Blind Shoot-out in San Diego -- 5 CD Players


On Saturday, February 24, a few members of the San Diego, Los Angeles and Palm Springs audio communities conducted a blind shoot-out at the home of one of the members of the San Diego Music and Audio Guild. The five CD Players selected for evaluation were: 1) a Resolution Audio Opus 21 (modified by Great Northern Sound), 2) the dcs standalone player, 3) a Meridian 808 Signature, 4) a EMM Labs Signature configuration (CDSD/DCC2 combo), and 5) an APL NWO 2.5T (the 2.5T is a 2.5 featuring a redesigned tube output stage and other improvements).

The ground rules for the shoot-out specified that two randomly draw players would be compared head-to-head, and the winner would then be compared against the next randomly drawn player, until only one unit survived (the so-called King-of-the-Hill method). One of our most knowledgeable members would set up each of the two competing pairs behind a curtain, adjust for volume, etc. and would not participate in the voting. Alex Peychev was the only manufacturer present, and he agreed to express no opinion until the completion of the formal process, and he also did not participate in the voting. The five of us who did the voting did so by an immediate and simultaneous show of hands after each pairing after each selection. Two pieces of well-recorded classical music on Red Book CDs were chosen because they offered a range of instrumental and vocal sonic charactistics. And since each participant voted for each piece separately, there was a total of 10 votes up for grabs at each head-to-head audition. Finally, although we all took informal notes, there was no attempt at detailed analysis recorded -- just the raw vote tally.

And now for the results:

In pairing number 1, the dcs won handily over the modified Opus 21, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 2, the dcs again came out on top, this time against the Meridian 808, 9 votes to 1.

In pairing number 3, the Meitner Signature was preferred over the dcs, by a closer but consistent margin (we repeated some of the head-to-head tests at the requests of the participants). The vote was 6 to 4.

Finally, in pairing number 5, the APL 2.5T bested the Meitner, 7 votes to 3.

In the interest of configuration consistance, all these auditions involved the use of a power regenerator supplying power to each of the players and involved going through a pre-amp.

This concluded the blind portion of the shoot-out. All expressed the view that the comparisons had been fairly conducted, and that even though one of the comparisons was close, the rankings overall represented a true consensus of the group's feelings.

Thereafter, without the use blind listening, we tried certain variations at the request of various of the particiapans. These involved the Meitner and the APL units exclusively, and may be summarized as follows:

First, when the APL 2.5T was removed from the power regenerator and plugged into the wall, its performance improved significantly. (Alex attributed this to the fact that the 2.5T features a linear power supply). When the Meitner unit(which utilizes a switching power supply) was plugged into the wall, its sonics deteriorated, and so it was restored to the power regenerator.

Second, when we auditioned a limited number of SACDs, the performance on both units was even better, but the improvement on the APL was unanimously felt to be dramatic.
The group concluded we had just experienced "an SACD blowout".

The above concludes the agreed-to results on the blind shoot-out. What follows is an overview of my own personal assessment of the qualitative differences I observed in the top three performers.

First of all the dcs and the Meitner are both clearly state of the art players. That the dcs scored as well as it did in its standalone implementation is in my opinion very significant. And for those of us who have auditioned prior implementations of the Meitner in previous shoot-outs, this unit is truly at the top of its game, and although it was close, had the edge on the dcs. Both the dcs and the Meitner showed all the traits one would expect on a Class A player -- excellent tonality, imaging, soundstaging, bass extension, transparency, resolution, delineation, etc.

But from my point of view, the APL 2.5T had all of the above, plus two deminsions that I feel make it truly unique. First of all, the life-like quality of the tonality across the spectrum was spot-on on all forms of instruments and voice. An second, and more difficult to describe, I had the uncany feeling that I was in the presence of real music -- lots or "air", spatial cues, etc. that simply add up to a sense of realism that I have never experienced before. When I closed my eyes, I truly felt that I was in the room with live music. What can I say.

Obviously, I invite others of the participants to express their views on-line.

Pete

petewatt

Showing 17 responses by pubul57

It seems the possible permutations, variables, and what ifs that could be tested or considered for assessing 5 players would make a real, complete, and absolute shootout almost impossible in real life, if not theoretically. I do think you have to take the test for what it is and with a grain of salt - the perfect evaluation and comparison is impossible, nor necessary IMHO.
11-09-10: Mrtennis
the problem with such a test, is that the results cannot be extrapolated onto one's own stereo system, i.e., one would best listen to the same digital hardware in the context of one's own system--true for any component, to make a meaningful judgment.

