Audio Research Ref: CD8

I also think Dweller are right. It seems that ARC have a development strategy with module solutions. My guess is that we soon can see a Ref PH8 (PH7 with the "new" power supply and?) CD5's DAC is technical better but many still prefer CD7. My guess is that CD8 is the best of both.
Next major upgrade of Ref3 show the future. ARC's strategy is little tireing. DCS for example have another customer care philosophy with free software upgrades for longer lifecycles.

As I typed before, I had a chance to get a CD8 and CD7 for the weekend to home and experienced these two with my audio setup. My system basically is ARC gear, Ref-3 and Ref-610T monos. A couple of weeks ago I tested Ref-7 and found it has a better synergy than my Audio Aero Prestige. Now it was a better and more exiting test, comparing the successor of Ref-7 and Ref-7.

CD8 had approx 150 hours of burning while Ref-7 had 500+ hours. One can argue that CD8 needs much more hours to perform its optimum.

I also invited some audiophile friends to compare these two players.

I did not reveal which player was playing to the listeners until the end. So it was player A vs player B.

The conclusion was very straightforward. I guess it is a fair to say CD8 is a better player with a margin so that there is no doubt. I was expecting it to improve the virtues of Ref-7 to some margin but we found CD8 as a remarkably different sounding player than CD7. CD8 is fast, I mean really fast compared to Ref-7. Ref-7 seems like having a larger soundstage with larger instruments but in terms of accuracy and pinpoint imaging CD8 did everything right. CD8 has a darker background, better resolution in resolving instruments and inner details. Highs are better defined. It has a better authority and control over any frequency band. CD7 plays more forward compared to CD8. CD8 has a sounstage deeper and more behind the speakers. It is more effortless.

At the end of the listening test we also compared CD8 with my analog setup (Acoustic Solid Royal tt, Graham Phantom tonearm, Transfiguration Orpheus cartridge, ARC PH-7) to see really how close it gets to analog which is my current reference source in my setup. I might say CD8 is one more step closer to analog presentation than CD7. There is still a gap between my analog and my digital sources but it is narrower. So to me, CD8 is that good.

CD8 is my new digital source.

From my expirience, CD-7 requires about 400h of break in time. The difference is not subtle.

Since CD-8 shares basic architecture with CD-7, my guess is that it will also furhter improve. Pls keep us posted.

I just sold my CD-7 and should have CD-8 at the end of January.

I actually just purchased one of the last CD7's available for sale from Audio Research.

I went for the CD7 instead of the CD8 because I got a great deal on the CD7 with a trade in against my CD3 MkII and was also told by my dealer that the machine I was getting was a hybrid unit incorporating many of the design changes implemented for the CD8 with the exception of the new DAC; essentially a CD8 without the DAC upgrade. I guess it makes sense that as the factory ran out of parts for the old unit they would incorporate whatever parts could be directly substituted from the new unit in the last production run. While I have no way to verify this, the new unit delivered to me came with the new power supply already installed instead of an upgraded older power supply so I have to assume that what I was told was at least partly correct. (I also received the CD7 manual which referenced the CD7 tube complement instead of what was provided with my unit).

I have not had a chance to directly compare my unit to a CD-7 and have only run it for about 60 hours so far, but from memory of using a borrowed CD7 in my system I can already support the comments made regarding the performance of the upgraded CD7 and CD8. Notwithstanding the deficiencies of aural memory, there is definitely a more detailed, livelier sound with better soundstaging along with the impression of a slightly more extended, tighter bass. In fact the improvements are so much so that I was compelled to tweak the position of my speakers away from the back wall and further apart, something I did not feel inclined to do with the borrowed CD7. Performance should dramatically improve with break-in so I assume I am hearing only the tip of the iceberg.

It is not clear how much of a difference the DAC makes but assume that the CD8 will be even better than my unit. If someone ever has an opportunity to compare an upgraded CD7 to a CD8 I would be interested in the results. For now and into the foreseeable future I am in music lover heaven!

I was wondering if anyone knows if the modified CD 7 with the new power supply requires any "burn in time" or is it "good to go out of the box" once returned back from ARC?