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
no one has answered my question:

why have a shootout ? what is to be gained ?

the results are so specific to the experiment that they cannot be extrapolated to another stereo system and should not be used as a basis for purchasing.

in addition, there probably are numerous experimental design errors which would render the conclusins unreliable and perhaps invalid.

leave these type of situations to those who are educated and trained to do them properly.
Mrtennis - Is it possible that shootouts are more valid in the, for lack of a better description, MidFi than it is for HiFi? It seems that as the system gets more refined and revealing the "signautre" of any individual component becomes more obvious within a particular system.

If a system is revealing enough that changing speaker cables and/or interconnects makes a significant difference then any shootout using that system would be suspect because each component was not optimized in the system.

My system, for example, likely isn't revealing enough to note a distinct difference with interconnects between the SACD player and receiver making it more likely that a shootout done with my system might provide useful information for other systems of a similar level. Sort of a macro comparison vs. a micro comparison.
i would not be influenced to buy a product based upon a shoot out--audio or otherwise.

my ears, brain, preferences, etc. are unique.

this is true for every human being.

while it may be fun to do it, there is no substitute for listening.

shoot outs are not valid, period, with such a small sample size,. certain variables must be controlled and the experimental design and analysis must be very rigorous and conform to the methodology of statistical analysis. otherwise, the information so obtained is anecdotal, at best.

regarding resolution of one's stereo syetm. there is some basis for asserting that differences between components may not be detected if the stereo system is not sufficiently resolving. however, there may be interactions between the electrical characteristics and preamp, which may be noticed even in a so-called mid fi system.
MRT, sounds like no 3rd-party review of any kind can be valid or serve any purpose, given how "different" we all are, and absent truly terrible performance in those things that can be measured that we think correlate to "good sound", there is nothing intelligible to be said about the sound of equipment and 98% of Audiogon, Stereophile, TAS, 6moons, etc. is a waste of time since most of it is observational commentary and opinion. I get the logic of that argument, yet somehow it seems an overstatement and not quite true. I find tremendous value in the observations of others, though I know that there may or may not be 100% correlation between the views of others and my own.
hi pubul57:

it's not that suggestions are useless, it's just that the risk of following the advice does not lessen the risk that a purchase based upon those suggestions will necessarily be reduced.

one is taking a chance since there is no substitute for auditioning a component in one's system before buying.

suggestions based upon the experience of others are opinions which are probably true and probably false. the probabilities are unknown and are we better off making use of suggestions and buying a component than compiling a list of components , given certain constraints, and buying one of them ?

there is no way to predict in advance that randomness or the experience od others will lead to a more favorable outcome for a buyer.

i will admit that it is fun to exchange ideas on all varities of topics is interesting and a satisfactory use of time,.

still, the effectiveness of reviews, opinions from others, listening at dealers has not been evaluated.

i would be curious to test the outcomes of purchases based upon diifferent criteria, although i realize the impracticality of such a project.

it is what it is. one is free to pursue whatever is in his/her interest.

to each his own.