Blind Shoot-out in San Diego -- 5 CD Players
If the bard is long-suffering I think it must be as a result of the failure of his long-promoted pandemic to materialize despite his best efforts -- not from being a closet audiophile. His efforts to induce disequilibrium in domestic bliss have been replaced by another non-closet audiophile -- a Napolitanic devotee of vol-antics -- a condition that may be permanently cured by being QT'ed at SR headquarters. There are no limits to what rearranging internal molecular structure with high tech audio equipment can accomplish -- at least that is how things look from the audio side at Synergistic Research who deserve our kudos. |
When there were many audio dealers, you could hear equipment, but it was typically not a comparison and it was subject to the dealer's decisions regarding setup and with other speakers and equipment present in the room. But it was better than not hearing the equipment before buying it. Now, of course, very few of us have dealers within any reasonable distance. We are all now dependent on the comments of others. I am fortunate to have a limited number of people whose opinions I trust and the opportunity to go to shows, such as the RMAF and THE Show to hear components. Of course, these demonstration have severe limitations, such as electricity at the RMAF seldom being above 110 volts and rooms being too small. The reality is that no shoot out will ever be of much interest to me. Were I involved, I would find it entertaining but little more than that. The internet has killed dealers but has given us a broad universe of friends outside our community, whose opinions I find valuable. |
I think the methodology you propose would be better, yes, but unfortunately it is not going to happen. The other thing is, that even if it were possible, and one were to buy the winner, you would still have no guarantee that this would be piece of gear that would sound best to you in your system, room, music. I think we have two choices, get decent gear without worrying if it is the best, just get that idea out of your head for sanity sake and enjoy music, or allow yourself to try lot's of equipment because it is fun to do so, again without thinking you will ever have the best - a dangeorus idea and pursuit IMHO. For me the Shoot-out is just fun, something to think about, and part of the audiophile dialogue. What I have found as I have gotten older (52) is how much wonderful equipment there is that does not cost a fortune, finding those gems is a heck of a lot of fun. |
hi pubul57: i have a question for you: suppose you hear of a comparison between 5 similar components, e.g., cd players, and the number of listeners exceeds 100. suppose one of the players is favored by more than half of the listeners. do you think you would favor that cd player over another chosen at random within the same price range ? in other words, what is the value of the results of a "shoot out" consisting of 5 cd players when there exist over 1000 digital soiurces (must include dacs and transports)? it would seem to me the results are a microcosm of what is possible. i would propose a different experimental design, impractical as it is, which would require more listening and a greater period of time to accomplish the results. here it is: select over 100 cd players or dacs/transports, listening to 5 at a time. from the first 5 select the "favorite. from the remaining candidates, slecet another five and pick a favorite. at the end, there will be 20 favorites. narrow down the twenty to five and report on those 5 out of one hundred. my point is that 5 is too small a sample size to be very useful. there are many other digital "players" which could have been selected.. however, i will agree, the exercise is not useful, although the idea could be implemented to include more candidates, even if it requires months to complete the listening. perhaps , there are some serious audiophiles who could perform a valuable service by comparing a large number of , say tube and solid state amplifiers, capable of producing a reasonable spl, in a given stereo system. let's not try to get crazy here as there are many variables, but the idea of experienced listeners comparing equipment is of value if implemented using a larger sample size than 5. there may be some short cuts to reduce total listening time. it takes some clever people to design such an experiment. |
11-09-10: Mrtennis the problem with such a test, is that the results cannot be extrapolated onto one's own stereo system, i.e., one would best listen to the same digital hardware in the context of one's own system--true for any component, to make a meaningful judgment. 100% true, that isn't going to happen for most, if not all of us. So can we extrapolate, not perfectly, but better than nothing, which is what we would be left with if we had to test all five units in our own system - unless, I really had nothing to do all day. I want to see more shoot outs with feedback from the groups, and I'll add my own grain of salt to the results, for I think they are far from being meaningless, as long as we don't take these things as definitive - they are not, and mowst of us know and accept that. OP, how about 5 power cords next?:) |
Once upon a time, Donald Rumsfeld wrote the following verses: "As we know, There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know There are known unknowns. That is to say We know there are some things We do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, The ones we don't know We don't know." |
