Esoteric X-01 SE vs EMM CDSA SE

Leonx, I have heard SACDs where the imaging is bloated and overgrown as you suggest. Other disks where the imaging appears to be right on the button. My experience is that the bloated instrument images is mostly on SACDs that are remasters of old tapes from the 50s, e.g. Dvorak Cello Concerto with Piatigorsky/Munch, or Starker on Bach suites.
This may be just a case of conscious over-engineering of old master tapes by sound engineers that should quite frankly consider visiting a concert hall before indulging in any more fantasy pastiches of unrealistic hyper-realism.

Guido, the Piatigorski/Munch Dvorak sounds OK on vinyl. I'm surprised the sacd doesn't.

Thanks for the helpful answers!i think it would be interesting as well to hear from somebody that had done a direct comparison.Digital is, in my opinion, something tricky when it comes to comparing two machines.Its really important to compare side by side.Though its not the first time i hear that esoterics are kind of mechanical!

Leonx: I assume this was the standard X-01 you were comparing, i.e. not the Limited or D2?

Gregm, it is not at all surprising that the LP does not have the problems found on SACD. Consider that in most cases engineers start from the old master tapes. they remix, enhance, depress frequencies and tracks according to whatever canon they have chosen to follow. . . and that in SACD reprints of old recordings is often the 'wow' factor more often than not. Or in other words, SACDs do not murder music. . . irresponsible recording engineers with SACDs murder music!