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

Guidocorona, thanks for clarifying this. I wondered what the fellow who saved us from the awful bird flu pandemic was doing on Audiogon -- and what he could possibly have against Totem Acoustic products.

Hello Fellow Music Lovers,

I came upon this thread a few months ago and have just re-read it. I have been in the process of upgrading my system so there was no point in commenting until major parts of my new system were in place, including a "cousin" of one of the CD players used in the shoot-out. IMHO the shoot-out was highly flawed. I am not saying that the APL was not the best of the lot -- and possibly by far. But there are so many variables that were not seriously considered in this shoot-out that it must be taken for what it is worth -- which is to say advisedly, IMHO.

Firstly, the set-up should have been stated at the very beginning -- all of the equipment, wiring, plugs and room treatments used. Secondly, there are so many variables that were not even mentioned or considered. I find this astonishing. It is as though you just plug 5 CD players into the same system, listen to a couple of CDs for a few hours and out comes your undisputed winner. Well, I don't see things in such a simplistic way. Everyone knows that personal preference can make a very big difference. Wiring and plugs can make a very big difference. The quality of recordings can also make a very big difference. In today's CD world there are remasters and there are remasters. For instance. I have a copy of the latest Beatles remasters that is supposed to be the very best ever produced. But it is not the very best. It is clearly surpassed by the Japanese Parlophone box set remasters. Then there is the all-important factor of synergy. Components that work well with one CD player can may sound awful with another CD player. And since when can the PS Audio Multiwave II+ be seriously considered to be a credible part of a high end CD player shoot-out? What if the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE had replaced it. What would the various CD players have sounded like? And what if different speakers had been used? Then there is the choice of music -- 2 well-recorded classical CDs. This cannot seriously be taken as a measure by which to judge the various attributes of a variety of high quality CD players. Also, the word "consensus" has been used to crown the APL as the undisputed winner. There was no "consensus". There was a 7 to 3 vote in favor of the APL -- a wide margin of preference. But what factors led 3 participants to prefer the EMM over the APL? If a different mix of amplifier, speakers, power conditioner, wires, plugs room conditioning and recordings had been used might the vote have been different? I believe these are interesting questions to consider. A real shoot-out should be a far more serious affair, IMHO.

Hello Fellow Music Lovers,

A correction to the above posting. I should have said "What if the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE had been added to the shoot-out."

Hello Sebrof and Mikedimitrov, good to hear from you. I live in a remote area overseas so unless I travel overseas to nearby countries I cannot audition equipment. That is my problem. I have to be guided by experience and intuition -- a good dose of luck also enters the equation, inevitably. To tell you the truth I would love to be able to afford an APL but I can't. So I have settled for an EMM CDSA SE -- a mint unit I bought at a very nice discount and brought back home from the UK. Sebrof, with all due respect, may I correct you? The APL was preferred by 7 out of 10 of those at the shoot-out, not by all 10 attendees. I have had Merlin speakers shipped over recently and have a Marantz PM-15 integrated amplifier -- the original 1994 model that I purchased recently mint on a Yahoo Japan auction -- also for a very nice price. I have an Audio Magic "The Q" power conditioner but that will soon be replaced by a Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE. I will be adding a Rel T3 sub-woofer soon, as well, to bring the 30 to 50 Hertz range into the system. The Merlins are fantastic -- they are rated to about 50 Hertz. I have a Gabriel Gold PC, speaker cables and ICs, as well as a number of SR Master Couplers that I have re-terminated with Oyaide plugs and IECs. Since my Marantz PM-15 is a 100-volt model I am using them with a step-down transformer and to connect the Audio Magic to a Tesla Plex. That's about it for my system. The problem I have with the shoot-out arises from realizing how changing single minor element in my system can transform the entire system. I have been astonished at this. A fresh example came this evening. I simply changed an Oyaide P-079 plug for a P-037 on the end of the Master Coupler that links the Marantz PM-15 to the step-down transformer. The resolution was transformed and the sound stage became wider and deeper. With each small change the Merlins are showing just how good they can be -- and how good the EMM CDSA SE can be. It is the synergy of the system that is at the heart of what we are talking about here, not just one element. Changing a single plug can transform a system. How can a shoot-out using the same equipment and cabling for a few hours with a couple of good quality classical recordings possibly be taken as a serious measure of the potential of each of the CD players tested?

Hello Sebrof, I understand but there was far more going on with this shoot-out, IMHO. The organizers had no obligation to do anything but since they went to the trouble to do the shoot-out and one of the manufacturers was present there was a certain importance attached to this by at least one party -- an interested party. I am not talking about scientific here, I am talking about taking many things into consideration that, to my eyes, were obviously missing, in order to do justice to all the equipment being tested. In this shoot-out no variables were considered. There were short listening sessions using 2 pieces of classical music and a show of hands. That was it. I call that flawed. It is like taking a day-trip to London and then going back home to tell your friends you have seen London. The shoot-out had so much missing and so much was left unsaid. If they were really interested in doing a serious shoot-out they would have chosen more than 2 recordings from the same genre, they would have had a choice of wiring (power cords with different plugs and IECs, interconnects, speaker wires), they would have had speakers from at least 2 different manufacturers, they would have had at least 2 high end power conditioners from 2 different manufacturers -- and they would have asked the maker who was allowed to be present to leave the room. There are a whole host of subliminal factors that can enter the picture in a situation like this. What if all the CD makers had been allowed to attend? Their very presence in the room would have changed the psychological ambiance, IMHO, even if they were all completely silent. The neutrality of a listening room is made up of more than sonic neutrality. If you call an event such as this a shoot-out that means you are looking to eliminate all the contenders except one. Well, I think that when you are considering high end CD players you need to take more care. After all, this shoot-out was organized in order to post the results on Audiogon, not just to share the results among those present. This was done for public viewing. True, the participants and organizers had no obligation to do anything at all -- but they should have done more to do justice to the equipment and to the readers on Audiogon. If I were organizing or participating in a shoot-out of high end equipment knowing that the results were going to be published on Audiogon I would have taken much more care. Not enough factors were factored into the shoot-out to give those reading about it a clear picture of the potential of the equipment being judged. It was the emphasis on elimination -- not on potential -- that was the focus of the shoot-out. This was the most serious short-coming of the shoot-out, IMHO.