For really surprising results, instead of the beaks, grab a chicken and give this a try: Shlugen Kapores |
Hi Pubul57, I am not talking about a perfect evaluation that would take all possible permutations into consideration. That would obviously be impossible. I am talking about a shoot-out that would use more variables, not all possible variables. I mean, why go to all the trouble in the first place of doing a shoot-out and then tell everyone "take it with a grain of salt"? And one of the makers is there in the room. If you go to all the trouble of doing a 5-CDP shoot-out then going to a bit more trouble to make it 3-dimensional rather than 1-dimensional should not take that much more effort -- but it would take more time -- using more than 2 CDs, using a variety of plugs and wires, and using some good tweaks. It would have to be organized very well. Then you would not have to tell everyone "take it with a grain of salt". You would be able to say "we did a really good job to maximize the options to allow each player to show its best possible face. Here's what we did ..." And then the discussion among the attendees would be able to include a comparison of the improvements to each unit when different elements were added or taken out of the set-up. That's what I mean by 3-dimensional -- not just a headline grabber "Here's the winner". I am not interested in a sound bite shoot-out because that does not do justice to the units auditioned. Each one has merits. Each one is considered high end. I want to know what enhances those merits -- what makes them more meritable. There are so many things that I have done to transform my own EMM CDSA SE into a whole new EMM that if more attention had been paid to some of these things during the San Diego shoot-out the results and discussion would have been MUCH more interesting and MUCH more informative for Audiogon members. |
It seems the possible permutations, variables, and what ifs that could be tested or considered for assessing 5 players would make a real, complete, and absolute shootout almost impossible in real life, if not theoretically. I do think you have to take the test for what it is and with a grain of salt - the perfect evaluation and comparison is impossible, nor necessary IMHO. |
| Post removed |
Hi Tvad, The relevance 4 years later is the same as if the shoot-out were done today. APL and EMM and the other makers have all brought out improved models but that is irrelevant. What is relevant, IMHO, is that no matter what models are used for shoot-outs, and no matter what year the shoot-outs are conducted, they should include a lot more variables than the San Diego shoot-out. Otherwise they are what I call one-dimensional. They are designed to eliminate competitors -- to create a "winner", not to help the users of all models maximize the performance of their own units. The fact that I have recently been able to improve the performance of not only my own EMM CDSA SE -- far beyond what the normal EMM CDSA SE sounds like -- as well as my speakers -- has shown me just how limited the shoot-out was. The few variables and the short duration of the shoot-out with only 2 classical music CDs used for comparative purposes means that those reading the results should be careful in drawing conclusions. This is not to say that the APL is not at the very top of the CDP world but that with some attention to cables, plugs and tweaks the other models would have performed differently -- the EMM dramatically so. Some of the "votes" would undoubtedly have changed, IMO. Also, IMHO, because the APL sounds great without a power conditioner but other models may benefit from a power conditioner, this cannot be used as an argument to discount the sonic improvements produced by adding a power conditioner to some of the other models. In the end, it is the ears and the sound that count. I would really like to see another shoot-out using similarly-priced CDPs but with more variables in the equation -- including cables, plugs and tweaks -- and with a wide variety of music. What will work for one CDP will not work for all. The quality of sound of a CDP can be dramatically improved with attention to detail. But this takes time and a different attitude than the notion of "shoot-out". If it were less a shoot-out than a sonic comparison and experiment with a lot of variables then a lot more people would benefit from the exrecise -- not just the maker of the "winner" who would also deserve kudos, of course. |
| Post removed |
Hello Aplhifi, I appreciate your comments and observations. But the fact that EMM showed its need for power conditioning does not downgrade it, IMHO. Many systems need power conditioners to maximum their potential. The fact that APL does not need a power conditioner speaks highly in its favor -- but I don't feel this eliminates the sonic attributes of CDPs and systems that are improved with power conditioners. Regarding my earlier commments about how the sound in a specific system can change dramatically with a small change I just discovered the truth of this, once again, a few nights ago. The Totem beaks were not working at all with my Merlins -- Bobby Palkovic told me they wouldn't and he was right. So on a whim I decided to put the 4 beaks in diamond configuration on top of my Marantz PM-15 integrated amplifier. The result was a surprising improvement of low level detail, dynamics and sound stage. Who woulda thunk it. Then 2 nights ago I decided to put the 4 beaks in diamond configuration on top of my EMM CDSA SE. The results were not surprising -- they were dramatic. An incredible improvement in low level detail and warmth, bass, dynamics and depth and width of sound stage. I would NEVER have thunk it. I think this reinforces some of the points I have made about the San Diego 5-CDP shoot-out. What if the beaks had been added to the EMM or to the other units? What if other elements had been changed? IMHO, some of the votes might have been changed as a result and some of the comments may have changed, as well -- as dramatically as any dramatic sonic changes. None of this was considered in the shoot-out. The more I look at it the more I see that the San Diego shoot-out was really one-dimensional. It was conducted honestly and with good intentions -- but its short-comings stand out more than its merits, IMHO. Which is not at all to say that the APL is not a fabulous world-class player which I am sure it is. |
