Berkeley Alpha vs Weiss 202 vs Ayre QB9 vs ?

I had Berkeley in my system for quite a while and auditioned Weiss 202 in my system awhile back. Berkeley has bigger, slightly darker sound, fatter, somewhat slower bass. Weiss in comparison has more open and liquid sound,thinner, faster but may be a bit leaner tonal balance. Berkeley is perhaps a bit more analogue. I think both are roughly at about the same level so it is pretty much up to your preference and your system synergy. I heard QB9 a few times and was not impressed but it was an unfamiliar system and not under ideal situation so it was hard to tell for sure.

In a way, Walter is also right to think that Weiss in more analogue. I guess it all depends on what you consider to be analogue like. Weiss definitely has very liquid, smooth midrange and high that is free from the usual artifact one associates with digital. Berkeley certainly is not quite as liquid and a touch coarser through the midrange. My analogue setup at that time has VPI/Dyna XV-1s which had big, bolder sound and not the last word in smoothness in comparison to my current Air Tight cartridge and I find Berkeley a little closer than Weiss to my analogue setup in that respect. I just wish Weiss would have a bit more bottom weight that would make lower chords on a piano sounds like a real 9ft concert grand rather than a baby grand.
In the end, I did not change from Berkeley to Weiss as I think it was more of a lateral move rather than a true upgrade. Btw, I was using Lynx card with Cardas Clear cable to connect to Berkeley and Weiss was connected via firewire with Oyaide firewire cable when I made the comparison. Eventually I replaced my Berkeley with Playback MPS-5.

Glory, yes personally, I find PD to be a significant upgrade over Berkeley. The biggest improvement is in the lower frequency where I feel Berkeley is a bit sluggish, as it has big,fat bass but a tad slow and a bit less well define. PD improves significantly on that. Midrange on PD is a bit more forward but overall, on most part, I think PD improves upon Berkeley in just about everyway, not always a huge different but I did not find PD lacking in anything in comparison to Berkeley. Whether the improvement is worht $10,000 or not, I am not sure but I also gain SACD capability and an excellent transport as well.

Forgot to add, I also auditioned EMM XDS-1 in my system and heard Esoteric K-3 in comparison to PD but in an unfamiliar system. The EMM unit is very nice, more laid back, a bit more detail than PD but I did not feel that overall it was any better. I actually prefer PD slightly over EMM but another friend of mine prefers EMM. However, considering the price difference, there was nothing much to think about. Beside, EMM can still be a bit quirky when used with computer server for hi rez material.

K-3 is a significant improvement over the older Esoteric. I used to own D05 for awhile. Much smoother midrange and high and lacked the digital glare that I did not like in D05. However, the tonal balance is still a bit too cool and lean for my taste. Another friend who has PD also comapared his to K-3, he preferred his PD but some other friends preferred K-3. So all in all, digital source at this level will depends very much on personal taste as well as the rest of the system.