Hello Aplhifi, Thank you for your comments. They reaffirm one specific point that I was alluding to. Some players do well when configured with a specific piece of equipment and others may do better with a very different set-up. So if you compare both 2 players with the same set-up you may not get the best possible results from both players for comparative purposes. It would be difficult to judge the relative merits of the specific pieces of equipment in each set-up -- including the CD players. Looking at cables and plugs I find there is a big sonic difference between various makers in my system -- and within the product line that each maker offers there is also often a very big sonic difference, as well. The synergy of each system -- the best that it can offer sonically -- is dependent on many factors, IMHO. I am sure I would be very satisfied with one of your products -- I have no doubt about that. But since they are beyond my budget I am doing the best I can to maximize the sonic potential of my EMM CDSA SE using various cables, associated equipment, accessories and tweaks. So far, I am very happy with the result. But if I ever had the opportunity to A/B with one of your APL players I might be in psychological sonic trouble -- wanting to have one of your APLs without being able to afford it.

Hello Aplhifi, Thank you for your reply. I understand this difference between EMM products and APL products. As you rightly point out, this is an important consideration when looking for a system that will best suit one's needs.

Hello Aplhifi, I appreciate your comments and observations. But the fact that EMM showed its need for power conditioning does not downgrade it, IMHO. Many systems need power conditioners to maximum their potential. The fact that APL does not need a power conditioner speaks highly in its favor -- but I don't feel this eliminates the sonic attributes of CDPs and systems that are improved with power conditioners. Regarding my earlier commments about how the sound in a specific system can change dramatically with a small change I just discovered the truth of this, once again, a few nights ago. The Totem beaks were not working at all with my Merlins -- Bobby Palkovic told me they wouldn't and he was right. So on a whim I decided to put the 4 beaks in diamond configuration on top of my Marantz PM-15 integrated amplifier. The result was a surprising improvement of low level detail, dynamics and sound stage. Who woulda thunk it. Then 2 nights ago I decided to put the 4 beaks in diamond configuration on top of my EMM CDSA SE. The results were not surprising -- they were dramatic. An incredible improvement in low level detail and warmth, bass, dynamics and depth and width of sound stage. I would NEVER have thunk it. I think this reinforces some of the points I have made about the San Diego 5-CDP shoot-out. What if the beaks had been added to the EMM or to the other units? What if other elements had been changed? IMHO, some of the votes might have been changed as a result and some of the comments may have changed, as well -- as dramatically as any dramatic sonic changes. None of this was considered in the shoot-out. The more I look at it the more I see that the San Diego shoot-out was really one-dimensional. It was conducted honestly and with good intentions -- but its short-comings stand out more than its merits, IMHO. Which is not at all to say that the APL is not a fabulous world-class player which I am sure it is.

Hi Tvad, The relevance 4 years later is the same as if the shoot-out were done today. APL and EMM and the other makers have all brought out improved models but that is irrelevant. What is relevant, IMHO, is that no matter what models are used for shoot-outs, and no matter what year the shoot-outs are conducted, they should include a lot more variables than the San Diego shoot-out. Otherwise they are what I call one-dimensional. They are designed to eliminate competitors -- to create a "winner", not to help the users of all models maximize the performance of their own units. The fact that I have recently been able to improve the performance of not only my own EMM CDSA SE -- far beyond what the normal EMM CDSA SE sounds like -- as well as my speakers -- has shown me just how limited the shoot-out was. The few variables and the short duration of the shoot-out with only 2 classical music CDs used for comparative purposes means that those reading the results should be careful in drawing conclusions. This is not to say that the APL is not at the very top of the CDP world but that with some attention to cables, plugs and tweaks the other models would have performed differently -- the EMM dramatically so. Some of the "votes" would undoubtedly have changed, IMO. Also, IMHO, because the APL sounds great without a power conditioner but other models may benefit from a power conditioner, this cannot be used as an argument to discount the sonic improvements produced by adding a power conditioner to some of the other models. In the end, it is the ears and the sound that count. I would really like to see another shoot-out using similarly-priced CDPs but with more variables in the equation -- including cables, plugs and tweaks -- and with a wide variety of music. What will work for one CDP will not work for all. The quality of sound of a CDP can be dramatically improved with attention to detail. But this takes time and a different attitude than the notion of "shoot-out". If it were less a shoot-out than a sonic comparison and experiment with a lot of variables then a lot more people would benefit from the exrecise -- not just the maker of the "winner" who would also deserve kudos, of course.

Hi Tvad, kindly elaborate. Oy vey voos?

Hi Pubul57, I am not talking about a perfect evaluation that would take all possible permutations into consideration. That would obviously be impossible. I am talking about a shoot-out that would use more variables, not all possible variables. I mean, why go to all the trouble in the first place of doing a shoot-out and then tell everyone "take it with a grain of salt"? And one of the makers is there in the room. If you go to all the trouble of doing a 5-CDP shoot-out then going to a bit more trouble to make it 3-dimensional rather than 1-dimensional should not take that much more effort -- but it would take more time -- using more than 2 CDs, using a variety of plugs and wires, and using some good tweaks. It would have to be organized very well. Then you would not have to tell everyone "take it with a grain of salt". You would be able to say "we did a really good job to maximize the options to allow each player to show its best possible face. Here's what we did ..." And then the discussion among the attendees would be able to include a comparison of the improvements to each unit when different elements were added or taken out of the set-up. That's what I mean by 3-dimensional -- not just a headline grabber "Here's the winner". I am not interested in a sound bite shoot-out because that does not do justice to the units auditioned. Each one has merits. Each one is considered high end. I want to know what enhances those merits -- what makes them more meritable. There are so many things that I have done to transform my own EMM CDSA SE into a whole new EMM that if more attention had been paid to some of these things during the San Diego shoot-out the results and discussion would have been MUCH more interesting and MUCH more informative for Audiogon members.

