EMM DCC2/CDSD versus Esoteric X-01


To stoke the raging fires in the current discussions about the relative virtues of the EMM DCC2/CDSD combination,
I would welcome comments from those who had the rare opportunity of auditioning, and possibly trying out the Esoteric X-01, the CD/SACD only version of the slightly better known UX-1.
If you had the additional privilege of comparing either X-01 or UX-1 with the EMM DCC2/CDSD combination, your comments would be especially appreciated.
guidocorona
In my system, UX-1, EMM DCC2, Wadia 861, Ayre CD-5EX all at the same time. The rest of the system is McIntosh MC2000 and Audio Research Ref2 Mk2, HRX rack, Jm Lab Alto be, Shunyata6, Transparent super xl speaker wires, and either Harmonic Tech Pro Silway 2 or Synergistic Designer Ref balanced cable.

I have to preface my statements by saying that the room is very bright to begin with but very open. Slap echo is probably not a strong enough word, more like "smack echo".

First compared UX-1 to Wadia 861, the Wadia was a bit smoother, less revealing and realistic, smaller sound stage, more accurate base, but not as defined or organic in the mids and highs.

I then compared the UX-01 to a demo EMM labs... the EMM labs had MUCH less brightness, much more listenable, my wife, who was in the kitchen, asked "how much is that one going to cost us"? The EMM glitched, and for 17k, I am not going to buy a unit that glitches in the first month., so I deferred purchasing it, although it is still an option at this point if I can be convinced it has been fixed.

Then I compared UX-01 to brand new Ayre that I bought, as, in the final analysis, the UX-01 just sounds too metallic, for lack of a better work, on guitar, edgy and bright for my tastes long term. Out of the box, the Ayre is just not a happy camper, but I have been told to give it a long warmup (at least a hundred hours) It seems to emphasis leading edge transients at the expense of everything else, and is much less intelligible and full than the UX-01, but I will try it again this weekend after breaking it in.

What I heard, in a store, mind you, that absolutely made my foot tap, was the new DCS one piece unit. The UX-01 was in a setup similar to mine, and I noticed the same "metallic" coloring, but the DCS sounded much more organic, and "true to life". I know this doesn;t necessarily help you with the X-01, but they are of the same family I imagine
Thank you Chrisla. I have auditioned the DCS single box CD/SACD player as well and will confirm that it does sound most likely sweeter than the UX-1. You can read my findings at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1123254379&openfrom&58&4#58
I should point out though, that I did not have the opportunity of comparing the DCS to the X-01 directly, nor to the UX-1. In fact, I have not had the opportunity of hearing the UX-1 at all up to now.
It is my understanding though that, in order to maintain the same price point as the X-01 while adding DVD video and audio capability, Teac may have committed the mortal sin of audio compromise, by cutting in half the number of audio DAC chips (Burr Brown 1704) and performing other minor lobotomies to the circuitry. It has been said in some quarter that for redbook and SACD the UX-1 is c.ca 70% as good as the X-01.
Since my original listening in NYC, my enthusiasm for the X-01 convinced a friend of mine to obtain one for his system. In turn he 'forced me' to listen to his unit repeatedly and prolongedly, as a form of sadistic audiophilic retribution, until, under considerable pressure of course [chuckles!], I broke down and purchased an X-01 for myself.
The creature arrived one week ago and has now completed the 120th hour of breaking, with approximately the same amount planned for the coming week.
Amazing sound altogether: full bodied with a spectacular stage and a wealth of subtle detail. Excellent yet controlled dynamics and transient, but also with a heartless propensity to expose the excesses of recording engineers. Heartbreakingly beautiful on a well balanced recording, will get every nuance of residual sound on a muffled recording, but will not attempt to mask the screaming strings and brass and screeching voices in excessively bright recordings.
Quite sensitive to interconnects, my X-01 told me yesterday in no uncertain terms that it much prefers to tango with my Gutwire Synchrony IC than with my slightly older Cardas Neutral Reference. Too bad said I, Neutral Reference it will be, for the next few days, while I take the Gutwire on an auditioning trip to Salt Lake City It is being rumoured that I will have an opportunity to listen to an X-01 controlled by the meticulous 'baton' of a Teac G0S Master Clock. I will report my findings here on Audiogon.
But enough ranting for now. Talk to you all soon. Guido
Yup, wish I had a chance to have listened to the X-01. When I went in the store, they "forgot" to mention that unit and I was not, at the time, as well informed and assumed, based on the info I gave them, that I gots the 2 channel machine. Dang. Owning a cal lab... I took home a cesium beam standard (Hewlett Packard 5061a) to synch the EMM and Esoteric to, it made a much bigger difference on the Esoteric..much better pace, a little better soundstage, and made very little noticeable difference on the Meitner, maybe, just maybe slightly steadier sound stage. If only the doggone thing hadn't glitched twice:( it would be happily escounced in a new home.
The UX-1 and X-01 are cut from the same “sonic cloth”. They both are very neutral with no warmth to the sound. In many systems they may sound hard or bright. The X-01 is no better in this regard than the UX-1. In fact, the UX-1 sounds a little less detailed in the highs. I have lived with the UX-1 for over a year now and still enjoy it. The choice of AC cable and interconnects are crucial to the ultimate enjoyment of this product. I feel that the UX-1/ X0-1 are superior the DV-50S.

