2. digital
  3. 1289176769

Bryston BCD1 vs. Audio Research CD3 MkII

Has anybody compared the Bryston BCD1 with the (now discontinued) Audio Research CD 3 Mk II? Used versions of these players are now selling at roughly the same price (Bryston actually slightly more). I know that one reader (drummermitchell) earlier said he preferred the Bryston to a CD 7, but I'd like to hear other opinions from anyone who has heard both players. The AR is older technology, and the Bryston gets great reviews, but I'm nonetheless torn. I'm hesitant to try to auditon in my system, since I won't be buying it new from a dealer.

This will be replacing a Gamut CD1R which is starting to die. (It skips on early tracks of many CDS. Neither lens cleaning nor lubricating/greasing the laser track has resolved the problem. If anybody has suggestions...)

Associated equipment: Mag 3.5Rs/Audio Research VT100 X 2/Bryston crossover/Aesthetix Calypso

TIA
winstonk
3 responses Add your response
consrvaudio
3 posts
 
In my audio system, the BCD-1 completely outclass my 1999 CD2. The difference between the BCD-1 and CD2 is stunningly clear.

To my ears, the BCD-1 beats CD3MKII and bettered the CD5. I have not heard CD7 nor CD8.

The CD2 is 11 years old. Technology has evolved so quickly that ARC is now offering the CD Ref 8.

For those considering putting down more than $3000 for a CD player, I strongly suggest that you give the BCD-1 a listen. Price is not a good indicator of sound quality.

My digital system runs a BCD-1 (previously my CD2) to a LS25 to a pair of Emotiva XPA-1's each feeding a Thiel CS3.7.

The advances in BCD-1 is so overwhelming, we are now upgrading the LS25 to an ARC Ref-5.
drummermitchell's avatar
drummermitchell
262 posts
 
interesting,that's the way I felt about the AR.
found(and still do)the Bryston more involving and a lot better separation between the instruments.
Goes to show we all listen or hear differently.
Playing and listening to music since I was a young pup hopefully has alot to do with it as a musician you can really pick the out the little things that are going on in a recording or live.
I guess you have to listen for yourself as nobody else can do it for you.I'm still totally satisfied even though I had wanted the AR for a long time before(no audition).
Auditions pay off big time for music satisfaction.
rtaylor
13 posts
 
I did a head to head comparison a couple of years back. I was thinking that the newer Bryston would be a good replacement for my ARC CD2 which is the previous model to the CD3. Even in that comparison, it was a very close call. I had an ARC Ref 1 and a VT100 MKIII for the rest of the system.

As it turned out there wasn't enough of a difference to me to justify the expense of a new Bryston.

I also compared the Bryston to a CD3 in a store in Minneapolis. It that room on that day with unfamiliar equipment, it was hands down that the CD3 was the better player to me.

To my ears, the Bryston has a little more cloudy presentation and the ARC seems to be a little more clear and subjectively more involving.
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
EarMen Tradutto
EarMen Tradutto
80x80
Mytek Empire Streamer
80x80
RME ADI-2 DAC