If the bard is long-suffering I think it must be as a result of the failure of his long-promoted pandemic to materialize despite his best efforts -- not from being a closet audiophile. His efforts to induce disequilibrium in domestic bliss have been replaced by another non-closet audiophile -- a Napolitanic devotee of vol-antics -- a condition that may be permanently cured by being QT'ed at SR headquarters. There are no limits to what rearranging internal molecular structure with high tech audio equipment can accomplish -- at least that is how things look from the audio side at Synergistic Research who deserve our kudos.

Napolitana Volanta looks like she's already been consuming a lot of pasta -- looks like she needs a pair of good Horns and a power conditioner to cure her of what ails her sonically and otherwise. Maybe she'll bump into someone at a local audio dealer who can suggest some good power cords -- something high end like SR QT'ed may do the trick. On the component end she seems to be too digitally preoccupied at the moment -- she needs to look at something analogue, possibly.

When I commented earlier about missing "variables" in the shoot-out I am now able to expand on what I was talking about. I have the 1-box EMM CDSA SE. Without a power conditioner it is very resolving with excellent dynamics but the sound stage is unimpressive -- just plain flat. I have tried 2 power conditioners and have settled on the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE with the Galileo MPC. I just installed the SR last night, tweaking it with a set of SR MiGs underneath and 4 Totem beaks on top. A set of MiGs went under the EMM, as well. And I replaced the stock EMM fuse with a Furutech green T2A fuse from Japan. The sound coming out of the EMM is like night and day with the PowerCell installed and the tweaks. Frankly, you would not know it is the same player. So, my comments regarding variables and how the shoot-out was conducted stand. The shoot-out was one-dimensional and did not do justice to the EMM, and I presume this must be the case for the other CD players. The sound out of the EMM by itself is two-dimensional. The sound out of it with the PowerCell is 3-dimensional -- and a lot more. The shoot-out was essentially one-dimensional because it did not make any attempt to maximize the potential of the other CD players and judgments were made on the basis of a set-up that was clearly flawed. In fact, the observations of Petewatt at the beginning of this thread are exactly how I would describe the EMM + PowerCell in my system: "I had the uncany [sic] 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." Can the EMM + PowerCell rival the APL in these respects? You would never be able to find out given how the blind shoot-out was conducted. In retrospect I think the word "blind" is an apt characterization of the shoot-out itself. Saying that there was no attempt to make it a perfect shoot-out is really a cop-out. A lot of people went to a lot of trouble to set up the shoot-out. One of the makers was even present. It was set up to end up with a quick winner. This was not simply an informal Saturday night gathering of friends in the basement. The shoot-out did not do justice to all of the players that participated in this "competition" -- by a very long shot. All this having been said, the fact that the APL is a world-class CD player is not in dispute. My comments do not detract from its attributes in any way.

Audiofeil, you need to work on your sense of humor. Fplanner, Mrtennis,Sebrof, et al. I was fortunate to pick up a mint EMM CDSA SE recently at a 50% discount. Even at the price I paid it was over the top for me but I went for it because I didn't think I would be able to do better in terms of sound quality at that price point with any of the "competition". If I had a cost-no-object budget I might have gone for an APL but this was a moot point since APL is out of the ballpark for me. Although I have never auditioned an APL, from all reports it looks like it would probably better the EMM in terms of sound quality. But I have chosen my other components and cables carefully, and am tweaking my system to death to maximize its potential -- with very positive results. The latter have made a much bigger improvement than I could ever have imagined. So I am very happy with the sound quality of my system. Although a "winner" can be proclaimed in shoot-outs the point I have been making -- to the dismay of some who are tired of hearing me say what I care to say in which case they can easily skip my postings instead of complaining about them or making stupid humorless comments -- is that we are facing a real problem in today's economy. The price of top components cuts all but the rich out of the picture. The price of second and third tier components lets a few more of us in the door but we have to be careful how we spend our audio dollars before they are all spent and we find ourselves sitting at home with an inferior component or cable that brings the whole system down. So finding out as much as we can ahead of time about what our hard-earned dollars can buy is very important and that is where the Audiogon forums enter the picture -- especially for people like me who live abroad and who cannot audition equipment without getting on a plane and traveling a long distance at great expense to an audio-friendly country. The forums help people like me make important audio decisions. If shoot-outs were conducted in a more complete way -- following some of the suggestions I have made earlier -- they would help a lot of people make better choices within their budget, not simply leave us with one high five and everyone else in the dust. I will be writing a review of my system in the New Year that will include some of the amazing results I have been obtaining with a wide variety of tweaks that have made a huge difference in the sound quality of my system. I hope that my review will help others and that it will stimulate some constructive comments.

Pubul57, I think your comments were directed at my posting, if I am not mistaken. I was not talking about a "100% perfect decision". I was talking about a well-informed decision. There is no such thing as perfection as we all know. And there is no paralysis. There is only the process of evaluation. For those who are lucky enough to be able to audition equipment evaluation is a simpler process than for people like me who cannot audition equipment without traveling abroad. So a more complete shoot-out incorporating more variables would have been more helpful. That's all I'm saying.

