Zepher, I owned the K-01, which is a fantastic player that I easily could have lived with for along time and not looked back. I upgraded from the X-01/D2, which is an all together different sound. The X-01 plays multi channel SACD and when done right is certainly worth the listening time, for me anyway! But the K-01 is a huge step up from the X-01D2, much more relaxing and easier on the ears long term. They both are excellent at extracting information, but the K-01 is much much smoother and not as acute at the extremes.
To the point, an excellent opportunity came up to trade out the K-01 toward the D-02/P-02 combo... And that is a whole other league. The D-02/P-02 combo is by itself in the Esoteric offerings. Out of the box these players blew me away, even with the stock cords and inexpensive cables. I've since upgraded to Wireworld series 7 clock and DC's and Shunyata ZiTron PC's and the sound just gets bigger and bigger everytime I play them. The deliniation of sounds and instruments, and the authentic reproduction of vocals and piano is astounding. On live music the audience clapping sounds as real as I've ever heard it through speakers. I find it hard to believe that there are many players as peers to these machines ! I say to anyone who can afford it , don't even thing twice about it and you will never look back! Enjoy the music ! |
I have an Esoteric K-01 but a G-03X and in my opinion is the best to listen to digital sources! For me the K-01 with the clock is in the same league as the Escarlati, at a price much lower! Have a 500HS against requiring of break ing in each filter and sampler up! Another critical point is that it requires a good powercord would not say exceptional, in my case I use Purist Limited Edition + Furutech FI50/51, and as the clock BNC cable for Purist Canorus with all these products at least for me! end the search for the beloved musical nirvana!
Best Regards
Adrian |
Has anyone heard (and bought) the Estoeric P-02 D-02 combo as yet? I am interested in particular in the performance of the D-02 as compared to the older D-02 as I may take a step-wise approach to upgrading my P-03U/D-03 combo. |
My apologies Harv for my senior brainfart.... Looking forward to your msg this coming weekend! Saluti, Guido |
G-
OK, but I'm not "Frank", although I AM candid and forthright. I'll drop you a line this weekend.
HARVE |
hi Frank (Fplanner2010), I have tried to send you a PM via Audiogon, but the beta system does not support PMs yet.... Do drop me an email... Would love to chat about K-01, the Universe, and... Everything!
guido.d.corona@gmail.com
Saluti, Guido |
Anyone use the USB port yet? |
Zephyr24069, I suspect that K-01 may require separate breakin for major filters and upsampling rates as well. G. |
Guido...I don't own a K-03 or K-01 but when I talked to Mark and Tim from Esoteric this past April at Axpona about them (they were showing a K-03), they told me that breakin time is consistent with the P-01, P-03U/P-03, UX-1, X-01, C-03 pre-amp, etc....plan for 300-500 hours with unit getting incremental nuances/refinements after 500 hours. There is a lot of circuitry in the K series models, plan for good levels of break in. The thing I've always found myself wondering is when you have multiple choices for upsampling (DSD versus the various levels of PCM like the P-03 units provide) if you need to run separate breakin times for the 2-3 major modes of the transport or DAC in question. To be on the safe-side with my P-03U and D-03 I did in fact fun 300+ hours on DSD upconversion as well as 300+ hours on PCM at 176.4. |
|
What are everyone's experience with break in time on K-01? |
On G0 rb clock benefits, sharing the below clock specs i read about when i was reading about the K-01.
Esoteric D-02/K-01/K-03: ±0.5ppm
Antelope Isochrone 10M: ±0.00003ppm A friend of mine had tried Antelope Isochrone 10M atomic clock with his K-01 and wasn't able to tell the difference. The clock was returned to the dealer. I do think that you can do better than Antelope Isochrone 10M, as far as external clocks are concerned. Just spend your money on better cables, amp etc. instead. |
Has anyone compared the USB inputs of the K-01 vs the Coaxial inputs of the K-01 (using a Spdif to USB converter) ?
Would be curious is the coaxian input is better than the USB inputs for computer audio.
