Oracle CDP 2000 vs 1000

Dev
Lynn at Oracle sez the the BNC is the best output and that the two uit sound the same.

Tab110s the two units sound different.

Again I will say if they weren't I would have bought the 1000 and saved allot of money.

Lynn at Oracle is a nice person but I will have to disagree with her if she has made this statement, ask her how she came about with her conclusion. I would like to know what system she had set-up to do this evaluation including cables.

I had both the 1000 and 2000 hooked-up to the ACCUSTIC ARTS MK4 via AES and the differences were absolutely obvious that they sound different in my set-up.

I do not live that far from the manufacturer and would invite a demo comparison at my own home because it's a no brainer, if Lynn is making such statements then she is not doing justice for the Oracle product line.

Now I do want to make it clear that you Tab110 are the one saying this about Lynn and not me, (1000 sounding the same as the 2000)which I totally disagree with.

I have not yet tried the BNC connection mainly because I have a AES Stealth Sextet digital, if the BNC is better that will only be a bonus, I will get one down the road to try and find out for myself.

In the past I have done some comparisons between AES and BNC, there were differences but better! nope and that is why I have AES digital connections.

I'm sure the system used was probably all thier own products. Lynn doesn't return emails very quickly and the company takes vacation a few times a year.
The 6moons reviewer qouted Lynn as saying that they differ only in the suspension. Since you since in Canada, it'd be more easier for you to contact the company.

Tab110, I would not go by what the 6moons reveiwer (Ken) said fistly he obviously prefers the looks of 1000 over the 2500 and has not even evaluated the two, please.

Secondly he actually never even had a 2000, he had a 2500. Some of these reviewers are so in their own world and I personally don't rely on their reviews. Even his system set-up, please.

Prior to me actually getting the 2000 I asked questions about the two, what I was told was that the electronics are very "similar" not the same but when it comes to design they are totally different and in a resolving system the 2000 will sound different and be superior.

Refer back to Audiofiel's thread, even though he is a dealer he has made a accurate statement when he said;

"That's not quite true. The CD-2000 has a much more sophisticated and innovative suspension system than the CD-1000. In a highly resolving system, the superiority of the CD-2000 is quite apparent."

Tab110, I had the Oracle 2500 player prior to getting the 2000 transport and have to say I prefered the Accustic Arts combo. When I initially received the Oracle 2000 I did not open it up right away, it sat unopened for some three hours mainly due to my findings of the 2500 but then I reminded myself that it was a transport and would be hooked-up via with my Accustic Arts dac. I sure am happy I did because from the first cd and first note I heard I have been impressed, the best I have had in my system period. Also I want you to know that my 2000 is the most current model so if you have an older one changes have been made, mainly the lazer.

Also I did not not even take Oracles own word and got a 1000 to compare for my self, the 2000 is better period and does not sound the same.

Dear Sir,
My name is Lynn from Oracle Audio Technologies.Please send me an email to: lynn@oracle-audio.com and I usually reply to all of my emails within 24 hours.Or you can reach me at 819-864-0480 . It will be a pleasure to talk with you.
Please note that the CD 2000 -2500 and the CD 1000-1500 have the very same electronics, very same circuitry and the same CD laser drive mechanism, the Philips CD PRO II.
Please let me know if you need more assistance. You can always visit our website at : www.oracle-audio.com. Please let me know where you are located and it will be my pleasure to direct you to one of our distributors. Thank you for your interest. Lynn