Cbw723, I agree that the presence of one of the makers at the shoot-out compromised the test. At least one of those present was not blind. Subconscious influence cannot be underestimated in such a situation. I also feel that a greater variety of CDs should have been tested. Testing only classical pieces was far too restrictive. But I disagree on the subject of variables. You would never recognize my EMM CDSA SE if you did a blind test before and after the improvements I made to my system. It is like night and day. The EMM has incredible potential from my personal experience. But without the right variables creating the right synergy you might easily dismiss it as an inferior CDP. Frankly, I was disappointed with its sound until I did some serious work with plugs, IECs, cables and tweaks, added the SR PowerCell 10SE, and then did a lot more work with plugs and cables and tweaking. The sound that it now produces is quite amazing, IMHO.

Cbw723, I really hadn't thought about the specifics of how to set up a more "revealing" shoot-out. Your suggestion makes complete sense to me. The people who know each player well could bring it to the shoot-out already tuned. This would be far better than the one-size-fits-all approach of the shoot-out that was done. There was no consideration at all given to the possibility that, for instance, a certain plug or cable used in the shoot-out might have been inappropriate for one or more of the players or might even have restricted performance. For instance, the maker of my speakers specifically recommends not using certain kinds of cables with his speakers. If inappropriate cables are used they will make the CDP in that system sound awful and one would then draw the conclusion that the CDP was not very good -- in one or more respects -- in comparison with other players which would be a totally incorrect conclusion. There is also the issue of which power conditioner works best with each player. Alex says his APLs don't need power conditioners. But I read some comments somewhere along the line from someone who said that even his APL was improved by a power conditioner they used with one of the APL models. So even the makers may not know what is best in all cases. I have come across this before with makers of various components. Sorry, I don't remember the details about the conditioner user with the APL in this case -- I'd have to go back and try to trace this information. It's easy to set up a CDP shoot-out that produces a quick "winner" through the process of elimination. It's not so easy to set up a CDP shoot-out that does justice to all the players by showing their potential through set-up that meets the specific needs of each one.

Pubul57, thank you for clarifying this. You're right, there are no absolutes. The thrust of what I am talking about is the extent to which a shoot-out is helpful for those reading these forums in evaluating equipment. I don't feel the shoot-out in question was helpful in this respect. It was not designed to be helpful. It was designed to declare a quick winner. What I am saying is that this is not good enough. It is easy to create a high-five shoot-out. It is not so easy to create a shoot-out that is as 3-dimensional as the music produced by some of the best CD players. Doing a really good shoot-out requires a lot more work than "bring the machines in -- connect them -- play a couple of classical pieces -- raise your hands -- that's it we're all done now". Foster_9, I somehow missed reading this posting by Aplhifi in reply to my earlier posting. It certainly sounds condescending and dismissive to me, as well. The only thing I can say in response is that it might not matter to Aplhifi what I have done to improve my "EMM box" but it certainly sounds more than a box to me and it certainly matters to me what I have done to enhance its attributes although it may not be at the pinnacle in the world of CD players. The fact is that I have had to wait quite a few decades to be able to afford a good music system. My system may not be the best -- I cannot afford the best -- but it is the best I can afford and I am very happy with the sound it produces. Enhancing its sonic virtues is important to me. It is a labor of love because I love music. Remember, music is in your heart and soul. It is not only in the equipment. I was thrilled with the music that came out of my transistor radio in 1957 no less than I am with my new system. I don't need the best -- which I cannot afford -- to be happy. I am not beating a dead horse. The fact that Aplhifi and others are still following and responding to my comments and those of others regarding the shoot-out shows the opposite -- this horse is alive and very well. What harm is there in talking about how shoot-outs might be improved in future so that they explore the potential of the players that are auditioned to help people make the best choices within their budget? A quick shoot-out that eliminates contenders is certainly beneficial to the winner -- but it is not beneficial to those who cannot afford the winner that has, ironically, become "worse than a boombox" according to the maker. And this kind of shoot-out is not beneficial to those who would like to know more about the salient points of some of the losers that might be more affordable than the newest version of the winner that is presumably the best out there -- and is even more unaffordable than the inferior version used in the shoot-out. This shoot-out elicited the strong bias of the maker who attended it and who could have subconsciously influenced the attendees -- and it also showed us that he is not very big on humility. He may produce some of the best CD players in the world but he has a thing or two to learn yet. What he is apparently unaware of -- or possibly does not care about -- is that his attitude may put off more people than it attracts. Running a good business involves a lot more than producing good products.

Exactly.

Guidocorona, you have the right to your opinion and so do I. Your patronizing posting is noted -- my goal is "commendable" -- and your sarcasm is noted as well -- "magisterial knowledge on the subject". What was the "original intended topic" of this thread that we are supposed to return to? Was the topic not the shoot-out? Are you the thread police telling everyone what they can say and what they cannot say about the shoot-out? If I am mistaken there is a moderator. Let the moderator cut in if he or she thinks it is appropriate to do so. Your role, like mine, is to feel free to express our opinions as long as we are civil about it.

Fplanner2010, you also have the right to your opinion. But you do not speak for everyone here. You speak for yourself and no one else. I never denied that Alex does complete mods -- using the Esoteric transport. You are shadow boxing. And who said I was an "authority" on anything? All I said was I know a lot about how to maximize the performance of the EMM because I have done it -- which you do not "buy" and which you then contradict because you already know about it but you apparently don't want to see it discussed here because EVERYONE already knows about it all. And in your next breath you talk about me being condescending. As a number of EMM threads clearly show everyone does not know all about this.

I disagree with your statement that you've "all been doing" the mods I have done "for years". How do you know what I have been doing? I have only talked about a fraction of what I have done. And how do you know what all EMM owners have been doing "for years"? Are you a mind reader? Do YOU own an EMM? Have YOU "been doing" EMM mods for years? If so, have you added the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE to your system? And have you changed the fuse in your EMM to the Furutech T2A green from Japan? And have you installed MiGs under your EMM? And have you added Harmonix SYN-100 footers to the top of your EMM? You claim to have been doing all this for years along with everyone else so a straight answer to my question would be appreciated.

