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.
Guys, please let me know what the story is. I will be in town till the 16th. I just received my APL, and WOW, with the clock, it is a different machine. Alex also put a brand new transport in, mine was damaged shipping to him, damn fed ex. My unit is burning in again. Even so, I know in my heart, and ears, this machine is MAGICAL. These are the only words I can use to describe the beauty of the music I am hearing as I write this. As good as the APL was without the clock, there was a 3 dimensionality to it. Now there is a holographic magic to it, accurate, delicate, extended, soft, seductive, percussive. The air in between the notes, instruments, guitars, piano, and especially vocals, are just fabulous. I am amazed at how great my system is sounding, right now. I am smiling. I am content. I am in awe.
I have talked to Bill the importer of Eastern Electric to maybe have him at the shootout and to be the person switching sources so you guys can make decisions on what sounds best, without being told what is playing. BTW, is the shootout on for the 19th? Are you guys going to listen to the UX-01 at quintessence tomorrow, if so, I can meet you. I can also purchase it if the shoot out is gonna be next week, when I am out of town. Rest assured, you can have the APL there if you would like too.
I just received my APL back earlier today. I noticed an immdediate improvement. The music was more real, holographic in ways. I have listened now for about 8 hours with redbook and SACD. I will wait to comment futher on the sound. The unit now has an external toggle for turning the remote on and off. The remote serves various functions(Sony remote, I think it's funny)when I push the REC mode, I can adjust volume control, pause by pressing 1, and invert phase by pushing 6, button 4 and 5 are the filters. I have not really used them as of now. I will in the near future, and will let you know . In the DVD mode, I can change tracks with the channel up/down, or by hitting the track #. Pretty simple to use, and a GREAT time saver for my fam. More to come.
Question about the bass performance of the APL 3910. I did not see any description of this aspect of playback. The APL is apparently very open, dimensional and holographic. That is expected when listening to a high-end tube signal. Is the bass deep, powerful and extended? Tubby or boomy? Slow or Fast. Soft but defined? To me this is just as important as getting the open aspect of playback right. Most players that get the openess right, also have a lean aspect to the bass. I have not heard one cd player that does both.
Nobody has mentioned that the APL 3910 is a single-ended design. Does this bother owners of fully balanced set-ups (like Atma-Sphere Preamps and amps, which I have)? Anybody know whether the Exemplar has balanced outputs?
Springbok10, my answer is yes. I would much prefer to work towards a fully balanced system. Perhaps in the future Alex from APL and Dan from ModWright may consider modifying some fully balanced players.
Man, that is a GREAT question. Bass is probably the MOST important factor to me in musicality. Funny I did not even mention bass response earlier. I have the mother of subwoofers, the SVS 12 B-4 Plus with 4 12 inch woofers, passively connected to a Crown K2 in mono for 2500 watts. I LOVE BASS.
The APL has bass that does not need for a subwoofer in my system. In the past, I only had issues with my WAF using the subwoofer. I do not use the Sub in my 2 channel. I have 15" paper woofers in my speakers. They are very fast, and depending on the source, can definately sound bloated or muddy. With my APL, this is not the issue. The bass I get is so tight, fast, articulate, emmmm, real, I can tell the difference in the types of drums used. I was listening to Chuck Mangione's, Children of Sanchez, when the bass drums start, WOW, tight, fast, in my chest, only like my subwoofer was playing. My daughter ran downstairs and told me to turn my subwoofer off, cause books were falling ff the desk. I was smiling, ear to ear, prior cause of the spl and air from my 15"ers. When she came down, I was floored that the bass was so GREAT, I was HAPPY.
Bass is wonderful, accurate, fast, focused, again,the best I have ever had in my system. I guess I just neber mentioned it cause I never felt bass was lacking, and just did not think about it. Bass is presented naturally IMHO.
Springbok10. I mentioned above that the APL is a single ended design. Alex told me he was going to offer balanced outs as an option but feels the machine sounds better single ended. He may have changed his mind so check with Alex to make sure.
Thanks. I wish that the APL was available for in home audition. I'm looking to buy something right now. Was wondering- Did you ever listen to the Krell SACD standard. About 6 weeks off for the new version. Anyway, I guess an inexpensive back-up player will have to fill in. Any sugestions?
