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

Reb 1208,

I heard the Marantz SA 11 at an authorized dealer. I requested to hear it out of the balanced outputs as have most of their customers (The dealers words exactly). I "assume" he compensated for the inverted polarity by reversing the cables around. It's a simple thing to do. He was using a $1,800 Audioquest Sky balanced interconnect. I doubt very seriously that he has been demoing this unit balanced to all of his customers incorrectly. But I will ask him and since I plan on demoing the X01 again next Monday or Teusday I will ask for another demo on the SA 11.

You know, you really need to tone down your rhetoric a little bit and have an open mind. I readily admit that when I started this thread I was extremely pro-dvd 50 and didn't want to listen to others in regards to modded units. Admittedly, I'm still pro dvd-50...but I think everyone on this thread would now agree that they've seen me do a 360 degree turnaround. I've pretty much admitted to everyone that the modded Denon's are superior.

Conversely, your first comments on this thread indicated how anti- DVD 50 you were (and still are). Comments like "over the top dynamics" , "poor bass" and "a home theater piece trying to cram high end cd playback down your throat" let everyone know how you felt about this unit. As Sean indicated, to state that this player is not a high end cd player after all of the published glowing professional reviews (I count at least 10, many of which are international),numerous posts on audiogon, audioasylum, etc and consumer praises is absolutely ludicrous. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with your unit (or maybe your dealer) or maybe you lost money when you re-sold your unit...I don't know.

Recently we haven't even heard from until you saw my comments regarding the Marantz SA 11...an item I guess you now own. I didn't even know you owned one (you never mentioned it on the thread) but for some reason you took my comments about your unit personally and started jumping all over the DV 50 again. Nothing that I say on this thread should be construed as being personal. I'm just trying to report the facts.

Now that I know you own the SA 11 (and vociferously praise its performance) I totally understand why you don't like the DV 50. They are at totally opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of voicing, sound characteristcs, timbre, presentation, etc. They're not even close. I described the sound of the Marantz very accurately. They try to re-create an analog sound by being overly warm, soft on dynamics and details and a laid back, less forward presentation. Absolutely no sparkle on the high end and soft,deep bass on the low end. Addtionally, Marantz has never been known for having a "highly transparent" sound. When I say that, I mean in comparision to the very best cd players, amps, etc.

There is nothing wrong with you prefering the sound of the Marantz. Many people do and that's why they're a very successfull company. But the modded Denons', Meitners, Esoteric's Reimkyo's, Burmeisters, etc are pushing the envelope trying to set new standards and levels of performance in digital cd playback. The Marantz SA 11 is nothing more than Marantz's attempt to improve on their highly sucessful SA 14 (vers. 1 & 2). It is by no means a "revoluntionary product" or a "statement piece", nor is it even the best in its class.

The DV 50 has revolutionized the industry by providing a level of performance for a universal player that was not thought possible only 2-3 years ago. As a result, other mfg's are now bringing new universal players to the market in droves trying to duplicate the success of the DV 50. The other mfg's I mentioned before have done the same (at one time or another) in their respective categories. More importantly, these level of achievements are so advanced and superior that years later the majority of their competitors still have not been able develop a product or introduce new technology that is either equal or significantly better.

The Marantz SA 11 is a good player...but on the level of the players we are talking about here. Last night I went to google and did a serarch on Esoteric DV 50. I found at least three reviews where the Marantz SA 14 was one of a list of players compared to the DV 50. In each case, the reviewers comments were "not even close". Again, the SA 11 is only slightly better than the SA 14.

Reb 1208, enjoy the music! I'm actually envious of you because you've found audio nirvana in a cd player and are now able to just sit down and enjoy the music. I, on the other hand, rue the day I started this thread and opened my mind to hear the Denon modded players. I've been miserable ever since and can no longer take solitude in the fact the DV 50 outperforms all others in its class. It doesn't...not by a long shot!

AVGURU

OK CORRAL SHOOT-OUT RESULTS

The long awaited results are here...but unfortunately I must report that the dealer sold the demo UX-1 they had on the floor a couple of days before we arrived. That was a HUGE disappointment as I really wanted to face off the DV-50 against the UX-1. Oh well, the show goes on!

Before I start lets give a quick glimpse into the demo system:

Sonus Faber Cremona speakers
Hovland 2 channel sold state amp (no model #)
Thor tube pre-amp (no model #)
All cabling/interconnects by Cabasso/XLO
Stock power cords/no line conditioning
Theta Compli universal player/Audio Research cdp MK III (it was the latest version) Esoteric DV 50 Denon Exemplar 3910

This was the first auditon session (second followed at 711's house):

DV 50 vs. Theta Compli (CD/SACD)

Listeners: AVGURU,Jactoy, Audiophile friend of Jactoy, Dealer

No comparision..not even close. Theta sounded lifeless/mechanical. More importantly, it didn't sound like
a high end end player. Dealer explained that the Compli was really set up to be used as a transport with the Gen V or Gen VIII dac's. In that configuration it is a deadly combo that may have no equal! Compli was only slightly better in SACD than CD. Listening results were unamimous

DV 50 vs. Audio Research CD MK III

Listeners: AVGURU, JACTOY, Audiophile friedn of Jactoy, Dealer

I've heard the AR was supposed to be a great standalone cd player but again fared poorly against the DV 50. AR had a trmendously open and wide soundsatage and a warm, analog sound. The soundstage actually curled around and enveloped you. However, inside the soundstage there was nothing there. Poor imaging, no center imaging, detail was fuzzy, definitely not 2 dimensional. Everyone agreed the DV 50 was better.

