2. digital
  3. 1172688055

Blind Shoot-out in San Diego -- 5 CD Players

On Saturday, February 24, a few members of the San Diego, Los Angeles and Palm Springs audio communities conducted a blind shoot-out at the home of one of the members of the San Diego Music and Audio Guild. The five CD Players selected for evaluation were: 1) a Resolution Audio Opus 21 (modified by Great Northern Sound), 2) the dcs standalone player, 3) a Meridian 808 Signature, 4) a EMM Labs Signature configuration (CDSD/DCC2 combo), and 5) an APL NWO 2.5T (the 2.5T is a 2.5 featuring a redesigned tube output stage and other improvements).

The ground rules for the shoot-out specified that two randomly draw players would be compared head-to-head, and the winner would then be compared against the next randomly drawn player, until only one unit survived (the so-called King-of-the-Hill method). One of our most knowledgeable members would set up each of the two competing pairs behind a curtain, adjust for volume, etc. and would not participate in the voting. Alex Peychev was the only manufacturer present, and he agreed to express no opinion until the completion of the formal process, and he also did not participate in the voting. The five of us who did the voting did so by an immediate and simultaneous show of hands after each pairing after each selection. Two pieces of well-recorded classical music on Red Book CDs were chosen because they offered a range of instrumental and vocal sonic charactistics. And since each participant voted for each piece separately, there was a total of 10 votes up for grabs at each head-to-head audition. Finally, although we all took informal notes, there was no attempt at detailed analysis recorded -- just the raw vote tally.

And now for the results:

In pairing number 1, the dcs won handily over the modified Opus 21, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 2, the dcs again came out on top, this time against the Meridian 808, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 3, the Meitner Signature was preferred over the dcs, by a closer but consistent margin (we repeated some of the head-to-head tests at the requests of the participants). The vote was 6 to 4.

Finally, in pairing number 5, the APL 2.5T bested the Meitner, 7 votes to 3.

In the interest of configuration consistance, all these auditions involved the use of a power regenerator supplying power to each of the players and involved going through a pre-amp.

This concluded the blind portion of the shoot-out. All expressed the view that the comparisons had been fairly conducted, and that even though one of the comparisons was close, the rankings overall represented a true consensus of the group's feelings.

Thereafter, without the use blind listening, we tried certain variations at the request of various of the particiapans. These involved the Meitner and the APL units exclusively, and may be summarized as follows:

First, when the APL 2.5T was removed from the power regenerator and plugged into the wall, its performance improved significantly. (Alex attributed this to the fact that the 2.5T features a linear power supply). When the Meitner unit(which utilizes a switching power supply) was plugged into the wall, its sonics deteriorated, and so it was restored to the power regenerator.

Second, when we auditioned a limited number of SACDs, the performance on both units was even better, but the improvement on the APL was unanimously felt to be dramatic.
The group concluded we had just experienced "an SACD blowout".

The above concludes the agreed-to results on the blind shoot-out. What follows is an overview of my own personal assessment of the qualitative differences I observed in the top three performers.

First of all the dcs and the Meitner are both clearly state of the art players. That the dcs scored as well as it did in its standalone implementation is in my opinion very significant. And for those of us who have auditioned prior implementations of the Meitner in previous shoot-outs, this unit is truly at the top of its game, and although it was close, had the edge on the dcs. Both the dcs and the Meitner showed all the traits one would expect on a Class A player -- excellent tonality, imaging, soundstaging, bass extension, transparency, resolution, delineation, etc.

But from my point of view, the APL 2.5T had all of the above, plus two deminsions that I feel make it truly unique. First of all, the life-like quality of the tonality across the spectrum was spot-on on all forms of instruments and voice. An second, and more difficult to describe, I had the uncany feeling that I was in the presence of real music -- lots or "air", spatial cues, etc. that simply add up to a sense of realism that I have never experienced before. When I closed my eyes, I truly felt that I was in the room with live music. What can I say.

Obviously, I invite others of the participants to express their views on-line.

Pete

petewatt
ctm_cra
86 posts
 
Greetings,
I wanted to thank the forum members who independently contacted some of the participants involved in this comparison. They provided excellent suggestions we can use in our next blind evaluations.

Pete says hi. He contacted me from a cruise ship, from which he admits, "It's very difficult, expensive and slow to stay [on the internet]".
Best regards!
petewatt OP
9 posts
 
As the author of this thread, and with the passage of a few weeks,I would like to make three retrospective comments.