Hello Sabai, I agree with you! This is the very reason why when the official part of the blind shootout in San Diego was over, I specifically asked to audition the winners EMM and the NWO without the power re-generator. To everyone's surprise, the NWO sounded much better, while the EMM clearly showed its need for power conditioning. So yes, it is very important finding the right synergy if you want to extract the best from your audio system. Best, Alex Peychev www.aplhifi.com |
Hello Aplhifi, Thank you for your comments. They reaffirm one specific point that I was alluding to. Some players do well when configured with a specific piece of equipment and others may do better with a very different set-up. So if you compare both 2 players with the same set-up you may not get the best possible results from both players for comparative purposes. It would be difficult to judge the relative merits of the specific pieces of equipment in each set-up -- including the CD players. Looking at cables and plugs I find there is a big sonic difference between various makers in my system -- and within the product line that each maker offers there is also often a very big sonic difference, as well. The synergy of each system -- the best that it can offer sonically -- is dependent on many factors, IMHO. I am sure I would be very satisfied with one of your products -- I have no doubt about that. But since they are beyond my budget I am doing the best I can to maximize the sonic potential of my EMM CDSA SE using various cables, associated equipment, accessories and tweaks. So far, I am very happy with the result. But if I ever had the opportunity to A/B with one of your APL players I might be in psychological sonic trouble -- wanting to have one of your APLs without being able to afford it. |
Hello Sebrof, I understand but there was far more going on with this shoot-out, IMHO. The organizers had no obligation to do anything but since they went to the trouble to do the shoot-out and one of the manufacturers was present there was a certain importance attached to this by at least one party -- an interested party. I am not talking about scientific here, I am talking about taking many things into consideration that, to my eyes, were obviously missing, in order to do justice to all the equipment being tested. In this shoot-out no variables were considered. There were short listening sessions using 2 pieces of classical music and a show of hands. That was it. I call that flawed. It is like taking a day-trip to London and then going back home to tell your friends you have seen London. The shoot-out had so much missing and so much was left unsaid. If they were really interested in doing a serious shoot-out they would have chosen more than 2 recordings from the same genre, they would have had a choice of wiring (power cords with different plugs and IECs, interconnects, speaker wires), they would have had speakers from at least 2 different manufacturers, they would have had at least 2 high end power conditioners from 2 different manufacturers -- and they would have asked the maker who was allowed to be present to leave the room. There are a whole host of subliminal factors that can enter the picture in a situation like this. What if all the CD makers had been allowed to attend? Their very presence in the room would have changed the psychological ambiance, IMHO, even if they were all completely silent. The neutrality of a listening room is made up of more than sonic neutrality. If you call an event such as this a shoot-out that means you are looking to eliminate all the contenders except one. Well, I think that when you are considering high end CD players you need to take more care. After all, this shoot-out was organized in order to post the results on Audiogon, not just to share the results among those present. This was done for public viewing. True, the participants and organizers had no obligation to do anything at all -- but they should have done more to do justice to the equipment and to the readers on Audiogon. If I were organizing or participating in a shoot-out of high end equipment knowing that the results were going to be published on Audiogon I would have taken much more care. Not enough factors were factored into the shoot-out to give those reading about it a clear picture of the potential of the equipment being judged. It was the emphasis on elimination -- not on potential -- that was the focus of the shoot-out. This was the most serious short-coming of the shoot-out, IMHO. |
