Alex, your post is sarcastic and demeaning. I played fair with you by emailing about your thoughts on the two players before going to the shootout. The contents of that email have and will remain confidential as promised. My trip to Chicago was two-fold. First, I went expecting yours to be a clearly superior player. I was fully prepared to buy your unit if the difference was as dramatic as the hype. Secondly, I wanted to hear the Blowtorch preamp and Soundlabs.
I also believe I have been gracious about the outcome. I even went as far as complimenting all of the designers/modifiers for raising the level. This was not an attempt to stroke you, but something I feel sincere about.
What I have changed my mind about is the fact that designers, dealers, and manufacturers can post to this forum. Many dealers refrain from this because of the potential for bias. In the case of someone actually designing and producing the products, there is even MORE potential for bias. After all, you have made a component that to your ears is superior. As far as the Denon 3910, it is a completely redesigned unit that you put your name on. The DV-50 is something you modify if you have to. If this is not true, you could have stepped up at any point in this thread to say otherwise. The other problem is that the outcome of reviews can affect you monetarily. These issues clearly are a good reason you should not post.
As far as my background, I have been an audiophile since 1972 until now and a high-end dealer from 1980-1992. I have sold and owned more equipment than most get the opportunity to. The drive to Chicago was nothing as Ive logged more miles for this hobby than I care to count. My ears are insured by Lloyds of London just kidding. Vie been involved in hundreds of listening sessions and shootouts, many of which provide a clear outcome.
Ive heard all the hype before, but this thread and your sincerity had me interested in the APL Denon. The shootout just DIDNT prove that one player CLEARLY was THE BEST. Yes, we all heard differences and the scores were close because the outcome was close. As I said previously, each owner thought their player was the best, but we all agreed that day that the outcome was closer than we all expected.
I also said previously that I had NO problem with the way the competition was handled. This is because with the space, proximity of outlets, number of cables, and amount of people and equipment in the room, there was no way to get things perfect. If you want to split hairs the DV50 was listened to last (which I thought was unfair to the others) giving it a slight edge as being the most recent heard. Each of six music selections were listened to entirely on each player before moving on. Normally, I would prefer a single selection played on each player before moving to the next. The power cables used were different on each player. There was no isolation or bases used. The DV-50 was listened to single-ended instead of balanced, giving it a disadvantage. Some may consider that significant. If you want me to take the differences that I heard to the typical audiophile level, the facts are that the DV-50 was clearly superior. It excelled in bass definition, inner detail, and timing & pace. Even though the tube units were warmer, the DV-50 was more musical. It was equal to the other players in every other category. Are you all happy now? In my opinion, the owners shouldnt have voted anyway.
Everyone is now pushing for more information, score cards, etc. This thread has become bigger than life, and the subject tarnished. I wont give the scores on each item because it really doesnt matter. These will just become more ammunition for the thread to continue and continue with no real meaning. Is anyone really using this information to purchase one of these players? I doubt it.
I believe we all agreed to agree that day not only because it was difficult to choose a clear winner, but because we were having a great time. This is what the hobby is all about anyway. I really dont care whether you, Alex, believe it was close or not.
Ive been involved in hundreds of listening sessions and shootouts, many of which provide a clear outcome. FOR WHATEVER REASON this one was more complicated. In actuality, there was a larger improvement when Brian applied Optix and Nordost Eco to one of 711 smilins CDs. This difference was bigger than the differences between players seriously.
I think the Chicago group took the high road on this subject and I wish for this issue to now end.
Tom Roberts
