In response to Tvad:
Fair question. Here is how I scored the three: Esoteric DV-50 (46); APL 3910 (47); Modwright 9000ES (48) out a "perfect" score of 55. We used a subjective scale of one being worst, and a five being the best, across 11 categories. If I could imagine better or was just a little bit unsatisfied, I didn't score a five. And no, I don't pretend that all of us were in agreement on the scoring categories or exactly what each category referred to.
Before I elaborate, let me say that this was fun even if exhausting. I heard some top-notch CDs, a couple of which I will obtain in future, through some really great equipment. Three players are plenty to compare in a day. I don't see how you could fairly compare more, as your brain needs a break after a while. We did listen to some SACD tracks as well, but none of them especially rocked my world.
To those that say you have to listen to each component in your own system, I have to ask: Do you ignore all reviews? If not, why not? The reviewer's system will never be an exact duplicate of yours and even if it was, your room will be different. Second question: How, if you are not a reviewer, are you going to get three or four or six top-notch universal players into your system for a lengthy test period? Modders don't loan out their equipment to the world at large. I suppose you could buy two at at time, A/B them and then unload one at a loss here on Audigon.
I appreciate Brian's making this audition, or shoot-out, possible. It was worthwhile, even if not as rigorously controlled as some might argue it should have been. And it was just a nice social event after the scorecards were completed. So don't dismiss the idea of a couple of audiophiles getting together to compare gear. Try it. You might find you like it. It might not change your mind, but it is worthwhile.
After a short warm-up period, we picked six tracks and played about two to three minutes, per track, on each player after first listening to each track. That is, cuts 1-6 were played back-to-back on one unit; then the same tracks were played in the same order on the second unit; then on the third unit. At the end, we took a couple of selections and went directly back and forth between players. Brian's sound meter needed batteries so the volume equalization was done by ear and group consensus, and yes I am sure we were a little off.
What each player did right:
The APL Denon 3910 had the clear edge on detail retrieval, bass, and depth of soundstage. On an early cut, from Brian's Nils Lofgren CD, it was a real treat. Steve made no bones about the fact that *bass* is really important to him. I don't see Steve trading his player for one of the other two. I thought, however, the APL 3910 was just a notch below the Modwright 9000ES on vocals - a little dry. And there was something slightly fatiguing to my ears towards the high end in the APL unit. Sorry I can't pin it down better than that, but by a slight margin I preferred the Modwright unit, even though it clearly wasn't the "best" in each category.
The Modwright scored high on overall "musicality" and didn't fall too far in any other category. It's bass could be better, tighter, but it's satisfying. The Modwright wasn't offensive in any category, had a nice soundstage, good midrange, treble, vocals. One other person thought the Modwright was a tad warm. I liked the unit on female voices. I thought there was just a little less detail than on APL 3910, but not much. Very enjoyable, very easy to listen to.
The interesting player, to me, was the Esoteric DV-50. It was neutral, as compared to the other two players, in that it didn't have big plusses or minuses that were easy to identify. It was a solid performer but left me with the sense that it was just a bit damped sounding as compared to the other two units. By that I mean it sounded just a little less "in the room" and vibrant. Tom thought the unit sounded more exciting in his home system, so I don't think I am off in this regard. The Esoteric unit had good rhythm and pace, good bass, and was right behind the other units in the other categories. Bon commented that, compared to stock DV-50 units, Tom's modified unit had a large soundstage that didn't collapse. I would agree.
---
In the weeks leading up to this listening session, there was an incredible amount of vitriol expressed in this thread. That's unfortunate. I had never met Bon, Steve, or Tom and his sister before yesterday. They are all into music and very gracious. No one seized control of the event or demanded that everyone vote a certain way. Brian lent some discipline to the exercise, but that's about it. Steve ruffled some feathers coming into this. But after meeting him in person, I don't have any problem with him. I think he's a little like the Rodney Dangerfield of audio in that he is very vocal, and I can see how he could set some up-tight audiophiles on edge. But his APL 3910 is really good and I don't believe that he is into this for anything other than his own enjoyment in the privacy of his home. Steve really likes music and it's not more complicated than that. And the rest of us of enjoyed the music as well!
---
That's how I scored it, and why I scored it the way I did. Brian has laid out the equipment that was used; on a different day, with different cords/interconnects/speakers/amps -- sure, everything would have sounded a little different.
Thanks again to Brian, who donated his time and made his excellent system available. And thank you Steve, Bon, and Tom for making the effort and sharing your excellent gear for an afternoon.