The contemptuous tone of your posting is noted. If you are tired of reading my postings then, with all due respect, go away and read something else. Who is forcing you to read my postings? You label my postings as "insulting" when they are not at all insulting. They challenge the set-up of the shoot-out in a very direct and pointed way, to be sure, but they do so in a polite and civil way. You choose to dismiss the content of my postings by simply brushing off their content. And you talk, once again, about my comments not being "good PR for EMM". Ahhh, there's nothing like a red herring. I don't work for EMM and I don't have to answer to you about what you think would or would not be good for EMM. EMM can speak for themselves like many other makers who speak out on these forums.

Who says "None of us really care about your claimed "mods""? Have you been on the phone with all the EMM owners who read this thread to find out who cares and who does not? It certainly sounds like it. If so, where did you get everyone's phone number from? If you have not actually talked with everyone then I imagine you must be a mind-reader. But you must have missed a few minds because you cannot be speaking for those who have already emailed me asking what mods I have done and where they can get hold of some of them. Or are you just trying to railroad me off this thread? Ahhh, I think the question contains the answer. Someone has to have the last word? I assume you mean that it should be you and Guidocorona.

The important thing here has been not only the content of my discussion but the fact that you are both trying to bypass that content as though it has no value for anyone. Instead you choose to attack the messenger -- an age-old tactic that has reared its little head here. What has also been revealed here is the clear bias of certain posters to this thread and the clear bias of the shoot-out. This discussion has revealed many interesting things.

Those who are interested in what I have done with my EMM and who don't want to get involved in this discussion -- which is not hard to understand -- can continue to email me even though it has been formally declared here that no one really cares. Of course, this presumptuous statement is untrue since it has been contradicted by the emails I have already received. If it were true that no one really cares it would be a sad commentary on those who actually own the EMM. Fortunately, it is not true. There are many out there who care, and who care a lot, because they care about having beautiful music in their home. That's the bottom line.

Cbw723, Depression? Certainly not. We're just telling it like it is. Ted is right about Bill (Audiofeil) who went to the trouble to send me a PM the other day when I made a comment about his sense of humor needing some work. Frankly, I feel there is something seriously wrong with him. Ted, I just picked up my PowerCell 10SE in Singapore and am a very happy audio camper with it in my system. The clincher was having a dedicated 20-amp line installed from the pole outside the house into my music room. The wall receptacle is my original Tesla Plex. I have it in series with my new Tesla Plex SE. The electrician installed a stock PC with a stock plug from the latter into the Tesla Plex wall receptacle. I got down on the floor yesterday and replaced that stock plug with an Oyaide P-004. SUPER WOW !! The Oyaide elevated the PowerCell to a whole new level -- transparency and dynamics and bass and fullness of sound and sound stage. Installing Oyaide plugs throughout my system has transformed it completely. I think Ted understands the importance of these plugs -- he used to have the Oyaide P-079 on the end of one or two of the top-of-the-line SR PCs. He has developed the G-07 plug and maybe it will rival the Oyaides but the G-07 is not yet available for the DIY market so I cannot make any direct comparisons. Even though my system is not 100% SR-cabled the PowerCell 10SE and Oyaide plugs have helped transform my EMM CDSA SE. It's all about synergy. This is the same EMM that Alex Peychev of APL recently called a "box" in this thread. Well, let me say that this box is actually capable of producing some very beautiful music -- maybe not the best that money can buy but nonetheless very beautiful music -- thanks in no small part to Oyaide plugs and the PowerCell 10SE. Even if you cannot afford the very best in all areas of your system you can have a system that allows you to enjoy beautiful music.

Jafox, It's prestidigitation. Transmutation of elements. Seriously, if you follow my postings I never lose the plot. I have been commenting consistently on the shortcomings IMHO of the so-called blind shoot-out and how it could have been improved. It did not do justice to all the players that participated in the event. Explaining how I improved the sound of my EMM is offered as proof. Not proof that it is better than the APL but proof that you can do a lot with it to take the sound to a much higher level -- which the shoot-out made no attempt to do. That's all I am saying.

