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
audiojoy4
98 posts
 
Might I reiterate once again my surprise at the results of the test. I have been using the so called most 'radical step forward in cd redbook sound reply' unit in the shape of the Reimyo DAP 777. This was used with the Marantz DV8400 highly modded transport. Yet Alex's older APL -SACD 1000,was superior by a large margin in every possible way. Now either that unit has been hyped by the press (that includes numerous magazines on line and in paper format), or the APL unit is something very special. That is not to say that the other units in the shootout might not have been special.

How much better could the DV-50 have been with the clock upgrade? if it is considered to be not quite up with the best in terms of its cd redbook replay in standard form.

Please dont shoot me down, as I have not heard the DV50, i am going on what others have said in the press and on this thread.

Something just doesnot smell right. I could be wrong though.
lazarus28
339 posts
 
i don't see why anybody feels insulted. if they'd had my cd player there and trashed it, i sure wouldn't give a damn. think of it like this - who has to listen to the damn thing - you or them? if you're happy with it, what else matters?

beyond that, do any of you actually feel that there's *ANY* validity to this supposed shootout? do you *know* these people? what reason do we have to trust their ears? (and please, i'm not trying to insult anybody at the shootout - you shouldn't trust my ears any more than i should trust yours) and who honestly believes you can achieve definitive understanding of a player's attributes, even with amazing aural abilities, after hearing but a few tracks played on it?

even the magazine reviewers live with a piece of equipment for a few weeks to a month before they write their review. and even then, how can you make a judgement based on one opinion?

and alex is right - can't stand the "fact," audiogirl? the fact that you can seriously take any of this as "fact" is disturbing.

once again, folks - keep this fun and keep ego out of it. make your own decisions and take everybody else's opinion with a grain of salt. (especially mine - as i stated earlier, i'm notoriously stupid)

the only valid view is your own.
dbld
297 posts
 
Audio_girl, I completely agree with you regarding the SP1000. I owned the Integra version for some time and your observation is dead-on-the-money (I can't describe these things myself...but I know when something's missing). Ears, however, is a die-hard SP1000 fanatic. The last time I criticized the SP1000/DPS 10.5's sound (in the AVS forum) he accused me of bragging about how much money I spent on other players for comparison.

I agree that the SP1000 is a great player for its price range and has excellent build quality. But its sound is so far off the DV-50 and the Meridian level (even the Krell and Lexicon level), it is not even funny. I couldn't even imagine comparing it to the Linn, but I have never heard the Linn.

Ears won't give up though. I am glad he is happy with his unit. But he gets very offended by those who do not share his opinion.
nealhood
199 posts
 
With the exception of a few slurs from the pig pen, the comments from the shootout have been entertaining and rewarding. I too would have preferred a blind test but, I do like the 10 category 5 point scorecard approach. I hope to be seeing more of these shootouts in the future. Even hope to participate is some.

I should also mention that successful entrepreneurs always exhude plenty of confidence in their product. It's expected. Here Alex deserves a complement. I certainly hope his enthusiasm, confidence and colorful opinions in his own products and handiwork never wans. And, the same goes for other vendors, modifiers, etc., out there. It is this enthusiasm that drives them for higher goals. I just wish the Ram and Modwright fellows would also chime in from time to time. Shill and hype keep the audio business thriving so for goodness sakes let's not loose it.

I would also encourage vendors and modifiers, and all for that matter, to disrespect any slurring and invective behavior by merely not responding or disregarding the post(s). To respond is like getting in a pig pen with pigs. Things will just get nasty and dirty and the pigs - well they don't care.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
musicfirst
40 posts
 
OK, I guess my efforts to focus on the music went for not...

However, we all have to thank Audio Girl for tonights object lesson:

"DO NOT PUT ALL YOUR FAITH IN REVIEWS!"

Unfortunately, the same must be said for shootouts, and the axiom holds even more truth for those well-meaning endeavours. #;)>

A digression if I might:

In my opinion, the hallmarks of a good audio review have always included the following elements:

1) A known baseline of comparison (reference system/partnering components and software

2) An accurate description of the component's sonic attributes, preferably in more than one system or at least with different ancilliary components. Ideally (although rarely) compared against said reference/baseline components.

3) Devoid of adjectives such as as or 'best' or 'ultimate' or when they are used, they are used in the context of elements 1) and 2)and occasionally in the context of the reviewers own musical priorities (some of you may remember the "golden years" of TAS in the early 90s when the magazine regularly published articles featuring one of their reviewers system(s), listening room(s) and listening biases)

Now back to our regularly scheduled program:

Shootouts introduce so many additional variables into the 'reviewing' equation that drawing meaningful conclusions is virtually, if not completely impossible.

Indeed, in this most recent shootout, the participants themselves are finding it hard to find meaningful differences between source components that have as different a pedigree as Dobermans and Chihuahuas. Each unit had a different transport, DAC chipsets, Power supplies, and analog output stages and yet they 'sounded more similar than different'.

Personally, I find it very hard to believe. Perhaps there was, as some have suggested, an overriding characteristic in the system that negated or minimized the differences that, based on my (admittedly extrapolated) experience, almost certainly existed.

Where does the excercise leave us?? Yet again, the quest to find a foolproof method of auditioning by proxy reaches its ultimate, and preordained conclusion.

Say Good Night Gracie....
More to discover