Playback Designs MPS-5 CD/SACD Player


Category: Digital

I recently added the Playback Designs MPS-CD/SACD player to my system and now that I've got some hours on it I thought I'd share my impressions.

First, realize that I don't have any references in the same price band as the PD, so the comparison will be to a grossly different universal player (a modded Pioneer Elite DV-58AV with a Superclock 4 and beefed up I/O stages). The Pioneer was actually pretty decent with SACD, but I longed for much more with redbook CD. I found myself listening to lots of vinyl or listening to SACDs and DVD-As.

There are now two or three reviews out about the MPS-5, most notably Mike Lavignes, supplemented by an excellent addendum by Ted Smith. David Robinson is working on a detailed review, but gave a preliminary thumbs up.

Well, I listened and listened and went back and forth from the Pioneer to the Playback Designs. The PD was clearly superior, but how to describe it was my issue, other than use words like bigger air and imaging.

All became crystal clear when I ABd using Enrico Rava (trumpet) and Stefano Bollani's (piano) latest CD "The Third Man". (BTW, this is a fantastic, etherial, jazz CD. Rava is one of the worlds great jazz trumpeters IMHO). If the pictures on the CD cover and insert are accurate, this is recorded in a live studio with hardwood floor and just a couple of mics. One mic is stuck right in the piano, with the lid open and the other is stationed in front of Rava, sitting about five-feet beyond the foot of the piano.

The first cut, "Estate", starts with just piano. I think a touch of reverb is added because of the very close proximity of the mic to the strings. With the MPS-5 the image of the piano stretches from about three-feet inside my right speaker to two-feet outside. (That reverb might actually be very light "flange" effect or "chorus", stetching the image so far). That image goes from my floor to a foot or two above the right speaker, but it's focal point is about six-inches inside the speaker about three-feet off the floor.

In contrast, the Pioneer doesn't go outside the speaker at all and stops about a foot from the floor and at the top of the speaker. I'd matched levels, but I tried to expand the Pioneer's image by turning up the volume, but no go, it just got louder, not bigger and "fuller".

Let's talk about Rava's trumpet image. The engineer has placed him to the left of center, but not out at the speaker. His mic is about four feet from the floor in the picture and he's sitting casually and playing. His mic is where you hear the atmosphere of the room, with both direct and reflected trumpet sound coming through, stretching from the piano edge to the left speaker, with a real strong focal point about four feet high and 30-degrees to the left of center. Once again, the Pioneer nails the focal point of the trumpet. You can hear the room, but it's much less obvious.

Didn't I say "fuller" earlier? Let me talk about it more. With that piano intro that I mentioned earlier, there's an incredibly rich and complex set of overtones, strongest at the piano's focal point, but showering the surrounding area with a overtones that decrease in richness as you move away from the focal point. Unfortunately the Pioneer is lacking the best overtones. The piano sounds "clangy" and thin in comparison. With the MPS-5 it sounds like there's more bass, but there's also way more high overtones. It's not all steel sound, but you hear the wood sound clearly.

The trumpet gains the same luxurious coating of overtones, high an low, making it sound fuller and richer and less edgy.

I don't have Rava's album on LP, but I do have a couple of Nora Jones albums on CD and LP. I'd stopped playing the CDs after I got my Pro-ject TT. Now the CDs are back out. In direct comparison, the glare and edge I was hearing in Nora's voice on CD is now gone. The images are now as big as the LP. The improvement is VAST.

Still, I think it took a sparely recorded album like Rava's to clearly demonstrate to me what I was hearing. Everything sounded fuller, more dynamic and just plain better, but now I can explain better why.

The excellent Reference Recordings CD "Crown Imperial" shows a couple of other advantages of the MPS-5. When things get really complex, with everybody playing loud but different lines at the same time it's much easier to pick out each line. I've played this before as a trumpeter, so I have a very good idea what's going on. Even knowing that I'd lose lines with the Pioneer, where the PD kept each line separate and easy to follow.

The controls are simple and intuitive, with a nicely backlit remote. The drawer is solid and fast. Like most drawers, if you push on it when it's open, it'll close. The chassis is heavy aluminum plate. At this price you might hope for a chassis machined from aircraft billet, but instead you get a solidly made chassis that's attractive, stiff and heavy.

