the raysonic is excellent player, although i listen to jazz, traditional and fusion, i find that tubes entered anywhere in the system tends to change the lowend. being a lowend guy, i have owned tube systems, with ss players and thought they were very musical, but always lack the prsence of low end dynamics, not booooom , but tight bass. in saying that ...i have gone to a real good ss system with the tube raysonic and found it to be more compatable to for me. i still get the ss tight end bottom and changed the tubes and found that the seimens are the better overall for me and pricing. thanks for starting the review of the raysonic which help me to purchase one..they are a great player for the money, especially if you can find one on audiogon. but in saying for those that retail, its still a great buy and i like the black one best.
Review: Raysonic 128 CDP CD Player
Category: Digital
My motivation for posting this is only because this is a new product on the market of which folks should be aware. It was recently reviewed by 6 moons if you're interested. I purchased it as a potential replacement for my CAL Alpha/Delta.
FWIW, I listen to Classical, Jazz, and pop vocal. No head banger stuff. Sonic preferences are for neutrality in all components - so long as they are 'tube based'. :-) While I can tolerate a bit of an uptilted bass so long as its undistorted, I can't tolerate exagerated high frequencies. I require transparency and smoothness. I can tolerate a bit of roll off so long as the signal is clean and clear.
I have had the Raysonic for about 3 weeks and it has just passed its breakin phase. Initially out of the box it was very rolled in the highs and full but dull in the bass. I'm still using the factory tubes (EH's). I did try different types and it is easy to change the units tone with different brands (whats new here!)
In comparison to my Wadia (direct to an amp) the Raysonic is as full but not as tight in the bass, as smooth in the mid range, and clearly not as extended in the highs. Compared to the Wadia thru a pre amp the gap closes quite a bit but the Wadia is still tighter and more extended.
In comparison to the BAT the bass is deeper and tighter but the mids and highs in the BAT are much more open and 'airy', perhaps a bit more transparent.
In comparison to the Cal units which it replaces it is sonically fuller in over-all tone, not as forward, and much smoother. I can't think of a single issue in which I prefer the Cal units, which have been long time favorites of mine in their price range.
And, in comparison to all three units, the Raysonic seems to have a greater dynamic range. I'm not talking speed, nor am I talking about absolute low or high frequency extension, I'm referring to the difference in the spread between the quietest and loudest sound.
I suspect this unit would have a high level of appeal not only to tubophiles, but to SS folks who want to avoid some of the more obnoxious effects of digital done wrong.
I'm keeping it!
Associated gear
Primaluna 3/5 pre-amp/amp
Tyler Linbrook Signature Systems Speakers
Similar products
Wadia 302
Bat DK5
CAL Alpha/Delta
My motivation for posting this is only because this is a new product on the market of which folks should be aware. It was recently reviewed by 6 moons if you're interested. I purchased it as a potential replacement for my CAL Alpha/Delta.
FWIW, I listen to Classical, Jazz, and pop vocal. No head banger stuff. Sonic preferences are for neutrality in all components - so long as they are 'tube based'. :-) While I can tolerate a bit of an uptilted bass so long as its undistorted, I can't tolerate exagerated high frequencies. I require transparency and smoothness. I can tolerate a bit of roll off so long as the signal is clean and clear.
I have had the Raysonic for about 3 weeks and it has just passed its breakin phase. Initially out of the box it was very rolled in the highs and full but dull in the bass. I'm still using the factory tubes (EH's). I did try different types and it is easy to change the units tone with different brands (whats new here!)
In comparison to my Wadia (direct to an amp) the Raysonic is as full but not as tight in the bass, as smooth in the mid range, and clearly not as extended in the highs. Compared to the Wadia thru a pre amp the gap closes quite a bit but the Wadia is still tighter and more extended.
In comparison to the BAT the bass is deeper and tighter but the mids and highs in the BAT are much more open and 'airy', perhaps a bit more transparent.
In comparison to the Cal units which it replaces it is sonically fuller in over-all tone, not as forward, and much smoother. I can't think of a single issue in which I prefer the Cal units, which have been long time favorites of mine in their price range.
And, in comparison to all three units, the Raysonic seems to have a greater dynamic range. I'm not talking speed, nor am I talking about absolute low or high frequency extension, I'm referring to the difference in the spread between the quietest and loudest sound.
I suspect this unit would have a high level of appeal not only to tubophiles, but to SS folks who want to avoid some of the more obnoxious effects of digital done wrong.
I'm keeping it!
Associated gear
Primaluna 3/5 pre-amp/amp
Tyler Linbrook Signature Systems Speakers
Similar products
Wadia 302
Bat DK5
CAL Alpha/Delta