Marantz SA-10 arriving Monday!


I've been hearing and reading all I can about this player during this last year. I have a 6005 right now and it's a nice player but not as good as my analog rig (10k) so it's not a fair comparison. Elizabeth mentioned that her SA-10 is better than her analog. I will be comparing the 2 SACD players side by side. I have at least 3 CD's in which I have duplicates. I'm fascinated about how the circuitry upsamples to DSD SACD. Well not exactly but somehow an improvement over Redbook CD. I have a 2" thick maple block coming in the same day for it. It's going to be a long weekend. I know it can't work miracles on all CD's. If there is jitter in the recording then supposedly you will never get that out. Speak up if I'm wrong about that.
128x128blueranger
@roxy54 I started with Ayon CD-07, then tried Sony HAP-Z1ES internal DAC, not happy as Ayon sounds better.  Both of them use Burr Brown 1796 DAC.  Then I purchased Denafrips Terminator R2R DAC 4 months ago, using Sony as a player with USB Audio connection.

Hello, hap-z1es with firmware 18120r support sa-10?
Are you using latest firmware also? Thank you
I do not see any new firmware for SA-10 on the Marantz website. Could you please elaborate on the firmware?

I got to play a little bit with the sound settings. (I can confirm that they only work on CD/PCM signal and not on SACD/DSD signal.) Some findings (in my system and to my ears):
Filter 2 sounds more natural overall, with better instrument attack. Although they say it would be brighter than Filter 1 and I complained about some brightness, I do not find that to be true in my system; maybe a little bit the opposite. Filter 1 increases the sound density; to a degree, it sounds more pleasant, but I feel that it is a coloring of the sound.
I ended up keeping the Dither 1 setting, but it was difficult to make a difference/choice between 1 and Off; setting 2 was not to my liking.
I changed NoiseShaper to setting 4th-1. I do agree that the sound stage seems a little tighter with 3th-1, especially by pinpointing vocals, but my Luxmans and the KEFs are already doing a fantastic job with the sound stage and I preferred the slightly perceived increase in overall sound definition of 4th-1.
These findings may be highly dependent on the source. My test discs were:
- Diana Krall: Turn Up the Quiet
- Katty Perry: MTV Unplugged
- Adam Cohen: We Go Home
- Dorati/London Symphony: Enesco’s Romanian Rhapsody 1 and Liszt’s Hungarian Rhapsodies 1-6 (I can see some people preferring Filter 1 on this CD because instruments sound a little richer with that setting)
All these different setting combinations seem to me like a cop-out on the part of the designer.  Surely the goal is to design and manufacture a machine as faithful to the original signal as possible; one presumes one setting combination comes closer to that than all the others.  Their inclusion seems like putting a parametric equalizer on a preamp.
Post removed