2. digital
  3. 1099737755

Esoteric DV-50: Any cdp's Significantly better?

Is there are anyone out there who has compared the Esoteric DV-50 to a number of dedicated red book only players (or other universal's) and found one that is SIGNIFICANTLY better?

I stress significantly because in my humble opinion the redbook playback (if comparison unit is just a cd cd player only )must be significantly better to justify losing DVD-A, SACD and DVD-Video capability.

I keep hearing there are better one box solutions and being a die hard 2 channel fan I would sell my DV-50 if I found a player in the same price range that sounds significantly better. But every time I do an AB comparision to other well respected units the DV-50 has slayed each and every one.

So far, it has eaten the lunch of the Classe CDP-10, Ayre CX-7, Linn Ikemi, Cairn Fog Vers. 2, Cary 306/300, Arcam DV 27A and CD 33T, Myryad CD 600, etc. It even betters a Sony SCD 777ES/MF Tri-Vista 21 transport/dac combo that I previously owned. I'm only comparing the DV-50 to single box cd or universal players, but I just wanted to mention the Sony/MF combo. I'm sure there are some dac/transport combo's that will handily beat the DV 50.

Some may say that the DV 50 should beat all the above because the of price point ($5,500 vs. average price of $3,000 for the above players). But I disagree since conventional wisdom says that stand alone players (especially with the pedigree of those mentioned above) should produce better redbook than a universal player trying to be a jack of all trades. Only the DV 27A does video plus audio. By the way, I was very impressed with the 27A as just a cd player. Of all the above I would say the Ayre was the best.

Next on my list is the Electrocompaniet EMC 1UP and the Resolution Audio Opus 21. However, I must tell you I am really impressed with the DV 50 and all the great reviews are absolutely true. I've noticed that many people who are using it or comparing to other players are using the RCA analog outs instead of the balanced outs. There is a significant improvement in sound if you use the balanced outs and I'm only interested in hearing comments from people who have compared it against other players using the balanced outs on the DV-50.

My system components are as follows:

B&W N803's speakers & HTM-1 center
Cary Cinema 5 (5 x 200) amp
Anthem D1 Statement pre/pro
Esoteric DV 50
Acoustic Zen Satori Shotgun speaker wire
Nirvana SX balanced interconnects from DV-50 to Anthem
Acoustic Zen Matrix reference II interconnects from D1 to Cary
No after market power cords or isolation equipment

My system sounds great! Those who comment please make sure to specify what specific improvements you heard over the DV 50 and what cdp were you comparing it against.

AVGURU
avguru
aplhifi
515 posts
 
Guidocorona, I agree with you and whatever I wrote before was strictly from my perspective. I have nothing against Balanced designs and their manufacturers. As you said, the truth is in the hearing. Yes, SE outputs stay intact as well as Balanced outs. My Balanced option approach is nothing new. It is widely used for Studio microphones. Since the microphone is a single ended device (as all other sources), a phase splitter is required. In most cases it is done with transformer. So I do the same. Even in digital applications there is no Balanced source. The phase splitting is usually done in the digital domain. The designer has the option to convert it back to SE, process the Analog in SE and split it to Balanced again, or just install twice more components and call it "true balanced".

Regards,
Alex
mejames
986 posts
 
does the denon 3910 take forever and a day like the Sony scd-1 to load the TOC and actually start playing a disc?
aplhifi
515 posts
 
Dbld, I am happy to hear that others share my view regarding "balanced".

Well, I do have the DV-50 on my bench as I type. My expectations are to improve its performance compared to stock and give it true DSD capabilities for stereo. To be honest, I am still beating my head with it so I can not comment more for now..:-) Many will disagree with my opinion about tube stages, but I like tubes. Sadly there is no space in the DV-50 for my tube mods so it will remain all Solid State. The ouput buffer will be MOSFET single ended working in Class A which is actually not bad at all and in combination with the Tamura coupling transformers provides very analog-like, natural sound character. I will tell more as I progress.

Regards,
Alex
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
Alex, two questions:
1. Ignoring obvious cost increase considerations, have you thought of trying the feasibility/results of a 'traditional true balanced design.', just purely as a prrof-of-concept/sonic test, of course.
2. How much cost to the end user would be added by such a design?
3. Concerning a purely hypothetical DV50 tube-based mod, you can always move some of the tube circuitry to an external chassis. That is I believe what ModWright and possibly Exemplar have done.
Oops, I have no idea how my two questions have now become three. Oh well, that's pragmatism again rearing its ugly head!
avguru OP
116 posts
 
Alex,

I could care less what people say in terms of balanced only being beneficial for long runs of cables. To many audiophiles (including myself) there is a clear and audible difference in hearing balanced vs. single ended performance...especially on those componets(like Electrocompaniet,Esoteric,Ayre,Classe,etc) that were designed to sound better balanced. What I and many other audiophiles hear are blacker backgrounds, a deeper soundstage and a more "see through quality" to the music. And when lesser designs start to sound distorted at higher volumes balanced designed equipment tends to hold its composure better.

We can talk all day about the technical reasons why there is no advantage to balanced over single ended but the fact of the matter is balanced DOES SOUND BETTER...and not by a small margin! As far as I'm concerned, if a design change or connection makes an audible improvement its better!

NUFF SAID!

AVGURU
More to discover