Jafox, Right out of the gate I bashed the way the shoot-out was set up. I stand by my stance. Disrespectful? Not at all -- unless you call challenging the set-up disrespectful. Ignorant? Well everyone has the right to his and her opinion. The word ignorant connotes not knowing what you're talking about. I don't believe this applies to me because I do know what I am talking about when it comes to improving the sound of the EMM because I have done just that. Whether you "buy" it or not is irrelevant. The fact is that I have done it. What you found "of value" in the shoot-out I found to be of entertainment value and nothing more. Your reference to tubes is a digression. You have lost the plot. Taking "a lot of time" is exactly what I am saying the shoot-out did not do. "Connect -- listen to a couple of classical pieces -- raise your hands" is not my idea of anything "of value". It was a one-size-fits-all set-up. What value was there in it -- except to the maker whose machine was declared "the winner"? Nothing at all was elucidated about the true value of the machines in the "test" because the potential sonic virtues of each player were not tested. The "test" was skewed by its rigid set-up. Yes, what I am precisely saying -- not implying -- is that I have turned "a dimensionally flat component into sudden magical 3D". Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. This is precisely what I have done. Which is why the shoot-out was valueless because the way it was set up, having the EMM transformed right in front of you would have been unimaginable. The fact that it didn't happen at the shoot-out proves that the people who set it up were woefully lacking in knowledge about the EMM's potential as well as imagination. I never said or implied anywhere in this thread that you should have tried "everything out there" or you should have tried "every cable and tweak out there". You are putting my words in my mouth and that is a cop-out. What I said was that there was no attempt to make the shoot-out anything but a one-dimensional event. That's what it was -- a one-dimensional event. I have the proof before me right here at home in my listening room. The EMM you heard was not the EMM you might have heard had you had enough imagination and taken the time to make the shoot-out a really great event. In defense of the shoot-out you compare it to magazine reviews. This is totally irrelevant. If magazine reviews are skewed -- which most are -- and the shoot-out was no different then how can that possibly justify anything at all -- except that in both cases you are justifying a dumbing-down effect. Everyone in this thread is not "well aware of finding ways to improve" the EMM. That's for sure. They may not even be aware of special ways to optimize their own equipment. If those at the shoot-out had been "well aware of finding ways to improve" the EMM then no one would have accepted that it be presented in a one-dimensional way that minimized its potential. How can there be "value" in a shoot-out that minimizes the true value of one of the participants? The shoot-out was not a first pass at anything. This is re-writing history. It was set up to declare a "winner" -- to eliminate all comers -- not as a first pass. On the contrary, it was set up to appear as a last pass. An earlier poster in this thread suggested that those who are expert in optimizing each participant should have presented to the group an optimized version of the machine being entered in the competition. Now that makes sense to me. You would not have to change the least tweak or cord. Each machine would be brought in ready to go. If Roy Gregory who I have not heard of before has the guts to suggest going to all the trouble of doing what you claim I "require" but which I never even implied requiring then he's the sort of serious audiophile I'd like to know more about. It sounds like he is not daunted by a "daunting effort". I think the folks at Synergistic Research would be amused by your comment that you consider synergy a "tonal bandaid". IMHO, this comment of yours is more than ample proof that the now-famous shoot-out in San Diego really was valueless. How any serious audiophile could possibly make such an obviously preposterous statement is beyond me. The skewing that this attitude brought to the shoot-out is quite revealing and it is one that I am sure many of those who have been following this thread will be interested to know.

Tvad, the issue is still alive and well even though it is related to an event that happened 3 years ago -- because it reveals how we still think about audio matters today. Mrtennis, consensus in the case of the shoot-out was elicited by a skewed set-up. Subjectivity, as you rightly point, out is a very big factor regarding sonic preferences. But hearing the best sound, or even "the better" sound that a given player can can produce can affect subjectivity very strongly. If the pizza lacks basic ingredients it cannot be enjoyed as much as when it has special spices and herbs added. Newbee, how can you be bored at improving the sound of your system? I disagree than no one cares. If this were true why do my postings elicit such a strong reaction? And why do people with EMMs email me with questions about what I did to improve my EMM and my system? They have an EMM at home. They want to know how to elevate the sound that it produces. That's what it is all about. A dead issue? Far from it. We all, myself included, of course, have a lot to learn and we can help the learning process for others by making these postings -- and by making shoot-outs part of that learning process. The issue is alive and well because it pertains to every system owned by each person reading this thread and the entire audiophile community who have not read it. The issue is how to maximize the performance of your system. This is something I am always working on and have had great success in doing. I am surprised at the sonic improvement that the changes I have made to my system have created. I am happy that others are benefiting from my experience. A power conditioner is a very important part of improving the sound of the EMM. This does not diminish the sonic results of adding a power conditioner to it. It is possible that a different power conditioner might have produced superior results with the EMM. IMHO, the Synergistic Research PowerCell 10SE does just that. I find it interesting that Alex is now talking about "two winners". Actually there was a split vote of 7 to 3 in favor of the APL which I find interesting. If the vote had been 10 to 0 in favor of the APL that would have told a different story. I assume that the power conditioner used at the movie director's house was not the PowerCell. I may be wrong. If it was not the PowerCell this shows that even though someone may think a certain power conditioner may be the best with his system he or she may be mistaken. I had an excellent power conditioner in my system -- from one of the top makers who produces a very expensive line of equipment -- before I installed the PowerCell. It was night and day after installing the PowerCell. And, furthermore, there is a LOT more that I did to my system than just adding the PowerCell that transformed the sound. This does not change the fact that APL makes world-class equipment. This fact is not in question and I have never stated otherwise in this thread. The gist of what I am saying is that where the APL may perform well with no power conditioner or "tweaks", other players may need them to optimize their sound. While this speaks loudly in favor of APL it does not diminish the sonic improvements that are the result of this process with other players. APL guts the Esoteric and does "mods". You might call my approach "external mods". In both cases the word "modification" or "change" is the operative word. Alex states I am "insulting everyone at the shoot-out". I believe I have been polite through-out this thread so it is a mystery to me how my remarks can be construed as "insulting" -- unless the meaning of the word "insult" is broadened to include calling into question the set-up used to arrive at the outcome. The set-up was obviously highly flawed. Alex would like us to accept the outcome of the shoot-out because his APL was the "winner". I do not doubt the merits of the APL line (even though earlier in this thread Alex himself ironically denigrated the APL 2.5 that was used in the shoot-out). But the set-up of the shoot-out remains highly flawed. Which does not mean that the same outcome would not have resulted from a better set-up. Of course, I am not "the only one who knows" about the benefits of various external modifications. That is not the point. The point is the extent to which such modifications can transform the EMM which is the point that is ignored by not only Alex in this thread but also by others. If the EMM had been elevated in the shoot-out the vote might have been closer, IMHO, and there would have been more positive comments about the EMM, as well. For all I know other participating CD players in the shoot-out might have benefited from "external modifications", as well. But my experience is with modifying the EMM so I confine my remarks to what I know. Fplanner, I think that being a zealous audiophile is a wonderful thing. How it could be considered absurd is beyond me -- after all this is an audiophile forum, if I am not mistaken. Are the zealous to be excluded? As regards "doing EMM any favors" may I point out that I have absolutely no ties whatsoever to the audio industry. In any case, how could pointing out that the EMM can be elevated to a much higher level be bad news for EMM? It is like saying that modifying the Esoteric is bad news for Esoteric. I don't think that Alex would agree. On the contrary, I think it is very good news for EMM to know that their player has much more potential than is obvious. This good news has the potential to attract more people to the EMM CDSA SE, IMHO -- people who might have turned away after a first pass because I assume that the EMM CDSA SE has a much broader customer base than their new model -- the far more expensive $25,000 EMM XDS1. If I had the budget I would be looking at the latter or an APL model to replace my EMM CDSA SE. Unfortunately, I am not in that league.