Thanks in advance. |
Alex, Thank you for your explanation. Have you compared the NWO-M to the Esoteric K-01? How do they compare sonically? Matjet, You're welcome! No one has compared the K-01 with the NWO-M so far, but I am really looking forward to it. The AK4399 in the K-01 (and the new D-02) are used according to the AKM datasheet design guide (normal mode) with "Digital Filter Bypass". The "normal mode" AK4399 configuration was used in the NWO-4.0-SE. The proprietary "special mode" we have incorporated with AK4399 made such a difference resulting in NWO-Master. And of course we have 20 DACs per channel against 8, so I am not sure if comparing the K-01 with the NWO-M will be fair at all. Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
Hi Alex, In your opinion, would those "other factors necessitate using two boxes or could the P02/D02 been designed as a superior one box solution? Hi Phaelon, there are many possibilities; better power supplies and digital signal processing (they say 35 bit), for example. Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
Alex, Thank you for your explanation. Have you compared the NWO-M to the Esoteric K-01? How do they compare sonically? |
"I am certain that there are other factors making the P02/D02 superior sounding compared to the K-01.
Hi Alex, In your opinion, would those "other factors necessitate using two boxes or could the P02/D02 been designed as a superior one box solution? |
Alex,
I find your comment regarding digital interference interesting. You think the K01 may sound better than the much more expensive two unit P02/D02 (make that 3 units if the G-orb is included)? Can you explain in layman's terms? Matjet, I am certain that there are other factors making the P02/D02 superior sounding compared to the K-01. Of course, if everything is made absolutely equal, I believe that the unit without the digital interface will sound better. You'd probably agree that, regardless of how good the digital interface is, it can never be as pure as a short wire connecting the transport and DACs internally. Furthermore, during our experiments with the NWO-M, I've found that different wire materials (Silver, Gold, plated, copper, OFC, etc.) connecting the transport and DACs all have their own sonic signature, just like it happens with interconnect cables, for example. Hope this explains it! Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
Alex - How does the NWO-M compare sonically with the P01/D01/Gorb combo ? Or is that an unfair comparison given the huge price differential ? Hi Mark, The P01/D01 (two mono) an Gorb combo sound very good and clean indeed. As reported to me, some prefer the NWO because it sounds more analog/natural. Of course, you must hear for yourself and decide. Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
Alex,
I find your comment regarding digital interference interesting. You think the K01 may sound better than the much more expensive two unit P02/D02 (make that 3 units if the G-orb is included)? Can you explain in layman's terms?
Thanks |
Alex - How does the NWO-M compare sonically with the P01/D01/Gorb combo ? Or is that an unfair comparison given the huge price differential ? |
WOW Guido - as always, you got your finger on the hot pulse of all things audio. I stand corrected - had no idea of that change. |
Harv, Tim Crable is now Esoteric marketing manager, although he may be retaining some tech services management functions as well. According to my information, Mark Gurvey has left Esoteric. G. |
Guys- I knew I'd heard "35 bits", but had forgotten the content. G- That was the head of Esoteric Tech Support who was running the show (Tim Crable), NOT the marketing guy (Mark Gurvey), FWIW. |
Alex, you are absolutely correct. Esoteric marketing mgr in Denver did state that P02/D02 utilized some form of 35 bits processing, rather than sporting 35 bits DACs. G. |
Well, my XDS1 sounds pretty awesome & natural & un-analytical with a Hydra V-Ray, Shunyata Anaconda Helix powercord, and a little nicer and fuller through the XLR outputs with Stealth Indra ICs. |
There is no 35 bit DACs in the P02/D02; it has the same AK4399 as used in the K-01 (8 per channel) which can process maximum of 32 bits. They probably mean 35 bit processing, which provides some headroom with most audio formats.
I am absolutely certain that the P02/D02 is an extremely good sounding product and I can't wait for someone to compare it with the NWO-M. Same applies to the K-01. :-)
Matjet, I'd stick with the K-01 because it is missing the digital interface between transport and DAC. It is just me, but I favor purer solutions.
Best wishes,
Alex Peychev |
Guido, it amazes me that some think that what they have to write is the end all but others are not important.
Sorry but you opened up the discussion posting your method so I was just responding, obviously you don't like it and that's too bad I don't see anything wrong.
