@georgehifi ^^
Audio Research CD6 vs CD9 original and SE versions
I recently had an ARC CD6 in for a demo. The system is:
Intel NUC --> MSB Analog (USB) --> Krell FBI --> Thiel CS2.7
With the ARC installed it went straight to the Krell.
What I heard was a fabulous top to midbass. Where it did not sound right was in the bass. For lack of a better term the bass sound was "rounded". I tried a few different cables with varying degrees of success however I could not live with the bass.
My question is does anyone have experience with side-by-side listening of the CD6 vs CD9 and or the SE versions? If so what differences did you hear? I listen to mostly classical on this system and having poor bass drum, tympani, and double bass performance won't cut it.
Intel NUC --> MSB Analog (USB) --> Krell FBI --> Thiel CS2.7
With the ARC installed it went straight to the Krell.
What I heard was a fabulous top to midbass. Where it did not sound right was in the bass. For lack of a better term the bass sound was "rounded". I tried a few different cables with varying degrees of success however I could not live with the bass.
My question is does anyone have experience with side-by-side listening of the CD6 vs CD9 and or the SE versions? If so what differences did you hear? I listen to mostly classical on this system and having poor bass drum, tympani, and double bass performance won't cut it.
Showing 6 responses by solobone22
From another post: "The Ref CD-8 used Burr Brown PCM 1792 chips configured in stereo mode. By contrast, the CD-6 and Ref CD-9 use the BB PCM 1792A, but configured in quad mono mode." https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/arc-ref-cd-8-compared-to-cd-6-and-or-ref-cd-9 Does this - in your experience - lead to issues with low frequency issues? |
@jond @georgehifi I've looked at the MSB spinners however they use the Oppo transport which may be hard to get these days. I've run a few different CD players into the MSB however they never quite worked for me: Denon 1650AR Primare CD31 CAL CL-10 The midbass on up was far superior on the ARC CD-6. Ideally I would like something that I can play discs and has a USB or network input. |
@jafant that could be. I for one would like to hear a few ARC players back to back to back. I think the ARC had a fantastic mid/high presentation. A trombone should sound like a trombone and a flute should sound like a flute. Not all trombones sound the same and not all players on the same equipment sound the same however there is a component of the sound that should identify it as a trombone or a flute. I think that is what the ARC gets right. The MSB on the other hand gives a very clear presentation with a little less of that component of the sound that identifies the instruments. |
The sound of the individual instruments were fuller (some might call this warmer) however the bass was muddy. I heard the instrumental presentation as closer to what I would hear in the concert hall with the exception of the double bass which was not clear at all. This was the impression I got from the CD6 (review is of the REF9): From this thread: https://www.audioaficionado.org/showthread.php?t=34305 "The Ref 9 might not be the most detailed player in the World, especially at low frequencies where it is a little warm and wooly" |