Audio Aero Capital CD vs SACD

tomorrow i may have an Audio Aero Capital 129/24 in my room to compare to my Linn CD-12 and my stock Marantz SA-1. if that happens i will report my findings.

i just finished an all-day listening session, part of which was the comparison of the Audio Aero Capital 192/24 to my CD-12 and SA-1. before i get into that issue i must state that the great digital we listened to was completely humbled by the vinyl on the Rockport.....the best digital was not remotely close to the vinyl. all 5 listeners agreed.

let me say that i have been anticipating this comparison for 6 months.....i have heard many great things about the Capital, that it was the "best"....better than sacd....as good as vinyl....etc.,etc. this feedback was from many "golden ears" that i highly respect.

next i want to put a few qualifications on my conclusions;

1.different interconnects....Valhalla on the CD-12 and SA-1 and Jena Labs Symphony on the Capital. both interconnects then went thru the switchbox to Valhalla and the amps.
2.trouble with volume matching....with the integrated volume control and gain stage on the Capital.....gain matching was somewhat problematic....but in my opinion this was not significant. more later on the Capital volume control.
3.advantages in my system may not be advantages in every system.....conversly.....problems in my system may be advantages in other systems.
4.these are my viewpoints based on my priorities and listening biases and i don't want to infer any absolute judgements.
5.my Linn CD-12 is a later model with the 24 bit dac.....earlier cd-12s had a 20 bit dac.

ok, here goes. for comparison we used;

"Come Swing With Me" Sinatra/Basie; track 1; "fly me to the moon.
"Burmeister #2 demo disc; all tracks
"Rachmaninoff Symphonic Dances" RR; track 1
"Red Rose sampler" track 11; "it might as well be spring" hybrid sacd
"Chesky sacd sampler", track 10; "spanish harlem" hybrid sacd.

looking at the Linn CD-12 compared to the Capital my conclusions were; the CD-12 had more resolution, especially on peaks. there was more texture and clarity, the soundstage was more resolved. the piano on the "red rose" track was slightly clearer to me (another listener didn't hear this difference), Sinatra's voice was more like "realiy" on the cd-12. the bass on the CD-12 was more articulate and textured, although not as dynamic as the Capital. i want to emphasize that others in the room for this comparison might have came away preferring the Capital as they were actually very close.

the Audio Aero Capital 192/24 was less detailed than the CD-12 but still had excellent detail. the Capital was less clear but still very clear, and the bass was definitly bigger and more powerful than the CD-12....although sometimes the bass energy would mask detail in the mid and upper bass. on the Capital there was a pleasing smoothness and ease to the sound that on many systems might be a better balance than the clarity of the CD-12. the CD-12 is very natural sounding with no etch but it falls short of the very slightly roundness of the Capital.

a note about the volume control of the Capital; we discovered that this volume control/gain stage is not totally transparent. my system eliminates a preamp and instead uses a passive switchbox and a Placette RVC (remote volume control). at first when we were listening we plugged the Capital directly into my Tenor amps and bypassed my RVC. when used this way there was a greater degree of coloration and warmth to the sound of the Capital. the bass got kinda wooly and overdone (the Capital was then sitting on the carpet and this may have contributed to this situation. but on the other hand 25 feet of interconnect were eliminated in this configuration). when we moved the Capital onto the rack, plugged it into the switchbox, and turned it all the way up and then used the RVC......clarity was greatly increased with no loss of musicality (my conclusions on the Capital are based on this configuration). my conclusion on this issue.....in a very good system, the volume control and gain stage of the Capital are limiting factors when compared to the CD-12 and the RVC. in most systems the standard use of the Capital direct into amps is still probably the way to go....it is all about context and system potential.

another related issue regarding the Capital volume control/gain stage. the Capital has a beautiful expansiveness to it's sound and this might be an advantage over the CD-12. but when we changed the configuration of the volume control there was a reduction of this expansiveness. so the question is....is this expansiveness a coloration or "reality"? i personally prefer the presentation of the CD-12. the CD-12 resolves the space better but using the volume control the Capital has a "large spacious sound". maybe a matter of taste.

we then compared the Capital to the Marantz SA-1. although the Capital was sounding great....it was no match for my stock SA-1.....the greater resolution of the sacd resulted in a more natural presentation, greater clarity, and more transparent soundstage. in an absolute sense the differences were not dramatic...but they were easily heard and significant to me. there was nothing wrong or digital about the Capital compared to the SA-1....just not quite there.

overall conclusions; the $6900 Audio Aero Capital 192/24 is a great cd player.....in the league with the CD-12 in performance. i personally prefer the CD-12 for my system but i could easily understand if another preferred the Capital for theirs. if i didn't already own the CD-12 i am not sure what i would do.....but $6900 verses $20000???

i want to add that the differences were mostly slight but clear....and without a direct comparison you would be hard-pressed to percieve them.

the Capital does not compete with a good sacd player but no 16/44 machine(including my CD-12)can.

i am still looking for the 16/44 machine that i prefer to my CD-12.....so far...i have yet to hear it. i know not everyone shares my opinion of the CD-12, which is no problem.

sorry for the rambling here but this was not a simple question and i tried to relate the whole picture from my perspective. please, all you Capital owners, no flames please. we are talking about the 2 best cd players i have yet heard, and i simply have my personal preferences.

PS; it was a fun day of listening with some fellow audiophiles and none of us wanted to stop listening.....what more can you ask for?

Hi Matt,

i'm ready any time! bring your umbrella.

hi Matt,

my opinion on your first question is that a separate dac would be unlikely to improve the Capital; which doesn't need improving. part of the magic of the Capital is related to it's tube output stage.....which would be bypassed if you used a separate dac. on the other hand until you tried it you wouldn't know for sure. in your case i think the #37 transport would be more appropriate for your #36s dac.

i have heard from a friend in Australia that by installing a "direct out" from the dac and bypassing the internal volume control and gain stage the sound improves. my experience would tend to prove that. who knows, i may have preferred the Capital in that configuration.

of course, one man's magic can be another man's limitation.

as far as $$$$, i think most would choose the Capital over the Linn but i will keep my Linn.....i prefer the Linn by enough margin to balance the $$$ savings by selling the Linn and buying the Capital. with 3200 cds i can justify in my mind the best cd playback. in my system i get no advantage with the internal volume control/gain stage of the Capital.

Tim, with all due respect to the Capitole (i guess i was misspelling it, sorry), any sacd player with a sufficiently high quality output stage should better any cd player, assuming other issues are equalized. how many sacd players have a sufficiently high-quality output stage?....possibly not man (i do think the SA-1 qualifies). the additional resolution of sacd, taken proper advantage of, wins every time.

the wild card here is the volume control and gain stage of the Capitole. if you love what it does, it may "add" something that you may prefer over whatever the sacd player you are comparing it to does. but this sacd player will be most likely going thru a preamp of some sort and add the signature of that preamp. so now you are comparing the relative performance of these preamps. personally, i believe the volume control and gain stage of the Capitole slightly colors the sound compared to my reference; which is "no" preamp (active gain stage). many prefer an active gain stage, and they may not agree with my preference. unless you can isolate the gain stage from the Capitole you will not know what and why definitively.

comparing the volume performance of the Audio Aero Capitole 192/24 with the Placette RVC in my setup made it clear to me that the Placette was the more neutral performer. whether that is preferable in all systems would be a matter of taste....."can you handle the truth?"

the Capitole used in this comparison is owned by an Audio Aero dealer, is the latest version, and fully broken in. i would be surprised if your friend with the Tenors is not familiar with the dealer involved here.