Which is the best CD-Player up to $ 10k ?

Interesting discussion about how to achieve the best sound. I feel that a high-quality source that is faithful to the recording is the place to start. I would give equal footing to the source and the speakers. I've invested more in proper set-up for the source than in any other component in 3 different systems.

What goes in between the source and the speakers should not smooth or mask, but help let the source realize its greatest potential. This means quality components, attention to power, cabling, connections, and isolation. Many high-quality components respond quite favorably to optimization and tweaking. The concept of a cable that removes information, without taking the proper pains to set-up correctly, seems to be going in the wrong direction.

As a generality, going from around the 5k to 10k price tag for digital results in a 3-fold improvement in performance.

08-05-08: Cincy_bob
John, I understand your point, and I don't disagree. The only thing I might add is that I do think it is possible to put together an audio system that is faithful to the sound of live music and that does not require any of the components to do any "smoothing" per se. The notion that an audio system needs to have something in the chain to achieve some masking or smoothing of the sound implies that there is something inherently unmusical, unnatural or flawed with the recording/mastering/pressing process or the software format itself.

You are correct Cincy_bob, however, IMHO the digital format IS basically flawed. FWIW, I see that you are using Jena Labs cables and darTZeel amplification, which are wonderful components, but many would consider "smoothing".

What one may consider "accurate" another may consider "bright" or "smoothing" depending on the ancillary equipment. For example, Jena Labs Valkyre were my reference cables until I purchased my reference speakers, Verity Audio Parsifal Encore's. At that point the Valkyre's sounded too warm and lifeless. The Verity's are notoriously warm speakers, so combining them with warm cables was a no-no. Silversmith cables added much more life and "accuracy".

The bottom line is that most of us use "smoothing" components/cables at some point in the chain, especially when digital is the primary source. When someone calls their single component/cable "accurate", it's usually because it mates well with their other "not so accurate" components/cables.

Cheers,
John

In my opinion the AMR does not lack resolution at all. I had the chance of auditioning it in my system. It is a very good player indeed. On the other hand it still sounded somewhat colored to my ears. I just dont get it why a source should have tubes...It doesn't make sense to me.

Regards,

Michael

I'll say it in a different way.

EMM LABS approach:

We believe in cd playback and we try to get the best out of it.

AMR approach:

We believe cd playback is flawed by design and we use tubes to get a better result.

here is a relevant question:

when listening to the amr vs the emm, in which case is the timbre of an instrument rendered more like the actual instrument ?

from what i have gleaned, the amr will be less timbrally inaccurate than the emm.

both players are inaccurate, as no component is perfect. one may create a more natural representation of reality than the other. that is the player i woould want to own.

is the amr the last word with respect to timbre ?

perhaps there is another player to compete with it, such as the audio aero capitole mk 1 and the lector 7 mk 1.