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
This week I have had the X-01 and UX-1 in my system, although not on the same days, and listened to both by themselves and as transports for my firewire versions of the dCS Purcell and Elgar Plus. I have also heard the EMM separates (DCC2 and new transport) through someone else's system. My preferences:

CD: The X-01 is marginally better than the UX-1, and almost but not quite stands up to the Purcell and Elgar Plus (using the X-01 as the transport for the Purcell and Elgar Plus), which are a bit clearer, more precise, especially on low-level detail, and have a bit more air and sense of space. But we're not talking bang for the buck here; if I didn't already have the dCS units, I could very happily live with the X-01 alone for CD playback. I wasn't particularly overwhelmed by my experience with the EMM pair, and found the presentation too bright, forward and lacking in lower midrange-upper midbass weight, although certainly the sound was as clear as it gets. But except for the speakers (Kharma) I wasn't familiar with the amps and cables in the other system (Tenor and JM Labs), and in any event my tonal preferences run to rich and warm. I am not for a moment suggesting that this last was a fair test, so take it for as much or as little as you think it's worth.

SACD: The X-01 is simply the very best I've ever heard--spacious, amazingly dynamic, as clean as it gets, and with as much sheer weight in orchestral music as the analog side of my system. I liked the EMM pair better in SACD than I did in CD--real space, real clarity--but again I far prefer the X-01, and, in any event, since the EMM's weren't in my system, it wasn't a fair test. The UX-1 was close, but couldn't equal, the X-01.

DVD-A: This was a shock. The UX-1 was simply third rate, completely unacceptable. My Esoteric DV-50 beat it by miles. This suggests to me that there was something wrong with the demo unit, but I don't know.

The one thing I can tell you for sure is that the only test worth anything is your own ears in your own system. Based on that, I'm ordering an X-01.
I presently have a UX-1 and have owned the DV-50. Compared them side to side, and found DVD-A to be far superior on the UX-1.

Sometimes I regret not getting the X-01, but I do enjoy DVD-A; perhaps this Dual Disc business will supply more DVD-A material. The DVD-Video is also outstanding on the UX-1.

Esoteric is now showing a new SACD transport and mono dac units. Appears that the set will be over 30K.

The fun never ends!
Thank you so much MGOTTLIEB and SPLASKIN for your input. Just two weeks ago I had the opportunity of auditioning the Esoteric X-01 connected to a set of Top Line Burmester electronics and JBL Utopia Alto speakers. Interconnects and speaker wires were by Synergistics with active shielding (sorry I do not remember which model).
In the same session I also examined the Burmester 001 and the Bel Canto PL-1A.

The audition was mostly performed using several tracks from Yo Yo Ma's latest CD (Redbook) collection of works by Antonio Vivaldi--a Sony Classical 24-bit recording (2796-90916-2), featuring the double cello concerto, the largo from Four Season's Winter, etc...
An interesting feature of the recording is that the basso continuo is mostly rendered by a double bass, augmented by either a harpsichord or a positif pipe organ, depending on the cuts.

I will report here my findings in chronological order of listening.

1. Burmester 001. This device was connected to the AC via its own stock power chord. In general I was under-whelmed by the Burmester 001 player. The sound stage was of very moderate proportions and relatively flat. Instruments sounds somewhat jumbled together and not terribly well separated. The timbre was dark, cold and reedy, reminding me of a very early Harnoncourt recording. Transients were very well defined and powerful, but the entire string ensemble and soloists were nasal and overwhelmed by the double bass, which sounded bloated and overbearing, with a smeared wolf-note centered on the third harmonic of whatever note it was playing. In the largo movement from the Winter concerto in particular, Ma's bowing felt bloodless, unemotional and indistinct, almost as if he were playing on a suzuki cello as an afterthought. I could hear the attack of each note, but each note appeared to decay quickly into nothingness, without any of the bloom and emotional richness characteristic of Ma's playing. In other words, micro-dynamics were absent and the midrange sounded anemic.
I had started the audition of this piece with a highly favorable bias, having read and reread its fabulous review on Sound stage. I ended my audition with a solid thumbs-down.

