Audio Research CD6 vs CD9 original and SE versions


I recently had an ARC CD6 in for a demo.  The system is:

Intel NUC --> MSB Analog (USB) --> Krell FBI --> Thiel CS2.7

With the ARC installed it went straight to the Krell.

What I heard was a fabulous top to midbass.  Where it did not sound right was in the bass.  For lack of a better term the bass sound was "rounded".  I tried a few different cables with varying degrees of success however I could not live with the bass.

My question is does anyone have experience with side-by-side listening of the CD6 vs CD9 and or the SE versions?  If so what differences did you hear?  I listen to mostly classical on this system and having poor bass drum, tympani, and double bass performance won't cut it.
solobone22
Just curious if you're just wanting to play CD’s why don’t you run a transport into your MSB Dac? Or do you not like the sound of the MSB?

jond
Just curious if you're just wanting to play CD’s why don’t you run a transport into your MSB Dac?

+1 on that.  jond

solobone22 If the CD6 and CD8 and CD9 are all  PCM 1792. wouldn't bother them the MSB should nail them all.

Give me the MSB Analog and a nice CD transport, and feed that Krell direct with the MSB's volume control.

Cheers George
@jond @georgehifi I've looked at the MSB spinners however they use the Oppo transport which may be hard to get these days.

I've run a few different CD players into the MSB however they never quite worked for me:

Denon 1650AR
Primare CD31
CAL CL-10

The midbass on up was far superior on the ARC CD-6.

Ideally I would like something that I can play discs and has a USB or network input.
solobone22

I keep re-reading this post and wonder, if, ARC has developed these newer spinner(s) to "bloom" in the midbass/midrange registers?
Possibly a more rounded or softer presentation?

Happy Listening!