Reb1208, I am gonna ship my APL 1000 back to Alex on Monday. I will suggest to him, if his busy schedule permits, to fully mod it, and use it for demo. This would not be up to the 3910 standard, but should be plenty wonderful to give a taste. I have not heard the Krell SACD standard, but from reading audiogon threads, I was under the impression the AA Capitole mk 2 was superior. I have owned that. I realize the more I know today, the less I know tomorrow. As far as an inexpensive back-up, it depends on what the buget is, and which formats are the most important to you. My back-up was(is) the SACD 1000.
Jes45, you need to get a life, I have bought, paid for used sold returned more equipment this year than most. I see no feedback for you, only rediculous posting. I am still buying other sources, and am communicating with other honest audiogon members who are on a similar search, for fabulous digital.. I have found something I realy love, and am sharing my experience. Nuf said.
I really don't believe there is any reason to doubt 711 Smlin's motives - in fact I would probably vote him the most enterprisng, energetic A'gon member I've ever heard of.......:)
I'm afraid I'm going to have to cancel the get together at my house next Sunday. I am extremely busy at work and have a deadline to meet. I will be very happy to host a session in January, probably after CES which I will be attending. Meanwhile, perhaps someone else is willing to host.
I apologize to all concerned for the cancellation, but I'm afraid time is of the essence.
Alex now offers balanced output (see the updated website). He also posted the price for the package deal (Denon 3910 + mods + clock = $4,200).
711smilin, I may change my logon to Philsmilin soon. I ordered the package deal. I am curious about your use of DVD. I'm assuming you must use a monitor to navigate DVD-A, correct?
Went to Alex's web site. I confirm the option for the masterclock generator for $200 on APL 3910. On the other hand I saw no mention of a balanced output stage. Question is also: will this option be simply XLR connection, or does it involve a fully differential balanced design? Perhaps Alex and Steve Milin can comment on the sound improvements for these two new features. Oh, do I so love an ever thickening plot! And yes, of course, the magic rabbit is running ever faster along the track's raill. . . Arf! Arf! Arf!
Guidocorona. Don't know why but going to apl website through agon you don't get the updated info. Go to aplhifi.com from your home page. Alex explains how he does the balanced outs on the updated site.
Thank you Frank, I did open the page from the address bar and found the following info about Alex's balanced output design for the APL 3910: "Unlike all of the available Balanced output machines using a simple Op Amp for Single Ended to Balanced conversion, or the even more complicated designs called "true balanced" using twice more components on the signal path, the new APL Hi-Fi Balanced Output is actually giving you the sound quality of a Single Ended Triode drive. The actual phase splitting is done by the secondary windings of the output transformer while driven from the same Single Ended 6H30 Tube stage. This component-less Balanced output design gives you the Ultimate sonic performance with all the benefits of Single Ended Designs. . . " The modification costs a modest $249. I am not qualified to comment on the engineering merits of this solution, but if it indeed it worked, it would deliver the sonic benefits of a traditional balanced design at a fraction of the price. Any comments from Alex, Dan, and any Agoners with either qualified EE knowledge or listening experience of similar designs will be appreciated.
Speaking of Alex, is he generally pretty responsive? I've written him twice over the past week, and have not heard back. I wanted to pass by his shop on Thursday for an audition of a modded unit, but it looks like that may not happen now. This is a great thread, by the way. Very informative.
Boa2, what can I say, I am really busy. My usual bedtime is 4:30am. I also thought that I will not have a demo 3910 for this Thursday, but it turns out I will. Please take your favorite music and stop by. I will email you with my address.
BTW, I can't find anything about the balanced output upgrade on the website. Am I missing something? Tried opening the page different ways and still nothing. I originally asked Alex about it and he says he prefered the single ended outs. Would have been better since I already had balanced cables.
The balanced output paragraph can be found by opening: http://www.aplhifi.com and going to the products page. It is immediately after the navbar. I'd be interested in reading from Alex about his new balanced design. It is quite possible that what you Jose21 have originally heard from him were impressions about an early prototype. On the other hand, his design does not appear to be a fully differential balanced design, and may therefore suffer of some inherent shortcomings. Only auditions/comparisons will tell. As Igor Stravinsky stated in his Poetics Of Music, you can judge a tree only by its fruits, not by its roots.
