Blind Shoot-out in San Diego -- 5 CD Players


On Saturday, February 24, a few members of the San Diego, Los Angeles and Palm Springs audio communities conducted a blind shoot-out at the home of one of the members of the San Diego Music and Audio Guild. The five CD Players selected for evaluation were: 1) a Resolution Audio Opus 21 (modified by Great Northern Sound), 2) the dcs standalone player, 3) a Meridian 808 Signature, 4) a EMM Labs Signature configuration (CDSD/DCC2 combo), and 5) an APL NWO 2.5T (the 2.5T is a 2.5 featuring a redesigned tube output stage and other improvements).

The ground rules for the shoot-out specified that two randomly draw players would be compared head-to-head, and the winner would then be compared against the next randomly drawn player, until only one unit survived (the so-called King-of-the-Hill method). One of our most knowledgeable members would set up each of the two competing pairs behind a curtain, adjust for volume, etc. and would not participate in the voting. Alex Peychev was the only manufacturer present, and he agreed to express no opinion until the completion of the formal process, and he also did not participate in the voting. The five of us who did the voting did so by an immediate and simultaneous show of hands after each pairing after each selection. Two pieces of well-recorded classical music on Red Book CDs were chosen because they offered a range of instrumental and vocal sonic charactistics. And since each participant voted for each piece separately, there was a total of 10 votes up for grabs at each head-to-head audition. Finally, although we all took informal notes, there was no attempt at detailed analysis recorded -- just the raw vote tally.

And now for the results:

In pairing number 1, the dcs won handily over the modified Opus 21, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 2, the dcs again came out on top, this time against the Meridian 808, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 3, the Meitner Signature was preferred over the dcs, by a closer but consistent margin (we repeated some of the head-to-head tests at the requests of the participants). The vote was 6 to 4.

Finally, in pairing number 5, the APL 2.5T bested the Meitner, 7 votes to 3.

In the interest of configuration consistance, all these auditions involved the use of a power regenerator supplying power to each of the players and involved going through a pre-amp.

This concluded the blind portion of the shoot-out. All expressed the view that the comparisons had been fairly conducted, and that even though one of the comparisons was close, the rankings overall represented a true consensus of the group's feelings.

Thereafter, without the use blind listening, we tried certain variations at the request of various of the particiapans. These involved the Meitner and the APL units exclusively, and may be summarized as follows:

First, when the APL 2.5T was removed from the power regenerator and plugged into the wall, its performance improved significantly. (Alex attributed this to the fact that the 2.5T features a linear power supply). When the Meitner unit(which utilizes a switching power supply) was plugged into the wall, its sonics deteriorated, and so it was restored to the power regenerator.

Second, when we auditioned a limited number of SACDs, the performance on both units was even better, but the improvement on the APL was unanimously felt to be dramatic.
The group concluded we had just experienced "an SACD blowout".

The above concludes the agreed-to results on the blind shoot-out. What follows is an overview of my own personal assessment of the qualitative differences I observed in the top three performers.

First of all the dcs and the Meitner are both clearly state of the art players. That the dcs scored as well as it did in its standalone implementation is in my opinion very significant. And for those of us who have auditioned prior implementations of the Meitner in previous shoot-outs, this unit is truly at the top of its game, and although it was close, had the edge on the dcs. Both the dcs and the Meitner showed all the traits one would expect on a Class A player -- excellent tonality, imaging, soundstaging, bass extension, transparency, resolution, delineation, etc.

But from my point of view, the APL 2.5T had all of the above, plus two deminsions that I feel make it truly unique. First of all, the life-like quality of the tonality across the spectrum was spot-on on all forms of instruments and voice. An second, and more difficult to describe, I had the uncany feeling that I was in the presence of real music -- lots or "air", spatial cues, etc. that simply add up to a sense of realism that I have never experienced before. When I closed my eyes, I truly felt that I was in the room with live music. What can I say.

Obviously, I invite others of the participants to express their views on-line.

Pete

petewatt

Showing 27 responses by tvad

Do you think Alex will accept my 2003 BMW 330Ci in trade for the $25,000 APL NWO 2.5T? :)
This thread didn't start off appearing as a sales pitch. It was genuine in it's reporting. Once the manufacturer stepped in, then the thread lost it's appearance of neutrality even if APL's comments were on point and added to one's understanding of the topic. It's an unfortunate by-product of manufacturer participation.
Considering this was a Blind Shoot-out, it's a miracle that no one was killed or maimed.

Congratulations to the participants, and thanks for the post, Pete.
03-03-07: Musicfirst
Interesting that in all this discussion, no one asked for the details of the recordings! After all, isn't it all about the MUSIC!!?
I'm guessing it was a little tabla and kalimba ditty, followed by some rollicking Bossa Nova?

How'd I do?

:)
Tvad - It is my understanding that you may be near our neck of the woods. You will have to join us next time.
That might be a real possibility. Thank you.

If you do, please promise to bring the recordings of the "little tabla and kalimba ditty, followed by some rollicking Bossa Nova" ;-)
Ha! Will do (of course, that means I'll have to go find some...) ;)
The most expensive player evaluated is the latest version of the Meitner and it did not win. Also, recall that each player was assigned a letter code written on a piece of paper and placed in bag. The order of the players was determined by the consecutive order of letters pulled from this process. By chance it turned out the Meitner and APL were last. None of the voters knew the letter assignments, however, until after the comparisons were complete.