Exemplar 3910 vs. DV 50 (CD/SACD)

Listeners: Jactoy, AVGURU, Audiophile friend of Jactoy,711,
Dealer

Again, the Exemplar threw a wider, more dynamic soundstage with living, breathing images that were at minimum 2 dimensional. Also surpised at the detail of the Exemplar as it was marginally more detailed ( a hard feat to accomplish against the DV 50). More air. It all adds up to a more musical presentation.

All were in agreement except for the dealer who felt the Exemplar had a "tin can" sound compard to the DV 50. We wrote it off as the dealer not being used to hearing anything remotely as "musical" on his showroom floor as the Exemplar.

NOTE: IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT ANY UNIT THE DV 50 BEAT THE EXEMPLAR DEMOLISHED! NO NEED FOR COMPARISIONS TO THOSE UNITS.

2ND LISTENING SESSION AT 711'S HOUSE

Listeners: AVGURU, JACTOY, 711

System Set-up:

Klipsch Cornwall Speakers
Tube Amps (forget name)
Exemplar 3910, APL 3910, APL 1000, Sony XA9000ES/Dan Wright
All cd players were direct to the amp/ no pre-pro
Power cord- Virtual Dynamics Nite I
No Power conditioning
Generic interconnects/speaker wire

Exemplar 3910 vs. APL 3910 (CD/SACD)

Tough call and the preference varies from song to song. But in the end the APL was consistently better sounding on most cd's than the Exemplar. Both units threw 2 & 3 dimensional soundstages. The Exemplar was slightly more transparent and detailed whereas the APL was more musical and engaging. The Exemplar was slightly more extended in the highs while the APL had the better and more detailed mid-range. Bass was solid on both units with detail and slam about equal. Results/conclusions were unamimous.

Sony XA900ES (Dan Wright) vs. APL and Exemplar 3910

This was the biggest surpise of the night. The Sony gave the most musical presnetation I personally have ever heard. Soundstage was routinely 3 dimensional, palapable and believable. Dianne Schure sounded like we were at a night club listening to her. What this player really excells at is space. Each musician on the soundstage has his own open and airy space to perform. No instrument/performanceis ever crowded or drowned out by another. When an instrumentalist solo's its as if the whole soundstage opens up for them to their thing (just like in a real concert where the other players will tone down their part and just add minor support) and then when that soloist finishes another hole in the soundstage opens up and another soloist takes the spotlight.

The other characteristic it excelled at was a full bodied, harmonically rich sound where you routinely heard 2nd and heard harmonics naturally roll off and decay into one another. The full harmonics of each instrument were easily displayed.

Finally the speed of transients as well as PRAT semed to be very good. We played some very fast jazz pieces (full bands with qucik horn sections and super tight rhythm sections) and the Sony just loved that stuff.

The Exemplar (and especially the APL) shared a lot of the same traits ..air, dynamics, bass impact, detail, three dimensionality, etc but in the areas of tonal richness, speed and spacing the Sony was superior. The APL took a little longer to warm and in all fairness as our session neared its end the APL started toclose the gap in terms of the degree of separation in these three areas. But it wss also clear to me that even with more time the APL would not have closed the gap to the point where the differences were miniscule.

Some may prefer the Exemplar or APL over the Sony as there were times where it sounded more accurate in absolute terms. But with a sound this musical it is very easy to
eschew any thoughts of accuracy and just enjoy the damn music!

It's time for me to go to bed. I will wrap up and summarize our listening sessions tomorrow. I have some interesting and rather favorable comments, observations and also some concerns about modded units and in particular the units that were demoed today.

AVGURU

just want to add, the Hovland amp is a solid state,
12K, my Sony is a S9000es Modwright, not the XA.The
cables use at the dealer were Kubala.The Thor monos
are worth 17K, and the preamp 12k.The room tweak at
the dealer is worth 15K, well filter.All of us enjoyed
the shootout.

When Dan Wright gets around to modifying a Denon 3910 it would be interesting to throw that into the mix.

AVGuru,
Just to be sure I know which Sony you are praising (they have some similar model numbers, I assume you are talking about the SCD-XA9000ES that has a list price of $3000. Is that right? That one has a great review in Stereophile of 12/03, Atkinson I thinkk. I've since read some other reports which highly praise its SACD performance but are not so thrilled about it's Redbook performance. Can you add anything to your description of it; especially with respect to Redbook?
I'm also wondering if you've heard the Linn players, Unidisk 1.1 and/or 2.1. I heard the 2.1 head to head with the Marantz 9500 and your comments re. Marantz seem to be on target. However, The 2.1 is 3X the price. I liked the Marantz pretty well, but the Linn was lots more detailed. I'd love to hear the SA-11 up against the DV-9500 for comparison sake.
Frankly, I'm close to ordering the modded Maverick from Underwood, but, perhaps I should revisit the Sony. All this is making my head hurt...in a good way.