Guidocorona, let me spell it out to YOU. I'm on to your game with APL and other posters in this thread. With a little help from my friends I traced all of you back in earlier threads to see how you operate. A nice little team of audio thugs you are. You don't like my "overvigorous posting"? Too bad for you. Who says you have to like everything you read here? If you don't like it go amuse yourself elsewhere. You don't own this thread. This thread belongs to everyone -- not to the thought police. Take your attempt at verbal intimidation somewhere else. I don't drink Kool-Aid -- so buzz off.

Tvad, who would want to vocalize their support for me here and get involved with the audio mafia? Those in the know are backing off, of course. I'm new to Audiogon but I am not new to this sort of thing. I'm glad I found out about all of you. Alex and the rest the gang can try to pull the wool over the eyes of those who have not caught on yet. Hasta la vista.

Jafox, sorry to have to correct you again. If you re-read my earlier posting closely you will see that the you have misquoted me. Your quote is not a quote from my posting. I never said "... world class 3D layering ..." anywhere in my posting. My remark refers to my Merlin TSM mmi speakers NOT to my EMM. I say that " ... it was only the synergy of the system that was holding them back. Now they produce world-class sound." Kindly take note that "them" clearly refers to my speakers NOT to my EMM.

My last posting in reply to Guido was excised by the powers that be -- a hot potato -- so let's try this reply to Tvad. Yes Tvad, I am very thorough which is one of the things that has been sidestepped here -- until your comment. And I am not afraid in the least of the attacks against me that are allowed to appear on this thread. If the message is too thorough and to the point it may burn too hot and be deemed unacceptable here. So poster/minions sidestep the issues being presented, label the poster "overly fervent" or another dismissive epithet, and invite the poster to leave at which time the messenger becomes fair play for any and all verbal assaults -- jeered at, sneered at, laughed at, florid-prosed at -- anything to chase the swine away.

These are the tactics used to rid the thread -- and not only this thread -- of "the unwanted posters", those who refuse to play the game. Since some of my postings are "officially unacceptable" here I am saving them and emailing them to those who PM me. Postings can be excluded from threads but the truth can never be hidden. Any attempt to do so will be in vain and will reflect badly on Audiogon in whose best interest it is to allow all posters to post. I have been receiving a lot of PMs about this. If inane postings, disrespectful postings and mocking postings are acceptable why are all thorough, clear and well-written postings not acceptable as well? I believe this is a very good question.

Surely those who are allowed to post here must have a comment or 2 -- or a spam or 2 -- for this newest entrant who will undoubtedly be summarily dismissed from this forum for stepping one someone's toes. Ouch !! Tvad, Aplhifi, Guidocorona and the MBL of all audio threads, the omni-directional Audiofeil -- certainly we can count on you, can't we? No time to waste -- it's time to ratchet up the volume on this fellow -- how dare he?

There are great reports starting to come in about the EMM CDSA SE "X" upgrade. Here is the Audiogon link:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1279884931

Has anyone heard the new EMM "X" yet? If so, do you have any comments? It sounds like the new "X" upgrade may be catapulting the EMM into "world class" territory. It may be a great option for owners of the EMM who are looking for reasonable ways to enter the very top echelon of CD players at a reasonable price. It would be very interesting to hear all the newest iterations of the top players in a shoot-out. Anyone up to it?

Pubul57, I have the PowerCell 10SE but have not had the "X" upgrade done. All I can say is that the PowerCell has made a huge difference in the sound of the EMM. Which just shows how great its potential is. If you have a good component and do not do it justice you may end up wrongly accusing it of falling short. It may just be that you fell short in understanding what it needs to sound its best.

Pubul57, I know what you mean about poor engineering. I was up against the same thing in the past with amplifiers, CD players and speakers. The EMM CDSA SE does not fall into this category in my system. With the SR PowerCell 10SE and good cabling and tweaks it sounds wonderful. The sound stage is wide and deep and it is never fatiguing. It is a 3D stage, not a holographic wrap-around one, nonetheless a very satisfying stage with lovely layering and a beautiful and natural tone that is truly a pleasure to listen to.

Pubul57, I believe you would end up holographic with the EMM CDSA SE if you get the "X" upgrade. Synergistic Research produces truly world-class products. With the addition of the SR PowerCell 10SE and Galileo speaker cells and interconnects cells the quality of the sound produced by your EMM would likely be elevated to an even higher level. It is just a matter of unlocking its potential.

What it all comes down to is that you have to listen to each CD player in a system that is designed for it. Most players need to be modded or upgraded and special components, cabling and tweaks have to be added to bring each player up to its full potential. No news here.

It is the same with speakers. Some high end speakers may sound awful until all the elements in the system are matched to produce the synergy they need to find their full potential. I have seen this with my Merlin TSM mmi speakers. Out of the box they sounded unremarkable. But once I got everything in my system matched to their potential they began producing the world-class sound I knew they were capable of producing. I might have concluded -- prematurely -- that there was something lacking with them -- the same with the EMM right out of the box -- when, in truth, it was only the synergy of the system that was holding them back. Now they produce world-class sound.

