I can't really hear a big difference


Some of you might think I'm crazy, or deaf...

BUT..

I just got a BAT VK D5SE, used, for a good price. I eagerly set it up, and compared it to my current CD changer (cost me abourt $200), a Sherwood Newcastle CDC 680.

The bass is fuller on the BAT, voices seem a little bit more smooth, but basically it sounds very similar, if not identical in some places to the Sherwood. I mean, it's HARD to hear the difference. The BAT also sounds softer, like the volume is turned down a tad.

My other components are: ML Aerius i, VTL IT 85...

When I upgraded my amp from an NAD 340C to the VTL IT 85, the difference was mind blowing. I mean, HUGE HUGE HUGE. This, costs just as much (even though I bought it used, and the VTL NEW!), and has hardly done much at all!!
128x128dennis_the_menace
I own a VK-5se and I'm very happy with its performance.
Mine was also used and had to go thought some hoops.
I had two tubes loose from shipping and swiched balanced
innerconnects several times before I was happy. Also you might
remove one of the feet and place one in middle so you are using three feet(nordost points worked well for me). Not sure why but made a noticeable difference. Also the lense could have a film
on it. I'm not saying is everything(I just ordered a aero audio)but I have no intention to sell it either. Is yours
the 24 bit version? It should say on the back.
Dennis - My take on audio gear has always been that if I'm "upgrading", the change should be very noticeable and much better - as you say, nobody would suggest this is not an improvement. I'm not searching for that last .1%, at least at this point in my life, but I'm willing to drop the $$$ on something that is clearly an improvement and have done so multiple times.

With a very good set of speakers, changes to amps and preamps (and certainly from receiver to decent separates) were of the can't-miss-the-improvement variety. Some were jaw-dropping, some were significant, and some were just nice improvements. Many "upgrades" didn't produce the sense of clear improvement. This is always disappointing, but the piece gets sold and I move on.

I tried several different CD player and DAC upgrades to no avail - I didn't even think they sounded different, much less better. There was no way I thought I could tell the difference a/b'ing them. Again, this is not comparing them over a month with very detailed listening - this was going back and forth over an evening or two, so I'm not saying there was absolutely no difference or improvement, just that it was more subtle than I was going to worry about.

Several months ago, Muse's Model 9 DVD player started showing up used at very good prices. I had read many reviews that raved (and then some) about the performance of this player. I've always liked Muse's philosophy and reputation. And, I want the best sound I can have without having two dozen boxes to get it, and since I really like HT too, I thought that if this was an excellent CD player (which is what the rave reviews focused on), then it was a near-perfect addition as it would be dual-purpose.

So I bought the Model 9 and put it in my system. This time, there was definitely a noticeable difference. Switching back and forth between it and my Sony DVD-S7700 as a transport into a highend processor, the Muse was much smoother and more musical. Playing some Coleman Hawkins, there was no doubt that the Muse made it sound more like a real saxaphone.

What was interesting to me about this, in addition to the number of strike outs I had experienced in the same arena, was how much more difficult it was to describe this improvement. Every other time I had upgraded, I had no doubt that an open-minded, but uninterested, by-passer would admit that the upgrade made the system sound better, even if they thought the price was crazy. I'm not sure that this would be the case with the Muse upgrade, though I have no doubt that anybody who has ever had an interest in music playback would readily identify it as a significant improvement.

Anyhow, there are a bunch of reasons why the BAT might not be able to show it's true colors to you, but there are also many of us who have experienced the same thing. I'm not as persistent as many on this site, but I wouldn't spend a lot of time with it if you find it basically disappointing at first blush - sell it and move on. Just my opinion. -Kirk
This thread is an interesting commentary on the psycology of the Audiophile (and I say this as a full fleged member of the club).

We automatically assume that the more expensive piece just has to sound better than the inexpensive one, and look for reasons why the expensive unit doesn't decisively trounce its inexpensive cousin.

The other side of the coin is to ask why the inexpensive piece sounds so good relative to the expensive one - but that's a hard road for us (me!) to travel!
Why would the Sherwood sound louder than the BAT? I'm having a hard time A/Bing them because of this...

A little more listening, and the BAT sounds a LITTLE bit more realistic on piano, but the Sherwood plays voices more forward and full... almost an emphasis on the voice over the instruments, and it sounds real good.

The BAT also has less background "hiss", when that is noticeable on the recording.

Still planning on waiting for the new ICs to come, and break in some... I'm pretty skeptical though.