Ctm_cra (Threads | Answers)
I have to say, it appears many bases were covered in an attempt to make this listening comparison fair and balanced. Perhaps more so than any "shootout" that has been reported on Audiogon.

Congratulations to the group.
Just out of curiosity, why is it that Petewatt authored the thread and has not been heard from since, and Ctm_cra is answering all the questions concerning the session?
03-05-07: Metralla
I don't know but he's doing a bloody good job.

It seems as if he's well prepared for all the questions, so rather than giving a long treatise at the start, we get a brief lecture from his mate followed by a long question time.

Pretty good ploy though, and something our pollys would do well to adopt.
Tag Team Posting. I love it.

...and yes, Ctm_cra is doing a very good job.
03-05-07: Nilthepill
Tvad, How do we know The Tag Team is not getting any kickbacks from APL? ;-). (Wink wink. Toungue firmly planted in cheek) Sorry can't resist!
Nilthepill
We don't. Clearly, this entire thread is an APL advertisement in disguise.

Wink. Wink.

Oh...ah...damn...I've got an eyelash in my eye. Ow!
FWIW, my post was intended as irony. I am not of the belief that this thread is a form of guerrilla marketing.
FWIW, the official word about tube substitution in the APL players is that it should not be done. This is stated by Alex in this APL discussion thread.

It is highly recommended to ask us first before plugging any other than the original ECC99 tube in the NWO since you can easily void your warranty.

The E180CC has the same pinout as the ECC99 but differs in some characteristics. All NWO players made before the NWO-3.0-SE (and all Denon players) used current regulators for the tube heaters. The ECC99 takes about 1 Ampere of current, while the E180CC takes just 400 mA (0.4 Amperes). This clearly suggests that the E180CC plugged in the NWO works at much higher heater voltage than specified which significantly reduces its life. Also, the E180CC has 7500 Ohms plate resistance against the 2500 Ohms of the ECC99 so the output impedance of the NWO is increased 3 times, not that good. Finally, the E180CC is not as linear as the ECC99 is so what you hear is nothing else but coloration combined with extreme working condition for the circuit. NOT recommended!

Again, please DO NOT experiment with the NWO unless authorized by us.

Best,
_________________
Alex Peychev
I understood the primary point of Alex's post to be that the 7062 was detrimental to the circuit due to the higher heater voltage and the potential damage to the resistors (which was mentioned in a separate post on the APL website...if I could find it...).

I have no debate with the different sound of the 7062 tube. Frankly, if it wasn't for Alex's warning, I'd probably try it myself, but I'm not willing to risk damaging the player.
My Denon 3910 has recently selectively stopped reading redbook CDs, like so many others have reported with their Denon 3910 machines.

So, off it goes to APL for a new laser assembly whenever Alex returns to the states from Bulgaria.

I can no longer recommend the Denon 3910 player due to its failure prone laser.
Jafox, maybe so, however with the laser issue being what it is, I am unlikely to put more dollars into the player beyond a new laser assembly.
I tried the CD lens cleaner from Radio Shack, and thus far it hasn't been useful.
Tonight, I ran the Radio Shack lens cleaner twice more. As a result, the Denon plays a couple CDs that it would not play before, but it doesn't play all the CDs with which it had problems.

Thanks, Swampwalker for the suggestion. I was remiss in thanking you earlier. Alex had also suggested the CD lens cleaner a few weeks ago.
I'm not clear why debating the validity of this shootout has any relevance four years later? The APL unit discussed is now three our four generations old.
Sabai, your post is very difficult to read without paragraphs.

But excellent job beating this dead horse.

It's too bad you weren't around three years ago.
May I suggest, or better strongly recommend--I should even say urge--for you to open a dedicated thread, where you will impart and share your magisterial knowledge on the subject...
Guidocorona (Threads | Answers | This Thread)
Agreed.

And when you do...use paragraphs.
Of course, this presumptuous statement is untrue since it has been contradicted by the emails I have already received.
Sabai (Threads | Answers | This Thread)
The famous supportive "emails received behind the scenes".

Why is it no one sending these emails ever seems to offer supportive comments in the actual threads?

Perhaps if folks stop responding, the thread will die due to inactivity...

Thanks for the paragraphs.
Sabai, from my perspective as it relates to my comments about your contributions in this thread, the history between APL and Brianw's company has absolutely no bearing. It's history that is long washed away.

Certainly, Guidocorona's comments here are independent. He's about as fair handed as anyone can be, and he has never had a dog in the hunt regarding APL or Brianw's company. Heck, he's an Esoteric guy if anything.

I look forward to reading your thoughts about system building in a new thread. You appear to be quite thorough.

Thanks again for the paragraphs.
Sorry, Sabai, but it appears you've been mislead about some subversive and nefarious scheme that frankly was never the intention.

It's incredible that some prefer to hold onto paranoid notions of dark political motivations that frankly aren't worthy of one's time.

That's all I can add. The spin on this topic has become ridiculous to an extreme.
01-13-11: Sabai
In the right system the EMM is capable of a reaching a much higher level than it apparently did in the blind shoot-out.
Which is equally applicable to the Resolution Audio Opus 21 (modified by Great Northern Sound), the dcs standalone player, the Meridian 808 Signature, and the APL NWO 2.5T.

The bottom line is depending on one's viewpoint of the shoot-out, the results are valid, or the results are invalid, and each of the players is potentially capable of sounding much better than they did at the shoot-out.

Is there any useful conclusion that can be drawn other than there is no useful conclusion (nearly four years after the fact)?