2. digital
  3. 1227537678

Transporter vs Ayre CX-7e

About a month ago, I bought a Logitech Transporter and it was a noticeable improvement over my Music Hall Maverick SACD player (for playing RBCD) so I gave it some thought and ultimately decided to dump all my physical disc players and move toward a media-server based solution with the Transporter as my final digital front-end.

However, I was in the showroom the other day at a local HiFi store and they had an Ayre CX-7e pumping through some decent, but not rediculous equipment. It was going through an Anthem TLP-1 Preamp, feeding an Anthem MCA-20 amp and pushing Paradigm Signature S6 v2 speakers.

I had heard just about all of this equipment before, but the Ayre was new to me and I was in awe over the tonal accuracy of instruments and voice. BUT, it was in a showroom, different equipment than I have, etc, etc, etc.

So my question is, does anyone here have any direct experience comparing a CX-7e with a Transporter? Was what I was hearing in the showroom a product of the showroom acoustics or is the Ayre clearly a better sounding device (when it comes to airiness and tonal accuracy).

I currently have a Marantz AV8003 preamp feeding an Outlaw 750 amp (although looking to replace the amp as mentioned in another recent post) pushing a pair of Focal/JMLabs Electra 1027be's. I'd like to think that my preamp/amp/speakers equal or exceed the quality of what I heard but I can't get the sound from that showroom out of my head.

Maybe I'm just rambling and I've already subconsciously made a decision here, but I figured I'd reach out to see what ye almighty Audiogonners thought.

Thanks in advance,

-Ben
fatgh0st
cerrot's avatar
cerrot
1,606 posts
 
The Ayer is clearly better. The CX-5 even more so. The properties you mentioned are much of what Ayre CD players are known for. Keep in mind, the Transporter does blow away the music hall, but the Ayre does blow away the transporter. The transporter is good but limited to, pretty much, the DAC. (there are other issues, ie transport, cables, vibration control, etc.) but, basically, the DAC you heard in the Ayer is just plain better than the dac in the trasnporter. I heard both and went with the squeezebox 3 (and Esoteric X03SE for critical listening-I felt it bettered the Ayer in detail, dynamics and low level resolution) so that I can change dacs as I feel fit. I have the benchmark dac now (hooked to squeezebox) as it's just for casual listening. If I get a bit more into it, I will go with a much better dac (Berkshire or Esoteric, etc).
fatgh0st OP
43 posts
 
Cerrot: Thanks for your response. The Esoteric and the Ayre 5xe are out of my budget, but I think you've helped me lean closer to the Ayre 7e. I'm also glad to hear that the wonderous sound I was hearing was not just a figment of my imagination.

The convenience of the transporter is a major benefit, but at the end of the day, if I'm sacrificing quality for convenience and I know it, It will bother me until I do something about it. Sounds like the 7e for now and then when affordable Hard-Drive based systems come to market with sound quality that equals or rivals that of current top CDPs, I'll dive back in.
chesebert
38 posts
 
I thought the 2 were closer than I initially thought when I compared them using with Ax-7e

I wouldn't say Ayre is 'clearly' better. Maybe Cerrot can elaborate more on his/her comparison?
cerrot's avatar
cerrot
1,606 posts
 
I also enjoy the convenience of having music on a hard drive to play hour long playlists on my squeezebox, though, as I have said, not up to par (to me) for critical listening. (I did come up with an excellent work-around, though-I have an Alesis Masterlink CD burner and put nice compilations together on MoFi Gold CDR's and play them on my Esoteric. 70 minutes or so of pure bliss - close, but not totally the squeezebox convenience, albeit much better sound).

As for the difference(s) between the Ayre Ax-5e & Ax-7e, I thought they were close at first, but after a few hours of listening, on redbook, I found the 7 to be a bit leaner overall, a bit more forward sounding than the 5, not as much punch or dynamic and the soundstage was petty much as wide, but no where near as deep. On SACD, the difference was even more dramatic. The 5 had much, much more overall resoultion. The 7 played SACD's like very well recorded Redbooks but the 5 delivered more music, more of the experience. Cymbals had more air around them and the decay was very realistic on the 5; on the 7, it didn't have as much space, and was a bit abrupt. Vocals on the 5 were smooth and lifelike, while on the 7, there was a hint of symbilence (please excuse spelling) and I didn't feel the presence of the singer as I did with the 5. The 7 did mask inferior recordings better than the 5, but that's a trait I find in less revealing gear, and, to me, I need to hear everything that was recorded-good, or bad.

The Esoteric (X03-SE) was even better than the 5, with greater dynamics, deeper soundstage greater air and presence and the retrieval of low level detail blew my mind. On Jacintha's SACD, Goes To Hollywood, on Que Sera Sera, on the opening acordian, you can hear the acordinaists fingers on the keys, and the sound the keys make when they are released. On the 7, you can barely recognize what it is; on the 5, you hear it distinctively but on the Esoteric, it becomes part of the performance. It actually adds to the experience and makes the little hairs stand up on my neck. The resolution is absolutely amazing.
fatgh0st OP
43 posts
 
Cerrot: Thanks for the detail...very informative. However, my understanding was that the 7 only plays RBCD, not SACD. As such, it would lead me to believe that perhaps you were actually hearing the RBCD layer of the Hybrid SACD on the 7 as opposed to the actual DSD layer (which would explain a difference).

Anyway, I wish I could get an Esoteric of 5e but I think they are both out of my range....although I could possibly stretch :-)....

-Ben
More to discover