossible to make any meaningful comparison or evaluation in such circumstances as all it is possible to do is compare one system to another.
You say that your SCD-1 "equals or surpasses the DCS stack and Zanden player" you heard, but unless you place your SCD-1 in the same system any comparison is impossible. All you can say is that your system using the SCD-1 sounds better to you, although I admit is only human nature to do what you have done.
Consider that if you were primarily interested in the speakers, you would have come to the conclusion that your speakers were better than the Escalante Fremonts you heard, and if you were primarily interested in the amplification you would have come to the conclusion that your amps were better than the VTL electronics you heard. :0)
Whenever I've been interested in a source component, be it SACD or CD, I've always either taken my source to use in the other player's system, or friends have brought there source over to my place. It's easier with source components obviously as amps and especially speakers aren't quite so manageable.
Even if you'd heard them all in the system though, I wouldn't have even raised an eyebrow at you suggesting that your SCD-1 is better than or equal to the Zanden or DCS stack. I might disagree if I heard the same comparison, but then again I might agree - who knows.
What had me rolling my eyes was when I read that the poster in question was saying the SCD-1 was 'many times' better than 'any' player over 15K when I know this isn't true, and that the poster won't have heard every player over 15K.
Let's restrict ourselves to making comments about our experiences or expectations, rather than passing off expectations as experiences or facts.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
"I wouldn't have even raised an eyebrow at you suggesting that your SCD-1 is better than or equal to the Zanden or DCS stack"
I remember a few years back that the Zanden got a rave in a rag even though one of the outputs was wired in reverse polarity. Funny how such flawed reviewing can be accepted at face value, yet when another box is trashed people cry because it is their precious toy.
You've lost me - might be the glass of wine I've just had?
Which box is being 'trashed' and who is crying because the box is their precious toy?
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Just finished Stereophile April Recommended Components issue-- my last issue in a three-year subscription. Suffice to say that Michael Fremer's writing is the only thing that leads me to pause before letting the subscription expire for good. His tour of Vegas emptied out except for rows of $200K components at CES makes the audio industry read like Madoff before the fall. It's a good time to get off a runaway train.
I agree that comparisons involving multiple variables are difficult. But if one spends enough time with RBCD, it becomes apparent that most players-- even very expensive ones-- have difficulties. Some of the differences between players are a yin/yang thing(comparison in the same system of DCS and Zanden was a good illustration of this point.) But few players(even these two) get it all right: resolution & transparency without the compromise of dryness, organic unsynthetic analog-like sound without the compromise of HF roll-off, dynamic scale without the compromise of aggression & fatigue. The well-modded SCD-1 gets all these things right. Whether listening at home or in hi-fi emporium, if things are not right at source then it carries all the way through. Garbage in, garbage out.
One reasonable way to make comparisons between digital sources across systems is to use good vinyl as a benchmark. There is less variability between excellent vinyl front ends than there is between top RBCD players. Few owners of high end vinyl front ends will maintain that their RBCD approaches the level of their vinyl. But if your ears tell you otherwise-- that you're approaching convergence between the formats, then you know you're hearing great digital. The modded Sony approaches this level.
"Few owners of high end vinyl front ends will maintain that their RBCD approaches the level of their vinyl. But if your ears tell you otherwise".
Well, I don't have a vinyl front end and my reference is how natural a source component can make a system sound, not how 'vinyl' which is usually taken to mean 'analogue'.
I've heard digital sources which sound natural and analogue, yet when the digital source is not as good as it can be it manifests itself in a sound which is far less easy on the ear than when a turntable isn't as good as it could be.
I'd also disagree that there is less variation between high-end vinyl than high-end digital when arms and cartridges have such variation in themselves, but if we all agreed then these forums wouldn't be half as much fun as they are now.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Yes vinyl is a"forgiving" format, in the sense that a wide range of vinyl gears sound musical. But if you had both vinyl and digital formats in your system and spent time and money developing the two formats to the point where they sound pretty much alike, then you might conclude that you are converging on an end point. Moreover, if you're into modding gear, and reached this point after installing better piece parts and circuit designs, then you might further conclude that there is a convergence of art and science on this point.
"Moreover, if you're into modding gear, and reached this point after installing better piece parts and circuit designs, then you might further conclude that there is a convergence of art and science on this point."
I'm not into modding gear as such, though I do believe that with audio, the simpler the circuit is the better, which also means shortest signal paths, the least processing and the very best components/conductors which means silver.
"But if you had both vinyl and digital formats in your system and spent time and money developing the two formats to the point where they sound pretty much alike, then you might conclude that you are converging on an end point."
If you go to an audio show where Audio Note have a room, you'll find one of their turntables alongside a digital front end, and if it wasn't for the odd click/pop of older vinyl you'd be hard pressed to know which source was playing.
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
Thank you and bless your pea pickin' heart.
DS
Thank you for a calm, well-thought out response. Some here are really brutal.
You claimed in your original post that you wanted responses on how a ten-year-old Sony could possibly sound better than an Esoteric DV-60. You got your answer from me and another poster in "calm" and "well-thought-out" responses: Your Esoteric DV-60 is not yet broken in.
Please don't shoot the messenger. To do so would be "brutal" on your part.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: