Esoteric DV-60

rest assured that the DV-50(S) is built very well and will easily handle many more hours than just 400.

Hello Dlbd - I'm not questioning the overall build quality of the DV-50S. Nor do I think that a DV-50S can't handle 400 hours of total playing time. That's not at all what I was referring to.

The post I responded to recommended "break-in" via 400 hours of UNINTERRUPTED playback. I do not think it was designed for this. I don't care how good the build quality is, it's still an electromechanical device with a limited lifespan. 400 hours of uninterrupted playback isn't break-in, it's accelerated wear.

So, if this has been the standard "break-in" regimen that most DV-50S owners have followed, I won't be buying a used one. That was my point.

So, if this has been the standard "break-in" regimen that most DV-50S owners have followed, I won't be buying a used one. That was my point.
Rex (System | Threads | Answers)

I understand your concern, Rex, but I think you're safe. The accelerated method has been suggested by several modifiers, and I've used this method on five of my digital players with absolutely no deleterious effect. If you're concerned about a particular unit, then simply ask the owner how the unit was broken in.

As an alternative, one can use a semi-accelerated method by running the player on repeat overnight and turning it off in the morning. The process three times as long, but still faster than normal listening sessions.

Sorry guys I have to apologize. DV-60 was used on wrong polarity. Problem is fixed and DV-60 is now as good as DV-50 S on CD/SACD and better on DVD.

Frank, how was the UX-3 SE on video and audio compared to the others?

I didn´t spent to much time comparing the video capabilities. In short: DV-60 is def. better than DV-50 S on video. DVD-A was better with UX-3 SE - although I just compared two DVD-A´s (Kraftwerk and Michael Jackson).