Big Difference With New Source?

With a revealing system, changes in source are very apparent and IMO establish the basis for achieving a natural musical presentation devoid of the digital artifacts that we all seem to dislike. I have an NAD 541 as my cdp in a project studio with SS into Tannoy monitors but I wouldn't use it in my dedicated listening room for classical music (there I use Merlin VSM-Ms with tubes). I have used an Arcam Alpha 8se, CAL Delta / Bel Canto DAC 1, and Dan Wright modified CAL Delta / Tact RCS 2.0 internal DAC. Each of these had its own character (as did the selection of digital cable connecting the transports and DACs). I think the choice of equipment (including cdp) depends upon what music you want to listen to and your personal preferences about sound presentation. My Arcam was more forward and very detailed while the Delta/Bel Canto combination was more laid back and smooth. I preferred the latter but I can imagine others preferring the Arcam. I've never heard the Rega Planet 2k but from everything I've read, my guess is that it would be a great match for your equipment based on what I like. YMMV however.

Hi Ptm...I do think CD players sound different enough to make the upgrade worthwhile, but the differences are much much more noticeable when the rest of your system is upgraded. I'm not familiar with most of your components, so I can't comment on them. If you are planning on making other changes you might want to make them first. If not, then spend the money on the better CDP (and consider buying used...you get a lot more for your money).

What represents a major, dramatic improvement is a relative thing that changes over time with your tastes and listening experience. As you listen to more and more gear you get a better sense of which components have an effect on what aspect of sound, and once you have that ability changes that would be relatively minor to a novice become dramatic to the more seasoned listener.

A novice, for example, can readily pick out differences in speakers but can not always hear "significant" changes between CD players, although to a more experienced listener the two CD players can sound like "night and day." That said, I don't think any component makes a more absolute difference to a system than speakers as they are not only responsible for delivering information accurately but, more than any other component, will impart a certain character to the sound given its overall design(i.e. 2/3/4 way, sealed/ported, monitor/floorstander, cone/ribbon/stat, crossover order, etc.) and how it interacts with your room. This is not to say upstream components don't have character as they most certainly do, but they will not impart their character to the extent that speakers do to the overall system(which is why novices don't have a hard time hearing differences between speakers but don't always pick up as easily on changes to electronics). So don't expect the change to be "quantitatively" as different as changing speakers, but "qualitatively" a CD player may yield a bigger improvement depending on your system and tastes.

I'm saying all this because if you don't like the "character" of the sound of your system the biggest absolute(note, not qualitative but rather quantitative) change you can make is with regard to speakers. If, however, you basically like the sound of your system but want to improve it then I subscribe to "the chain is only as strong as the weakest link" theory, and it's up to you to discover which that is through trial, error, and playing a hunch.

I think you're on the right track looking at the source(assuming you're happy with the "character" of your system), and given your level of equipment I'd think you would hear a fairly dramatic improvement to your system by upgrading to a better source component, but don't expect the change to necessarily hit you over the head immediately--it may or may not. Some things to listen for would be not necessarily the level of detail but rather the way in which detail is presented--is it more natural/believable? Also there should be more clarity of space between players/instruments that allows them to more clearly exist individually. Bass may become tighter and better defined. Soundstage may expand in all directions, and elements at the rear of the stage especially may become more readily identifiable and easy to hear/place in space, and echos and reverb will tend to tail off in a more natural and extended way. Anyway, these are some things to listen for, and I bring them up because sometimes you need to listen into the music more to pick up these changes.

So this has a lot to do with perspective and expectations, and the above is meant to help provide some of the former while also managing some of the latter--hope it helps and best of luck.

By the way, my guess is Sean's referring to an EVS Millennium DAC as I had a VERY similar experience when I got mine. Talk about dramatic improvements. Come on Sean--fess up.

Tim

Yes, Tim is right. While i had initial problems with my first EVS DAC and ended up returning it, it was a hard thing for me to do. I really liked this piece but the low level hum / buzz that i had in the system with it was annoying once i noticed it. Even with the barely audible buzz, my Brother's first words when hearing the Mill II ( for less than one minute !!! ) were "this sounds AWESOME !!!". The results were that noticeably improved over my previous tube based dac, which is now serving in one of my other systems. The tube based DAC retailed for 50% more than what the Millennium cost me. That does not include the tube upgrades and mods / tweaks that were done to it either. As you can see, price does not always equate with better performance.

As it turns out, the hum problem was elsewhere in the system. With the EVS being "tweaked out", it is quite sensitive the system that it is in. The EVS was transparent / sensitive enough to reveal such a problem whereas over a half dozen other DAC's had not exposed such a flaw. Probably because they weren't as revealing to begin with. Once i had gotten that problem tracked down, i ended up purchasing another Millennium II and have fallen back in love all over again.

My Brother also own an EVS DAC now, albeit an earlier model. After hearing mine, he decided that he wanted something similar. The results of installing one into his system provided the same "magic" that i had obtained in mine. We had to play around a little bit more with digital cables in his system, but we ended up where we wanted to go pretty easily. Like me, he has no intentions of doing any shopping for another digital source anytime soon. For the record, he had used four different "one box" players and two different DAC's in the last two years.

The trick is to find a component that is both revealing AND "musical" at the same time. Most lack in one aspect or the other or can provide both qualities but do so in limited quantity. It is the "limited quantity" of having both aspects that can make a component / system sound "good" but not quite pull you into the music full time. I've found the EVS to be capable of doing what i want it to do so long as the source feeding it ( transport / digital cable ) are up to snuff. I'm currently using the same transport ( with modifications ) that Bob Crump / John Curl use to demo their CTC gear with. As far as i know, this is also the same transport that Hovland uses as their reference at trade shows. Obviously, the rest of the system behind it has to be up to the same level of performance and i think that i've come pretty close to achieving that. Sean
>

In my expereince, the source and the speakers are the two components that will most dramatically change the sound of a system. Amps and preamps will change the sound as well but I think to a far lesser degree unless huge money is spent. Choose carefully and if at all possible, audtion with your own stereo as it is. In your price range there are many good CDP's to choose from.

Good Luck,