Hello Sabai, Very good points, thank you! The day after this shootout, we went to Hollywood and had another session at the house of a movie director. He has a dedicated “audio bunker” designed by Cardas and tuned by Rives Audio. This gentleman was the one who brought the Meridian and dCS, and since he liked dCS better, we did not try the Meridian again. The gentleman who owned the EMM Labs combo was very kind to attend as well. He brought some expensive power conditioner (sorry don’t remember the make) that he felt was the perfect match for his EMM gear. To our surprise, we got the same result as the one in San Diego. One of the things we learned at those two shootouts was that the EMM gear sounded much better with power conditioner or re-generator, while the NWO was best when plugged direct to the wall. Hope this helps! Best, Alex Peychev www.aplhifi.com |
Sabai - My point was that these guys ran the test, however unscientific and however flawed, and posted their impressions. They have no obligation to anyone to do better than that. We must take the OP for what it's worth to us. The reason I posted is because so often, so very often, people post about how a component is the best or the worse, or their jaw dropped or whatever, with absolutely no reference to anything. These guys went above and beyond what so many posters do in my opinion, that's all. |
Hello Sebrof and Mikedimitrov, good to hear from you. I live in a remote area overseas so unless I travel overseas to nearby countries I cannot audition equipment. That is my problem. I have to be guided by experience and intuition -- a good dose of luck also enters the equation, inevitably. To tell you the truth I would love to be able to afford an APL but I can't. So I have settled for an EMM CDSA SE -- a mint unit I bought at a very nice discount and brought back home from the UK. Sebrof, with all due respect, may I correct you? The APL was preferred by 7 out of 10 of those at the shoot-out, not by all 10 attendees. I have had Merlin speakers shipped over recently and have a Marantz PM-15 integrated amplifier -- the original 1994 model that I purchased recently mint on a Yahoo Japan auction -- also for a very nice price. I have an Audio Magic "The Q" power conditioner but that will soon be replaced by a Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE. I will be adding a Rel T3 sub-woofer soon, as well, to bring the 30 to 50 Hertz range into the system. The Merlins are fantastic -- they are rated to about 50 Hertz. I have a Gabriel Gold PC, speaker cables and ICs, as well as a number of SR Master Couplers that I have re-terminated with Oyaide plugs and IECs. Since my Marantz PM-15 is a 100-volt model I am using them with a step-down transformer and to connect the Audio Magic to a Tesla Plex. That's about it for my system. The problem I have with the shoot-out arises from realizing how changing single minor element in my system can transform the entire system. I have been astonished at this. A fresh example came this evening. I simply changed an Oyaide P-079 plug for a P-037 on the end of the Master Coupler that links the Marantz PM-15 to the step-down transformer. The resolution was transformed and the sound stage became wider and deeper. With each small change the Merlins are showing just how good they can be -- and how good the EMM CDSA SE can be. It is the synergy of the system that is at the heart of what we are talking about here, not just one element. Changing a single plug can transform a system. How can a shoot-out using the same equipment and cabling for a few hours with a couple of good quality classical recordings possibly be taken as a serious measure of the potential of each of the CD players tested? |
Sabai - I thought the OP was very informative. If you run out and buy the APL blindly based on the SD Shootout, then oh well I hope it works out for you. But I would expect that most would take it for what it's worth - The APL was preferred by those people in that system and room with that music. Period. btw: Do you own one of the other players? |
Hello Fellow Music Lovers, I came upon this thread a few months ago and have just re-read it. I have been in the process of upgrading my system so there was no point in commenting until major parts of my new system were in place, including a "cousin" of one of the CD players used in the shoot-out. IMHO the shoot-out was highly flawed. I am not saying that the APL was not the best of the lot -- and possibly by far. But there are so many variables that were not seriously considered in this shoot-out that it must be taken for what it is worth -- which is to say advisedly, IMHO. Firstly, the set-up should have been stated at the very beginning -- all of the equipment, wiring, plugs and room treatments used. Secondly, there are so many variables that were not even mentioned or considered. I find this astonishing. It is as though you just plug 5 CD players into the same system, listen to a couple of CDs for a few hours and out comes your undisputed winner. Well, I don't see things in such a simplistic way. Everyone knows that personal preference can make a very big difference. Wiring and plugs can make a very big difference. The quality of recordings can also make a very big difference. In today's CD world there are remasters and there are remasters. For instance. I have a copy of the latest Beatles remasters that is supposed to be the very best ever produced. But it is not the very best. It is clearly surpassed by the Japanese Parlophone box set remasters. Then there is the all-important factor of synergy. Components that work well with one CD player can may sound awful with another CD player. And since when can the PS Audio Multiwave II+ be seriously considered to be a credible part of a high end CD player shoot-out? What if the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE