Aqua 'La Diva' ($9k) or Gryphon 'Ethos' ($39k) versus. Pro-Ject CD Box RS2 T ($3k)?


What sensible rationale is there for buying either of the two above-mentioned VERY COSTLY CD spinners (Aqua ’La Diva,’ a CD-only transport, and the Gryphon ’Ethos,’ a CD player with built-in DAC) when we can get the same pure Red-Book CD digital output from the Pro-Ject CD Box RS2 T for FAR less money?

What is a potential buyer getting for their significantly increased expenditure other than fancy packaging and possibly a boost to their egos from ownership of a prestige brand-name item? The one component (and a crucially-significant one at that) which all three of these products have in common is the new Philips-based Stream Unlimited CD Pro 8 CD player mechanism. Aside than that, what one appears to get with the two far-higher-priced components is little more than pure window-dressing, not substantive gains in performance over the CD Box RS2 T.

It is little wonder that one reviewer of the RS2 T thinks of it as nothing less than a "giant killer," in that it makes it nearly impossible for any level-headed purchaser, even one with the means to spend lavishly, to rationalize spending thousands of dollars more on these two competing products (or on others like them) when one can get the same sonic results (which from most reports are splendid) from the humble little CD Box.

Any thoughts? Do we audiophiles finally have good reason to come to our buying senses? To me, Pro-Ject Audio Systems may have struck a true winning vein with their CD Box when prospecting for gold.

128x128erictal4075

Showing 1 response by mahler123

Charles dad criticized the Porsche-VW analogy as old, but that doesn’t make it less valid.  Both vehicles have the essentials required to get a passenger from Point A to Point B—4 tires, internal combustion engine, battery, brakes, etc.  Just because all 3 transports have the same disc tray doesn’t make them all equivalent.  They probably differ significantly in the other areas.

  To be clear, my sentiments are with the OP.  I’m not cashing a few IRAs to spend $40K to hear the slight improvement that such an expenditure might obtain.  However, it isn’t hard to detect the envy in his post.  He seems offended that (admittedly ridiculously priced) gear exists, that there are people who can afford it, and I also sense a bit of frustration that as good as his system is and as reasonable as his suspicions are about the price to performance ratio of the stratospherically priced gear, he will probably never really be able to verify his well founded suspicions that the higher priced stuff is not money well spent.

  I am glad that my system is so much better than I ever would have imagined it could be.  Hell, even my 2 mid Fi systems are worlds better than what I could have imagined owning 40 years ago.  
  Another old argument that rings true is that the mega bucks spenders allow for the development of technology that ultimately trickles downstream.  Let those early adopters pay the R&D costs.

  Inequality will always be with us.  Even societies that attempted to force equality at the point of a gun had elites.  At some point you have to look at the stuff that you have, ask if it makes you happy, and if the answer is yes, stop giving a rats a** about what your neighbor might have