100% true, that isn't going to happen for most, if not all of us. So can we extrapolate, not perfectly, but better than nothing, which is what we would be left with if we had to test all five units in our own system - unless, I really had nothing to do all day. I want to see more shoot outs with feedback from the groups, and I'll add my own grain of salt to the results, for I think they are far from being meaningless, as long as we don't take these things as definitive - they are not, and mowst of us know and accept that.

OP, how about 5 power cords next?:)
I think the methodology you propose would be better, yes, but unfortunately it is not going to happen. The other thing is, that even if it were possible, and one were to buy the winner, you would still have no guarantee that this would be piece of gear that would sound best to you in your system, room, music. I think we have two choices, get decent gear without worrying if it is the best, just get that idea out of your head for sanity sake and enjoy music, or allow yourself to try lot's of equipment because it is fun to do so, again without thinking you will ever have the best - a dangeorus idea and pursuit IMHO. For me the Shoot-out is just fun, something to think about, and part of the audiophile dialogue.

What I have found as I have gotten older (52) is how much wonderful equipment there is that does not cost a fortune, finding those gems is a heck of a lot of fun.
Mrtennis, what you say is true, but how would one break through the paralysis, or ever be in a position to know that one can make the 100% perfect decision? Until there is a local store carrying every piece of equipment made, with a loaner program to listen in your room before buying - we are left with some collective wisdom deciphered with a little bit of healthy skepticism and a small grain of salt -but surely a careful reading of Audiogon comments can lead one to making some pretty good choices in buying equipment; not sure we have any better way; better than blind faith, but faith nonetheless. Is the EMM CDSA SE the best? Who knows. But if you can't be happy with it and enjoy it, there is a problem that probably can't be helped with another equipment fix.
Sabai, no, I was responding to Mrtennis who was raising the difficulty with your position, I was simply saying the are always problems with seeking certainty, we can only move with accumulated personal knowledge, and reading the thought of others who seem to have good judgement (I agree with them:)), and knowing that nothing anyone says here is going to ensure with 100% certainty that a piece of equipment will be just what you are looking for.
Not sure Sabai said that, only that you would find the EMM capable of world class 3D layering. Frankly, I would take any of the 5, and enjoy any of them without too much worry about the shoot-out worthiness.
I'm not sure we disagree at the core, but perhaps in the degree of uncertainty involved in the process. Ultimately, you are right, the final arbiter is your ears, your music, your room, but there remains something to be learned from the crowd, as long as we do accept anything on blind faith.
I wonder if the player with the $5000 X upgrade, also needs the $5000 PowerCell 10SE to sound its best. Now you are in "real" X territory.
I do use Running Springs with my EMM and other source equipment, figuring some line conditioning might make a difference - I ran out of things to buy - and a JPS Digital power cable thinking it might make a difference - since Art Dudley claimed this was the one time he could hear an obvious difference with a power cord and it wasn't that expensive (except when you think it just a power cord), and I have mass loaded my player with Herbies Tenderfeet on a 3" Solid Maple table, well just because - but I have to say that if a piece of equipment needs too much work and tweaks to get it sound great there is something poorly engineered with the equipment to start with - not that I am saying there is anything wrong with the design of the EMM CD player, nothing wrong with the way it sounds as far as I can tell (with or without the "tweaks" I've been willing to try, though I have not heard an APL which might make it "sound broken", but I doubt that.
If my CDSA-SE sounded holograhpic, wrap-around, I would be afraid I was wired out of phase; though headphones or nitrous oxide might have that effect too (so I am told). I don't know where it ranks, or how good it is, but I prefer it to the ARC CD3 and Accustic Arts Transport/DAC combo, and I thought they sound mighty good too. Now I just wait for a universal cloud library with on-demand, hi-rez digital streaming into G8 wireless receiver/DAC - I think music servers are just a intermediate step before we get to that....
"If you happen to find yourself in my part of the world one day I invite you to listen to my EMM CDSA SE. You will immediately recognize that the sound is anything but flat and 2-dimensional. It is 3D and layered with a wide and deep sound stage." Certainly sounds like you are talking about the EMM; though I agree with you about Merlins.
Seems to be the case with my CDSA-SE and VSMS:) And certainly as much so as with the ARC CD3 MKII and Accustic Arts combo I previously owned. As good as APL? Who knows. Not something I worry about very much - they are all world-class digital sources.
MRT, sounds like no 3rd-party review of any kind can be valid or serve any purpose, given how "different" we all are, and absent truly terrible performance in those things that can be measured that we think correlate to "good sound", there is nothing intelligible to be said about the sound of equipment and 98% of Audiogon, Stereophile, TAS, 6moons, etc. is a waste of time since most of it is observational commentary and opinion. I get the logic of that argument, yet somehow it seems an overstatement and not quite true. I find tremendous value in the observations of others, though I know that there may or may not be 100% correlation between the views of others and my own.