2. Bel Canto PL-1A universal player -- This device was connected to the AC through a Shunyata Python VX and rested on a Black Diamond Racing platform.
Sound stage was enormous and the largest among the three players: wide, tall, deep, but unfortunately not completely focused. There was a sense of floating, as if the synesthetic images of the instruments were 'seen' through a magnifying glass. Instruments were well defined but their position seemed slightly unclear. Transients were excellent. Bass was amazingly tight. The double bass continuo was tight and clearly defined without any wolfing on the 3rd harmonic. There was also a fair amount of presence in the mid range that gave life to Yo-Yo ma's bowing. I could hear some emotion and subtlety in the cello transcription of the solo part in Winter's largo. However, the slight unfocusness of the sound stage and some residual thinness of the midrange still gave the impression of a slightly reedy and hollow presentation, lacking ease. I was very intrigued but was not enamoured by the sound. There was something altogether lacking. Please remember that the PL-1A's was assisted by the Python chord and a Black Diamond Racing platform. I did not have the opportunity of listening to this device in its stock setup.

3. Esoteric X-01 -- Initial listening with its stock power chord.
Sound stage was almost as large as Bel Canto PL-1A, but was rock solid. No sense of floating sound scape here. Instruments were very well defined and separated along the three-dimensional axis. Once again, excellent transients, but while I did have several misgivings of one form or another on the ability of the Burmester and Bel Canto of sustaining a sound and creating involving musical shapes through micro-dynamics, I was here instead struck by the subtle beauty of Yo-Yo Ma's bowing in his lyrically restrained rendition of the largo. Each note had a story to tell, with an attack, a dynamic arching bloom and a slow decay, transitioning to the next note, in turn having its own unique story to tell, different from all previous ones and all subsequent ones.
Furthermore, I was hearing more detail and richer harmonics than from the previous players. In one of the cuts the wooden pipes of the positif organ could be heard in the background, while it was mostly absent with the other players. The bass was quite good yet not perfect. It was reasonably well defined, but there was a trace of unpitched hash from the double bass which sounded like a slightly graying veil at the bottom.
On a whim, I asked the audio consultant to replace the Esoteric stock power chord with the shunyata python VX.
The result was not subtle: the bass line became rock solid, without any trace of hash. The sound stage opened further in the three dimensions and the background became even blacker. I detected even further instrument separation and the midrange and treble became even sweeter. Yo-yo Ma's solos were now staggeringly beautiful.
I was now in love with a sound which was simultaneously precise and emotionally involving.
I sampled the SACD capabilities of the X-01 only for a few minutes on a Jazz ensemble disk and found it to be incredible.
Declaring a simple thumbs up on this player would be a gross understatement. I would rather say that I am in love!

In conclusion: the only player I would consider in this bunch is X-01. PL-1A was intriguing but. . . no cigar. As for Burmester 001, I am still shaking my grizzling head!

NOTE. in phone conversation, people in the know at the Esoteric Division of Teac America suggested that while X-01 does offer a marvellous Redbook performance, the P70/D70 combo is still the Esoteric redbook flagship. It may be even superior to X-01
, with even better separation, definition, sweetness.

NOTE 2. Eventually I would like to have the opportunity of comparing X-01 with P70/D70. Does anyone know of any dealer who stocks both players in the US or Canada? Or has anyone listened to both of them?

NOTE 3. P70/D70 can function without a pre-amplifier as D70 has a digital volume control. Has anyone tried the combo driving an amplifier directly?

NOTE 4. I'd be also interesting in hearing more about the now rumoured SACD separates from Esoteric. Esoteric has now just launched a brand new and very informative web site at: http://www.teac.com/esoteric/NewEsoteric/index.html
The site features UX-1, X-01, P70, D70, DV-50, but the new aledged separates remain as such. . . they are yet unmentioned.
Sounds like you had a good listening session, and I obviously agree with your conclusions. But if you think changing power cords makes a difference, try cable changes on the X-01. Especially, try my favorite, Purist Dominus (I use Revision B, but some people prefer C). This player does love Dominus! Even changing the digital cable to my
dCS separates from Dominus to my other favorite cable, Kharma Enigma, seems to make a bigger difference than I am used to when changing these two cables.