There are balanced and unbalanced analog outputs (I used balanced into my Rowland Continuum 500 integrated amp). There is a wide selection digital inputs and outputs, but no HDMI either in or out. (My Pioneer has DSD-out via HDMI, so I miss the potential to use that with the Playback Designs).

Playback Designs' web site is not up yet, but it will be reasonably soon, I hope. I leave that to give you more technical details. I'm only here to talk about sonics.

Sorry that I didn't have any 10 and 20-thousand dollar players to compare the MPS-5. Mike, Ted and Dave have started that and there'll be more to come.

BTW, the retail price is $15,000 and there's an introductory price of $10,000. I have no idea how long that'll last, but I suspect it'll end soon, when the web site is up and marketing swings into full force.

Dave
dcstep
Of course, but who is without bias; not the dealer of a line (e.g., AF), not the owner of equipment (e.g., you) and not the owner of other equipment (e.g., me).

The comments don't convince me that the Emm is better than the PBD; rather, they are enough to determine that the PBD isn't nearly the world beater it's been made out to be - it's a good CDP at its price point; nothing more.
Bar81, I totally agree with your assertions about bias, but given that, how can you then turn around and coclude "...that the PBD isn't nearly the world beater..." I don't think there's enough information to conclude anything, other than it's a contender.

When a less biased review comes along, if ever, then we'll know, OR you can listen for yourself and judge for yourself, which I've fortunate enough to do.

Now, if I can compare to dCS and AMR and maybe one or two others, like modded Esoterics, then I'll have more conclusive, but biased, opinion. Making those head-to-head comparisons are harder than you might think.

Dave
Here are a few things that I'd do different if doing this comparo again and only had an hour to an hour and a half:

First, I'd avoid Pink Floyd and Radiohead. As much fun as they are to listen to, they're chocked so full of purposely out of phase signals and flying voices and electronic noises that you can't evaluate what's "right". These albums sounded so different on these two players that it was mesmerizing, but not real useful.

Next, or really first, match levels. We didn't do this and it's really critical. The machines clearly had different output levels, yet we simply adjusted by ear, a real no-no.

Next, set up both players with equivalent ICs so that you can move back and forth with ease. Physically switching is a chore and reduced the comparative analysis that we might have otherwise done.

Limit your listening to three or four discs, each with a purpose. On CDs, this needs to include one loaded with glare on lesser machines to see what magic is done, if any. Another disc should focus on midrange accuracy, so a female vocal, either a cappella or with a small group. Next, listen to a BIG orchestral piece that has micro dynamics and blockbuster sound. (I love Mahler for this). Focus on both ends of the dynamic spectrum. Include a really densely scored disc to see how the lines stay separate, or not. (Mahler is good again). Include a solo piano disc with big dynamcis.

When possible, listen in balanced and unbalanced modes. (Both were unbalanced in this case, despite the PD's balanced mode excellence.)

On a hybrid SACD compare the CD layer and SACD layer on both machines.

We could have done that in an hour, IF we'd been focused on getting it done and had all the needed parts. We spent too much time enjoying music and didn't "work" hard enough.

The goal should be to identify performance in both CD and SACD modes, balanced and unbalanced, and comment on balance, musicality, micro and macro dynamics, timbral presentation and, above all, never use the word PRaT. (Just kidding Mike).

Given way more luxurious time, I'd run the transport of one through the DAC of the other and vice versa, if possible (the Emm doesn't allow this). I've found this useful for hearing differences between DACs and transports.

With more time, I'd also pull in the Pink Floyd and Radiohead and do some phrase by phrase comparisons to see what's happen, or at least be able to say, "this one did this and the other one did that."

Finally, with more time I'd just spend...more time, seeing where the investigation leads me and just enjoying the process.

Dave
You'll be able to hear the MPS-5 for yourself at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest this October. Look for it in the Soundings/Rowland/Sumiko high-end room (they'll have two rooms). It'll be the source in the system demonstrating the new Vienna Acoustics "The Music" reference speakers, driven by Jeff Rowland Design Group equipment, hopefully including their new Criterion battery powered pre-amp.

There won't be any A-Bing with the competition, but you can listen to the PD and go to other rooms to hear Emm, dCS and others that are certain to be there.

The Democrats just proved that Denver's pretty easy to get to, so plan to come and listen.

Dave