Alex, What can I say? I'm pretty busy as well. The next time you want to save face, however, you could just respond directly to my e-mails, which you still have not done. I know, everyone does business in his/her own way. I'm just a stickler when it comes to customer service. Everyone is exceptionally good at selling it, and very few actually deliver. Thank you, but I won't be by on Thursday. Best of luck, truly. It's refreshing to see so many people excited about your product.
BOSA2, just a gentle reminder. Agoners and industry folks on this thread are all very busy having a lot of fun. We are welcoming you to the discussion and look forward to your next postings in the cheerful and positive mood that we all want to maintain. Hope to read your findings about your upcoming 3910 audition soon!
Guidocorona, first off let me say that there is no such thing as Balanced source to begin with. The balanced designs have very high CMRR and are very useful and required for production studios and other Pro applications where long cables are must. For home, it does not make ANY sense to use balanced gear. Why? Because the so called "true balanced" (or full differential) designs use the same amount of components for each phase per channel. What would you say, is it better to have 2 components on the signal path or is better to have 4? I vote for 2. The transformers I am going to use have Faradey shielded windings for much improved balance. Even in full differential design there is components mismatch so nothing is really perfect...;-) Why I am offering the Balanced is for people who do not agree that there is no benefit of it and insist on having it...:-)
Balanced = push pull. I still prefer SE Class A, nothing like it...;-)
What happened to your web site? I was going to e-mail you about setting up another time to come audition the player, but www.aplhifi.com brings up a site for web designers. You might want to check it out.
Thanks Alex for the explanation. Will your 'balanced' design also supply single ended connectors in the same box? I suspect balanced vs single ended is a religious matter, as there are as many staunch defender of fully balanced approaches willing/able to prove their point, as there are detractors. Ultimately, the proof may be in the pudding, or was it in the 'fruits?' As for push/pull vs triode, I have heard situations where the former sounded better, and some where the latter did instead. But perhaps this is only my old Italian ultra-pragmatism showing through.
It is interesting to hear Alex's thoughts on Balanced vs. Single ended. When I asked the question of Coda (which connection they recommended for 2M cable input to their monoblocks), they recommended the very same thing...single ended. They sited long cable length is the only reason you'd want to run Balanced too.
Touching back to the title of this thread, I believe Alex has a DV-50 in his shop undergoing some mods.
So Alex -
Can you comment on the DV-50 and its suitablilty for mods? What are your expectations...realistically?
Guidocorona, I agree with you and whatever I wrote before was strictly from my perspective. I have nothing against Balanced designs and their manufacturers. As you said, the truth is in the hearing. Yes, SE outputs stay intact as well as Balanced outs. My Balanced option approach is nothing new. It is widely used for Studio microphones. Since the microphone is a single ended device (as all other sources), a phase splitter is required. In most cases it is done with transformer. So I do the same. Even in digital applications there is no Balanced source. The phase splitting is usually done in the digital domain. The designer has the option to convert it back to SE, process the Analog in SE and split it to Balanced again, or just install twice more components and call it "true balanced".
Dbld, I am happy to hear that others share my view regarding "balanced".
Well, I do have the DV-50 on my bench as I type. My expectations are to improve its performance compared to stock and give it true DSD capabilities for stereo. To be honest, I am still beating my head with it so I can not comment more for now..:-) Many will disagree with my opinion about tube stages, but I like tubes. Sadly there is no space in the DV-50 for my tube mods so it will remain all Solid State. The ouput buffer will be MOSFET single ended working in Class A which is actually not bad at all and in combination with the Tamura coupling transformers provides very analog-like, natural sound character. I will tell more as I progress.
Alex, two questions: 1. Ignoring obvious cost increase considerations, have you thought of trying the feasibility/results of a 'traditional true balanced design.', just purely as a prrof-of-concept/sonic test, of course. 2. How much cost to the end user would be added by such a design? 3. Concerning a purely hypothetical DV50 tube-based mod, you can always move some of the tube circuitry to an external chassis. That is I believe what ModWright and possibly Exemplar have done. Oops, I have no idea how my two questions have now become three. Oh well, that's pragmatism again rearing its ugly head!