- Eric
Fair question. Here is how I scored the three: Esoteric DV-50 (46); APL 3910 (47); Modwright 9000ES (48) out a "perfect" score of 55. We used a subjective scale of one being worst, and a five being the best, across 11 categories. If I could imagine better or was just a little bit unsatisfied, I didn't score a five. And no, I don't pretend that all of us were in agreement on the scoring categories or exactly what each category referred to.
Before I elaborate, let me say that this was fun even if exhausting. I heard some top-notch CDs, a couple of which I will obtain in future, through some really great equipment. Three players are plenty to compare in a day. I don't see how you could fairly compare more, as your brain needs a break after a while. We did listen to some SACD tracks as well, but none of them especially rocked my world.
To those that say you have to listen to each component in your own system, I have to ask: Do you ignore all reviews? If not, why not? The reviewer's system will never be an exact duplicate of yours and even if it was, your room will be different. Second question: How, if you are not a reviewer, are you going to get three or four or six top-notch universal players into your system for a lengthy test period? Modders don't loan out their equipment to the world at large. I suppose you could buy two at at time, A/B them and then unload one at a loss here on Audigon.
I appreciate Brian's making this audition, or shoot-out, possible. It was worthwhile, even if not as rigorously controlled as some might argue it should have been. And it was just a nice social event after the scorecards were completed. So don't dismiss the idea of a couple of audiophiles getting together to compare gear. Try it. You might find you like it. It might not change your mind, but it is worthwhile.
After a short warm-up period, we picked six tracks and played about two to three minutes, per track, on each player after first listening to each track. That is, cuts 1-6 were played back-to-back on one unit; then the same tracks were played in the same order on the second unit; then on the third unit. At the end, we took a couple of selections and went directly back and forth between players. Brian's sound meter needed batteries so the volume equalization was done by ear and group consensus, and yes I am sure we were a little off.
What each player did right:
The APL Denon 3910 had the clear edge on detail retrieval, bass, and depth of soundstage. On an early cut, from Brian's Nils Lofgren CD, it was a real treat. Steve made no bones about the fact that *bass* is really important to him. I don't see Steve trading his player for one of the other two. I thought, however, the APL 3910 was just a notch below the Modwright 9000ES on vocals - a little dry. And there was something slightly fatiguing to my ears towards the high end in the APL unit. Sorry I can't pin it down better than that, but by a slight margin I preferred the Modwright unit, even though it clearly wasn't the "best" in each category.
The Modwright scored high on overall "musicality" and didn't fall too far in any other category. It's bass could be better, tighter, but it's satisfying. The Modwright wasn't offensive in any category, had a nice soundstage, good midrange, treble, vocals. One other person thought the Modwright was a tad warm. I liked the unit on female voices. I thought there was just a little less detail than on APL 3910, but not much. Very enjoyable, very easy to listen to.
The interesting player, to me, was the Esoteric DV-50. It was neutral, as compared to the other two players, in that it didn't have big plusses or minuses that were easy to identify. It was a solid performer but left me with the sense that it was just a bit damped sounding as compared to the other two units. By that I mean it sounded just a little less "in the room" and vibrant. Tom thought the unit sounded more exciting in his home system, so I don't think I am off in this regard. The Esoteric unit had good rhythm and pace, good bass, and was right behind the other units in the other categories. Bon commented that, compared to stock DV-50 units, Tom's modified unit had a large soundstage that didn't collapse. I would agree.
---
In the weeks leading up to this listening session, there was an incredible amount of vitriol expressed in this thread. That's unfortunate. I had never met Bon, Steve, or Tom and his sister before yesterday. They are all into music and very gracious. No one seized control of the event or demanded that everyone vote a certain way. Brian lent some discipline to the exercise, but that's about it. Steve ruffled some feathers coming into this. But after meeting him in person, I don't have any problem with him. I think he's a little like the Rodney Dangerfield of audio in that he is very vocal, and I can see how he could set some up-tight audiophiles on edge. But his APL 3910 is really good and I don't believe that he is into this for anything other than his own enjoyment in the privacy of his home. Steve really likes music and it's not more complicated than that. And the rest of us of enjoyed the music as well!
---
That's how I scored it, and why I scored it the way I did. Brian has laid out the equipment that was used; on a different day, with different cords/interconnects/speakers/amps -- sure, everything would have sounded a little different.
Thanks again to Brian, who donated his time and made his excellent system available. And thank you Steve, Bon, and Tom for making the effort and sharing your excellent gear for an afternoon.
- Eric