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
 
Aldavis, it is very simple to understand. EVERY single component on the signal path adds noise and distortions. The passive components (resistors, caps, transformers) add less, but the active components (transistors, tubes, etc.) are adding more. This is the reason why more complicated circuits require sufficient amount of negative feedback.

In conclusion, all of your audio components add noise and distortions (some more some less). If you like the “bloom” of your CJ preamp and this combination sounds better to you, then listen that way. Of course, again, this will be added noise and distortions.

Regards,
Alex
Ag insider logo xs@2x
aldavis
202 posts
 
APLHIFI,
At no time did I dispute your reasoning for a shorter signal path. My question regaurded your own use of "bloom" causing tubes. You have not explained why you use them. My assumption is that they are used intentionaly to alter the sonic signature to a more pleasing "bloomy" one. I personaly don't judge this one way or the other. Regaurding the use of a preamp I would say that it would be a net negative only if you have a better way to perfectly add gain. I want to make it clear that I'm not attacking you or your products.
Best Wishes,
Jim
aplhifi
515 posts
 
Aldavis, no offence taken! I use the term "bloom" because it is commonly used for the added warmth from tube stages. I am not the guy who looks for really creamy, flabby and tubey sound. The 6H30 tube I use in my designs is also known as "the solid state tube". Not many are using it because it does not add the usual "bloom" and soft tubey sound signature as many other tubes do. I would hate to mask existing problems with tube stage that rolls off the highs and "blooms" so you don't hear the harshness. I take a different approach of having everything as right as possible before the tube stage. Then, the transformer coupled 6H30 adds just more naturalness and musicality to the sound. Why is that? It is becuase the 6H30 is Super-linear tube which does not have much gain. This allows for design without negative feedback. The end result is dynamic, transparent, 3D solid-state-like sound with added high frequency sweetnes and liquid midrange coming from the tube. Since all passive or active components add noise and distortions, my tube stage isn't free from that - it adds them too. The question is if you would like to make things worse using preamp.

Regards,
Alex
reb1208
518 posts
 
Alex, I would like to know if your 6H30 circuit can support these two tubes. 6N1P and 6CG7. I use a tube linestage designed to take 6H30 and can sub, without any problem those two tubes. And if you have a bias or filament pot inside, the 6922/6dj8 should also work. For many people, not being able to roll the 6H30 will be a big negative.
aplhifi
515 posts
 
Reb1208, sorry to say but you can not roll tubes as my circuit will not allow it. I have a box full of the best available NOS tubes (about $3K worth) and have tried all. I have yet to hear anything else that sounds close to the 6H30.

If you hear the machine with the 6H30 tube stage, you will realize that you don't need to roll tubes.

Regards,
Alex
More to discover