Esoteric DV-50: Any cdp's Significantly better?


Is there are anyone out there who has compared the Esoteric DV-50 to a number of dedicated red book only players (or other universal's) and found one that is SIGNIFICANTLY better?

I stress significantly because in my humble opinion the redbook playback (if comparison unit is just a cd cd player only )must be significantly better to justify losing DVD-A, SACD and DVD-Video capability.

I keep hearing there are better one box solutions and being a die hard 2 channel fan I would sell my DV-50 if I found a player in the same price range that sounds significantly better. But every time I do an AB comparision to other well respected units the DV-50 has slayed each and every one.

So far, it has eaten the lunch of the Classe CDP-10, Ayre CX-7, Linn Ikemi, Cairn Fog Vers. 2, Cary 306/300, Arcam DV 27A and CD 33T, Myryad CD 600, etc. It even betters a Sony SCD 777ES/MF Tri-Vista 21 transport/dac combo that I previously owned. I'm only comparing the DV-50 to single box cd or universal players, but I just wanted to mention the Sony/MF combo. I'm sure there are some dac/transport combo's that will handily beat the DV 50.

Some may say that the DV 50 should beat all the above because the of price point ($5,500 vs. average price of $3,000 for the above players). But I disagree since conventional wisdom says that stand alone players (especially with the pedigree of those mentioned above) should produce better redbook than a universal player trying to be a jack of all trades. Only the DV 27A does video plus audio. By the way, I was very impressed with the 27A as just a cd player. Of all the above I would say the Ayre was the best.

Next on my list is the Electrocompaniet EMC 1UP and the Resolution Audio Opus 21. However, I must tell you I am really impressed with the DV 50 and all the great reviews are absolutely true. I've noticed that many people who are using it or comparing to other players are using the RCA analog outs instead of the balanced outs. There is a significant improvement in sound if you use the balanced outs and I'm only interested in hearing comments from people who have compared it against other players using the balanced outs on the DV-50.

My system components are as follows:

B&W N803's speakers & HTM-1 center
Cary Cinema 5 (5 x 200) amp
Anthem D1 Statement pre/pro
Esoteric DV 50
Acoustic Zen Satori Shotgun speaker wire
Nirvana SX balanced interconnects from DV-50 to Anthem
Acoustic Zen Matrix reference II interconnects from D1 to Cary
No after market power cords or isolation equipment

My system sounds great! Those who comment please make sure to specify what specific improvements you heard over the DV 50 and what cdp were you comparing it against.

AVGURU
avguru

Showing 5 responses by musicfirst

Hello everyone! Well for the most part, the hook is set and I want to get my name on the APL waiting list, but I can't seem to reach Alex. Phone messages and E-mails over the last two days have so far been unanswered. I know I'm being a little impatient, but you know when the bug bites, ya gotta scratch!

Tomorrow I'm thinking I'll try Smoke Signals, Telepathy or Channelling #;)>.

Does anyone know if Alex is away or otherwise indisposed?

Thanks

Kerry
Assuming the modifiers are doing the same full-out mods, why is the Denon 3910 better than the 2900 as a base unit for modifications? Is the transport mechanism that much better?

E M W T K
nquiring inds ant o now

Thanks

Kerry
OK time to lighten up! Let Talk Music First!
I want everyones vote for the Best CDs at this and previous shootouts!
Artist, Album, Label catalog number and cut(s) where appropriate.
And yes it can be your disc.

Kerry

OK, I guess my efforts to focus on the music went for not...

However, we all have to thank Audio Girl for tonights object lesson:

"DO NOT PUT ALL YOUR FAITH IN REVIEWS!"

Unfortunately, the same must be said for shootouts, and the axiom holds even more truth for those well-meaning endeavours. #;)>

A digression if I might:

In my opinion, the hallmarks of a good audio review have always included the following elements:

1) A known baseline of comparison (reference system/partnering components and software

2) An accurate description of the component's sonic attributes, preferably in more than one system or at least with different ancilliary components. Ideally (although rarely) compared against said reference/baseline components.

3) Devoid of adjectives such as as or 'best' or 'ultimate' or when they are used, they are used in the context of elements 1) and 2)and occasionally in the context of the reviewers own musical priorities (some of you may remember the "golden years" of TAS in the early 90s when the magazine regularly published articles featuring one of their reviewers system(s), listening room(s) and listening biases)

Now back to our regularly scheduled program:

Shootouts introduce so many additional variables into the 'reviewing' equation that drawing meaningful conclusions is virtually, if not completely impossible.

Indeed, in this most recent shootout, the participants themselves are finding it hard to find meaningful differences between source components that have as different a pedigree as Dobermans and Chihuahuas. Each unit had a different transport, DAC chipsets, Power supplies, and analog output stages and yet they 'sounded more similar than different'.

Personally, I find it very hard to believe. Perhaps there was, as some have suggested, an overriding characteristic in the system that negated or minimized the differences that, based on my (admittedly extrapolated) experience, almost certainly existed.

Where does the excercise leave us?? Yet again, the quest to find a foolproof method of auditioning by proxy reaches its ultimate, and preordained conclusion.

Say Good Night Gracie....