First of all, I want to thank all of you for your inputs, views and opinions. Unfortunately for me, almost immediately after my original post, I left the country for a month-long cruise. And given technical difficulties, black-outs and the high cost of internet communications at sea, I was unable to participate in the dialogue that ensued. Having said that, I feel that we are all fortunate that ctm_cra, who was the prime technical architect behind the blind shoot-out, did such an extraordinary job of filling in all the details and answering your questions.

Second, in my opinion, the value in this exercise is not just the comparison of top-of-the-line CDPs as objectively as possible. I stongly feel that our blind shoot-outs (and we've done more than one in San Diego) point out the fact that, though difficult to set-up and administer, such comparisons are not beyond the compentence of knowledgeable audiophiles. Perhaps, this observation will not go unnoticed by professional reviewers and editors in both print and internet published audio guides. The fact that these guides have been very reluctant to do so-call "double blind" comparisons before may or may not have anything to do with philosophical or financial considerations. I just think that this is an idea whose time has come.

Finally, having participated in this experience, I cannot tell you how much pleasure I derived from the opportunity to listen to some of today's top CD/SACD players. As I said in my original report, the dcs standalone, the EMM/DCC and the APL NWO 2.5T were all were deemed to be outstanding. But the fact is that one did come out on top -- the APL NWO 2.5 -- and it did so in convincing fashion in the eyes of the consensus of our group. I mention this in part because I recall one excellent question raised in an earlier post: i.e. if one player is viewed as clearly superior, wouldn't we expect to see one or more of the participants in the shoot-out purchase it? Well it's now been six weeks since the event, and I can report that three of the participants have since ordered 2.5T's from APL. One was the Meitner owner, another brought both the dcs and Meridian players, and myself (I traded in my APL Denon 3910 with custom linear power supply).
rackon
301 posts
 
LOL! If you find a $500 player that "trounces" the Meitner or APL PULEAZE let me know what it is. I've never heard a $500 player that bettered the above (or the Reimyo for that matter) but if it did I wouldn't - erm - "hesitate" to buy the less expensive player. I DO buy with my ears.

There are plenty of audiofools and God knows digital playback for modestly priced gear has come a long way but I kinda doubt a $500 digital giantkiller would languish in obscurity.

Personally, I've never heard an IPOD that sounded as good as my Cary CDP - much less a Meitner or Reimyo - on acoustic music of any kind. But if there's one out there do tell.

Parasound is generally good sounding gear. I'm not a Wilson fan, however.
ctm_cra
86 posts
 
Dear Rackon - We did not set out to "find a $500 player that "trounces" the Meitner or APL". Our goal was to compare top-of-the-line CDPs.

As an FYI, a non-voting, non-manufacturer participant did compare an Opus 21 player (and I do not recall at the moment if it was stock or modded) to the Reimyo, and he preferred the Resolution Audio player. The Opus 21 is the same player that outperformed the players specified in my 03-05-07 post to Arthursmuck. So we had no problem including the Great Northern Sound modified version in the lineup.

Having said that, it would have been great to have included the Reimyo, the latest Audio Aero Capitole, the best offering from Ayre, etc. So this could mean that another evaluation session is in order. I know someone already mentioned the top of the line Teac units and the single box Meitner. Feel free to recommend other top shelf players, including transport/dac combos.

raquel
841 posts
 
I just fell upon this thread -- with all due respect to the test organizers / participants, I want to explain why I believe that the test tells us next to nothing about the digital components under test (Nilthepill, jfz, Guidocorona and Newbee are all on to something).

First, no hi-fi component is more dependent upon warm-up than a CD player. CD players generally need one to two days to reach thermal stability, and over the course of warm up, their sound can change dramatically. As for this test (as reported), giving a CD player 20-25 minutes to warm up will not tell you what it really sounds like -- absolutely not, especially given the importance of power supplies in high-end players. What we've been told is which player to buy if you intend to treat your components like a rack system.

Second, if there is any question as to whether the players under test had adequate break-in, then the test is flawed. The sound of components can change dramatically up through 500 hours, and most continue to open up and change through 1,000 hours.

Third, six hours of listening parsed between five players is not enough time for a person to become accustomed to the performance of a component -- months are required. Anyone who has lived with a fair amount of spare components will tell you that the new kid on the block sometimes get sold or goes into the closet after yesterday's favorite goes back in the system. The performance of hi-end components in high-resolution systems is subtle and confounding -- preamps and CD players in particular -- and what sounds preferable this week can become unsatisfying next month.

I fully assume the good faith of the participants and note they appear to have tried hard to put together a controlled comparison, but with all due respect, this is not the way it works.
More to discover