I recently compared a lot of well-known high end speakers in very expensive systems at Adelphi in Singapore. I took a lot of time in the listening rooms to note the attributes of many of the world's best speakers. The Merlins are among the very best. Although I don't have floor-standers -- I have the latest iteration of the Merlin monitors in a small listening room at home -- they could easily fill a medium-sized room with beautiful sound driven by my Marantz PM-15 (the original 1994 model).

Likewise, with a player like the EMM that has such great potential it is only a matter of looking for the solution to the problem of synergy to find it. The fact that the solution is undoubtedly there has been driven home to me by the enormous improvement in sound from my own EMM by adding the SR PowerCell, some excellent cables and tweaks (a high-end fuse, SR MiGs, etc.). I have not done the "X" upgrade and do not have cabling that can be called "fully-loomed high end". Yet even at this stage my EMM produces beautifully layered 3D sound. It may not be "holographic wrap-around" yet but it is wonderfully satisfying to listen to from morning till night -- full of fine detail, natural tone and just the right warmth.

Jafox, I expected a jibe from someone on this thread -- and here it comes right on schedule. Whenever the EMM is mentioned here in a good light the knives are sharpened and the attack begins. We see have seen this time and again on this forum -- it is as predictable as clockwork -- and, with all due respect, it is about time that the moderators took notice.

Did I say something so offensive as to provoke this mockingly negative response? Quote me. Did I say "3D synergy and it's best"? If you would kindly re-read what I actually said you will see that I said " ... my EMM produces beautifully layered 3D sound. It may not be holographic wrap-around yet but it is wonderfully satisfying ... " Is there something wrong with reporting the sonic qualities of one's sound system?

If someone owns the EMM and it sounds good, is talking about it honestly, accurately and politely verboten on this thread? Does a comment like yours not deserve a direct response that points out both its inaccurate content and its tone that lacks respect for the poster? I believe it does. All posters should show respect for one another though we may hold differing opinions. Otherwise we will all be on the low ground and I don't believe that is appropriate for this sort of discussion -- nor is it necessary.

Jafox, I note that in an earlier posting on this thread you characterized the EMM used in the shoot-out (not the EMM CDSA SE that I own) as " ... a dimensionally flat component ... ". Would you care to elaborate on this? Are you implying that the EMM in the shoot-out was incapable of producing anything other than a flat 2-dimensional sound or are you saying that it produced nothing more than this in the shoot-out, ergo it was incapable of producing anything more? In that earlier posting, upon re-reading, your comments seem to be quite defensive.

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. It is irrelevant if you or anyone else on this thread don’t “buy it" because this is an opinion that has no basis in fact. You have not heard my system. I am not asking anyone to buy anything. I am only reporting what my ears hear. Anyone with good hearing who listens to my system hears this lovely 3D sound stage immediately. I had an audiophile friend over the other day who was very impressed with it. If you or anyone else contributing to this thread were to hear it you would hear the same thing. Then, this would no longer be a matter of argument or conjecture or speculation -- or the subject of jibes.

You are all invited over for an audition.

Mceljo, what I am saying is that if, for example, you hear the EMM in a blind shoot-out and the sound is 2-dimensional and it is dismissed as not being capable of sounding 3-dimensional, but in another system it produces 3-dimensional sound then one must question the set-up in the blind shoot-out which obviously fell short vis a vis the EMM.

Pubul57, you mentioned in an earlier posting " ... if a piece of equipment needs too much work and tweaks to get it [to] sound great there is something poorly engineered with the equipment to start with ... ". What does too much work mean? If you did a lot of work and finally ended up with the sound you were looking for would you not be happy about it? I certainly would be no matter how much work it took. I would not complain that it took too much work to get there. The engineering may just need some help. That's all. How can the engineering be that bad if you end up with the sound you are looking for? I would call it bad if you DON'T end up with the sound you are looking for.

Pubul57, My comment about 3D sound refers to my EMM and my Merlins speakers -- as you have noted in your latest posting. On none of my postings did I say or imply that the EMM was capable of " ... world class 3D layering ...". That is a misquote. What I said was that some posters have said they "don't buy" my observation that the EMM is capable of 3D sound. It is capable of 3D sound. Not world class 3D, nonetheless 3D.

Magnumpi205, if you read my postings carefully you will see the purpose. They have not elicited this discussion for no reason.

Mceljo, I have never stated or implied that "listening to [my] system will reveal the way a single component within the system sounds ...". What I said was that listening to my system will make it obvious that the EMM is quite capable of producing 3D sound. It obviously does not accomplish this without wiring and speakers and an amplifier -- plus some tweaks. I agree completely with you that "... a system is more than the sum of individual components." That is exactly my point in this thread. In the right system the EMM is capable of a reaching a much higher level than it apparently did in the blind shoot-out.

Mceljo, I also agree completely with your comments that "The description of a component in a comparison shouldn't be considered an absolute as it's really intended to be a judgment relative to the other components in that system used for the test. It's possible that the same comparison using a different system would result in the same findings or each one could have different results."

Mrtennis, I agree completely with your comments "the results are so specific to the experiment that they cannot be extrapolated to another stereo system and should not be used as a basis for purchasing ... in addition, there probably are numerous experimental design errors which would render the conclusions unreliable and perhaps invalid ... If a system is revealing enough that changing speaker cables and/or interconnects makes a significant difference then any shootout using that system would be suspect because each component was not optimized in the system ... shoot outs are not valid, period, with such a small sample size,. certain variables must be controlled and the experimental design and analysis must be very rigorous and conform to the methodology of statistical analysis. otherwise, the information so obtained is anecdotal, at best."

Pubul57, I agree completely with your comments "... 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 not accept anything on blind faith."

Tvad, I agree. Each player was " ... potentially capable of sounding much better than they did at the shoot-out."