I recently had the good fortune to live with the EMM DAC6e and CDSD for a month. I found this combination to be superior to my UX-1 and a friend’s X0-1 in SACD and CD.

Comparing the EMM combination to a Reimyo CDP-777 on RBCD, I preferred the Reimyo. The Reimyo has a certain quality of richness to the sound that separates it from the other units. I found that the Reimyo requires the Harmonix AC cable to sound its best. The Harmonix cable sounded too full in the bass on the Esoteric UX-1. Also, the Reimyo sounds much better using the single-end outputs.

Others have found the EMM to be superior in RBCD to the Reimyo. I guess it depends on taste and ultimately the system, isolation, etc.

At this point in time, given the failure of SACD and DVD-A to succeed in the market, I would focus my attention on RBCD performance. Personally, I find RBCD on the Reimyo to be more pleasing than most SACDs on the EMM products. Naturally, a multichannel system is an entirely different subject.

You can see my system and setup on Audio Asylum under “Mercman”.

Steve
Steve, I confirm your findings about X-01's extreme sensitivity to interconnects.
Last Saturday I had the pleasure of attending a marathon open-house event at Aris Audio in Salt Lake City, where Scott Haver, Aris's proprietor, gave me free range of his excellent facilities and several systems. In particular,
I had the opportunity to audition at length a system consisting initially of X-01, Audioquest Panther XLR, Audio Research Ref 3 in its pre update config, Jaguar XLR, Theta Dreadnaught, Audioquest Pikes Peak, Vandersteen 5A.
I used for the audition a variety of chamber music and orchestra CDs from the same set I used in my original audition of the ARC Ref 3 referenced above.
While CDS that had only moderate pitch extensions yielded a very good balanced, graceful and detailed sound, any greater top or bottom extension in the recording -- as in violins high strings, high woodwinds and double basses, appear to yield shrill and distorted highs, nasal mids, bloating on the mid bass, and hazy low indistinct bass.
I was not a terribly happy camper. This until Scott suggested we change the AQQ Panther with a 3 ft length of Audio Quest Sky. The entire system started to shine. Glorious mids, highs became more extended and approx 95% free of distortion, mid bass bloating disappeared, deep Bass became clean graceful and correct down to the 16 ft range of the double bass pedal openstring notes in orchestral works.
In particular, the beginning of the 2nd movement in Dvorak's New World Symphony conducted by Leonard Bernstein became something so emotional to raise your hair on end. The initial brass fanfare was deep with that slight treble cuivre that make good brass give goose bumps. The timpanis were clean and powerful while the double basses were something to be beheld.
In addition, what had suddenly appeared in spades was the threedimensional image of the hall, with a sense of space, air and overall grace I had seldom heard before in that recording. This seems to point out once again that X-01 is a wonderful but merciless machine: it is capable of extracting mountains of information from a disk. . . and if ICs and electronics downstream are not up to handling the information. . . results may be not of our liking. I only wish I had the opportunity to switch the Jaguar to Sky as well, and the Pikes Peak to Everest. . . may be next time.
One last note, during the audition I activated in error the button on the Ref 3 remote that turns off the balanced return signal on the ICs of this device. Suddenly the overall sound became completely bloodless, thin and uninvolved, until I turned the balanced signal back on. Small lesson learned: if a device is truly optimized for balanced operations, it is best used that way.