had replaced it. What would the various CD players have sounded like? And what if different speakers had been used? Then there is the choice of music -- 2 well-recorded classical CDs. This cannot seriously be taken as a measure by which to judge the various attributes of a variety of high quality CD players. Also, the word "consensus" has been used to crown the APL as the undisputed winner. There was no "consensus". There was a 7 to 3 vote in favor of the APL -- a wide margin of preference. But what factors led 3 participants to prefer the EMM over the APL? If a different mix of amplifier, speakers, power conditioner, wires, plugs room conditioning and recordings had been used might the vote have been different? I believe these are interesting questions to consider. A real shoot-out should be a far more serious affair, IMHO. |
| Post removed |
I too have had this same problem, been though the disc and am now on the 3rd laser assembly in my 3910. It will soon be just a backup for an Esoteric UX-1 I had upgraded to a UX-1P1. The difference in build quality is staggering vs the 3910. I am expecting much better sonics, video and dependability. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Thanks Tvad for your post. I tried to make it clear here that the 7062 tube was not supported by Alex. I have great respect for Alex and his work but to say that the sonic changes of the 7062 are due to its non-linearities and thus colorations compared to the ECC99 do not reflect my observations in the APL Denon nor the Aria WV. If colorations here implies several layers of haze and grain are removed and much lower level detail coming to the forefront, compared to the ECC99, I'll take it. As for the added output impedance, it's a non issue with the input impedance of the Aria WV. Alex is a proponent of his players straight into the amps. This was not the preferred case when I had the Callisto Sig, Bent TVC and now with the Aria WV as well. And a number of NWO owners I have corresponded with have all preferred their players into their line stages as well. For those with APL Denon players running the ECC99, enjoy and feel comfortable. But after hearing the 7062 and then again trying the ECC99, I would move on from the APL before I returned to the ECC99. It might be a readily available tube, as is the 6H30, but neither of these tubes is my cup of tea. |
Mr Nil- Unfortunately, the difficulties of arranging a comparison like that, via a CDP, would be almost insurmountable. What with setting up and verifying the accuracy of a reference system, finding the best set-up and positions for the mics/musicians/listeners, the performance, recording, mastering(or not), burning/pressing and playback chain: What an ordeal. The best we can hope for? Opinions from educated listeners, that remain immersed in the sound of live music, and are intimately familiar with the "cues" you mentioned. Better yet- That attended the recording sessions and are familiar with the artists and venues on the discs they are listening to. Way too much to hope for. I'll just have to keep doing it on my own! Enjoy your music!! |
| Post removed |
Hi John, now I'm intrigued by the Amperex PQ 7062 tube. Honestly, I haven't done any tube rolling since I've been quite happy with the APL Denon performance. I've been looking at other areas of my system to improve on. Do you have any good sources for this tube? I did a quick Google search and came up with eBay sellers, but I'm hesitant to go the eBay route. Thanks again for sharing your findings. Gary |
Hi Gary - Thanks for the insight on the 32-bit version of the APL vs. the AMR. Your results are encouraging. I only heard the AMR for 4-5 hours late one night in my system vs. the APL. And this was with the APL powered on for several days and the AMR only warmed up that evening. The reoccurring comment on A'gon that digital gear needs to be on for 48 hours before it can be "evaluated" meant nothing here as the AMR was off and running in just an hour of warm-up with stunning performance over my 24-bit APL player. This AMR demo was a courtesy of an AMR dealer from out of state who was in town and stopped at my house with the player for the evening to play some music. I really REALLY liked the AMR player. Even if the APL's bass performance was the clear winner, and that was not the case of mine with the 24-bit chipset, the AMR would still easily have been my preference. And yes, build quality of the AMR is most impressive. Had it not been for the recent discovery with the 7062 tube in the APL, I would have likely changed over to the AMR by the end of this year. I guess now I need to get the APL player into the queue for the 32-bit update. John |
Rodman99999, I agree with you 100%. If you are not attending to live acoustic performances, opinions don't have much credence. Even better is to compare the reproduction with actual live performance in the room. Of course this is not 100% possible but the tonal balance, bass, dynamics and bloom can be compared and best is the one that comes close to mimicking cues from the live performance. |
Mr CTM- I couldn't agree more with your assessment. If the individuals had been shown to have attending live performances(acoustic and/or "plugged in") a few times a month/over a few years, had been trained in how to listen and analyze sound/timbre/voice(YES- It takes some instruction), and attended the recording sessions of the music they were listening to via the given CDPs: I might(personally) give credence to their opinions. Even at that: Opinions are still always subjective. |