I could care less what people say in terms of balanced only being beneficial for long runs of cables. To many audiophiles (including myself) there is a clear and audible difference in hearing balanced vs. single ended performance...especially on those componets(like Electrocompaniet,Esoteric,Ayre,Classe,etc) that were designed to sound better balanced. What I and many other audiophiles hear are blacker backgrounds, a deeper soundstage and a more "see through quality" to the music. And when lesser designs start to sound distorted at higher volumes balanced designed equipment tends to hold its composure better.
We can talk all day about the technical reasons why there is no advantage to balanced over single ended but the fact of the matter is balanced DOES SOUND BETTER...and not by a small margin! As far as I'm concerned, if a design change or connection makes an audible improvement its better!
OK guys, I uderstand and agree with all of you. This is the reason why I will soon offer the Balanced outputs while the Single Ended RCA will remain intact...:-)
I could never listen thru a single ended pre-amp. Single ended source hooked to a balanced pre-amp can be ok though, depending on the design. Phono stages, for example- not much choice there. Balanced cd playback often helps free the medium from the "closed in" sound that is it's hallmark. And, certainly the balanced pre-amp should be hooked to a balanced amp. Even if that amp is not true differential. Balanced (differential) pre-amps IME, allow the system to achieve superior: Soundstage, defined images, tighter more accurate bass, lower noise floor, wider dynamic range. All without loosing musicality, if done right.
Thanks Alex, but. . . what about my original questions: questions: 1. Ignoring obvious cost increase considerations, have you thought of trying the feasibility/results of a 'traditional true balanced design.', just purely as a proof-of-concept/sonic test, of course. 2. How much cost to the end user would be added by such a design? 3. Concerning a purely hypothetical DV50 tube-based mod, you can always move some of the tube circuitry to an external chassis. That is I believe what ModWright and possibly Exemplar have done. NOTE: Yes. . . of course. . . I know it already. . . you do not have to say it. . . I am a real pain!
Oops, I just realized that my 3rd question may be misinterpreted as an insinuation that ModRight and Exemplar may be in the process of modifying a DV50. I have no such info, nor I have ever heard such a rumour. I meant to say that ModWright and Exemplar are using 2-chassis designs on some of their modified Denons and Sonys.
Guidocorona, as I mentioned, there is no "true balanced" designs. Why balanced sounds better to many is because both phases are eventually added at the end - the speaker. Just like paralleling multiple devices (DACs, components, etc.) you are getting the sum of them which results in better sound. Wheter you are going to parallel two single ended stages or use balanced design, the end result (sonically) should be the same when it comes to home applpications. Of course, the balanced design rejects all kinds of common signals making it suitable for Pro requirements. To design a "true balanced" I will have to use two triodes driving the output transformer. This will create all kinds of problems due to tubes mismatch. Even if you get exactly matched tubes, they will deteriorate differently over their life span. This can be somewhat compensated by NFB but I don't like this idea. With the component-less single ended to balanced conversion, you will get exactly the same benefit of the so called "true balanced" designs (sonic-wise).
You did not read my post very carefully. I specifically talked about units that were DESIGNED to sound better balanced. The units I made mention of were all made to sound better balanced. The owners manuals say the same.
Additionally, the better mfg's will offer a cdp that has both connections. The clear implication is go balanced for better fidelity...but should you not have a pre/pro with balanced inputs we will offer you rca's. That's a smart marketing move as they don't want to miss out on customers who may not have balanced ancillary equipment.
So, I never said RCA could not sound good or as good as balanced. I'm sure the two players you mentioned sound quite good from RCA outputs. What I am saying is that in the majority of cases where balanced ouputs are made available there will be a clear and audible improvement over rca...especially when both are offered on the same unit! That has definitely been my experience.
I'm dropping out of the "balanced vs. rca" argument because it gets away from the original motivation of my thread. Furthermore, I'm starting to see that many audiophiles out here don't have balanced equipment (or have never owned balanced equipment)so my argument falls on unqualified ears.
Unless you have owned multiple pre/pro's, amps and cdp's that offer both options and have compared them extensively (like I have) by switching back and forth between both connections you wouldn't know there is an advantage.
I agree with Avguru. I too have tried a DV-50, ML 32, Krell KMA 160 KMA single-ended vs balanced and the balanced was clearly "better" to my ears. So I went to a completely balanced pre-amp and amp that were designed to be balanced preferentially. (Atma-Sphere)I won't go back, which is why the APL 3910 is of less interest to me than it may be to those with single-ended systems.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