I'm actually interested in the K-01 and it's a very exspensive unit, if someone is going to be commenting as you have mentioned that you will be I would like to know how they did it along how they came to such, your way mentioned above is very questionable.
|
Hi Harvey, not having had Alex's NWO nor K-01 or P02/D02 in my own system, I would not dare even venturing an uneducated guess on my preferences... But I hope none of them would ever emit plumes of "competitive smoke" in my music loft... Would be, uhrn.... So undignified of them *grins!* G. |
According to Esoteric at RMAF, P02/D02 is supposed to be a quantum improvement from the P03/D03. 35 bit DACs are also mentioned, or something like that. I would presume, just from release timing and relative costs, that the P02/D02 will smoke the K-01.
I do know that I prefer my newly-improved NWO-M to what I've heard of the K-01 at this point as well, although I'd obviously need to have the K-01 in my system to be absolutely sure of the differences I am hearing. At this point, I don't feel the players are close enough to warrant such a test.
P02/D02 vs APL NWO-M would probably be a more interesting comparison, IMHO. |
My apologies Dev, as I mentioned already, analitical methodologies are best discussed in a dedicated thread. Guido |
Guilocorona,
said;
"Hence 2 well broken in CDPs should be in the same system, fed into identically broken in inputs of the pre, connected with identical and equally broken in ICs, and fed by identical power cords. Ideally, the two devices may be best set side-by-side on a rack, rather than on different shelves."
I don't agree with your way for comparisions, it's flawed, way to many other variables.
|
I believe the new Esoteric P02/D02 has been released. Apparently, it will replace the P03/D03. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the K-01. Alex, Guidocorona, any ideas? |
:Does this make product "a" better than product "b"?"
Typically, I avoid the terms "better" and "best" like the proverbial plague. I tend to use variants of the term "prefer" instead, in an as narrowly defined context as I can . However, I recommend that a general discussion on comparative auditioning procedures and merits be continued on a dedicated thread.... I am positive there exist a number of such items on Agon already, without the need to dilute this K-01-specific discussion any further with admittedly fascinating metatopics. |
Dev,
Excellent points, it is difficult to eliminate the many variables when attempting to fairly compare components in an A/B format. |
Of course Alex, it is important to keep independent variables at a minimum My point was that, there will still be variables which apply for the particular audio system in which both front-end units are being tested. Some will find the outcome helpful, some not. But I agree it will be fun, as always. :-) Interesting observation Alex about power conditioning on EMM.... Is EMM particularly sensitive to power conditioning? .... Why would this be the case more so than on Esoteric K-01? Because EMM has a switching power supply and the K-01 does not. So the EMM is much more sensitive to the power source compared to the Esoteric. Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
I have found comparing pces in general as mentioned above really isn't all that easy due to so many varibles that come into play.
#1 rca and xlr connections sonic characteristics vary.
#2 which connections are preffered and/or the strengths of the actual pce. I wouldn't use rca if xlr were the strengths visa versa.
#3 one IC that works well with one pce may not with the other.
#4 just removing an IC and connecting a different pce there can be a difference.
#5 some cables need to relax and seem to change once they have been removed and replaced
#6 Power cords, which one, just because one works well with one pce doesn't mean it's the ideal match for the other.
#7 Isolation, just because one works well doesn't mean the other one will be as ideal
#8 power conditioning also, same as #6 & #7
#9 there are other variables to consider depending on the rest of your set-up, one pce may convey something that you are missing or prefer. Lets say bass, maybe product "a" appears to be providing bass that you haven't heard in your system before but product "b" isn't.
Does this make product "a" better than product "b"?
So how are you really being able to compare or does it just come down to a personal what you like and prefer?
Just my two cents
|
Of course Alex, it is important to keep independent variables at a minimum.... Hence 2 well broken in CDPs should be in the same system, fed into identically broken in inputs of the pre, connected with identical and equally broken in ICs, and fed by identical power cords. Ideally, the two devices may be best set side-by-side on a rack, rather than on different shelves.
Interesting observation Alex about power conditioning on EMM.... Is EMM particularly sensitive to power conditioning? .... Why would this be the case more so than on Esoteric K-01?
Saluti, G. |
Esoteric K-01 and EMM XDS1 side-by-side in the same system may be a rather fun experiment... As always, and it will be sure conclusive, but for the given audio system both components (front-ends) are being evaluated. And make sure you have a really nice power conditioner or power re-generator for the EMM gear. Of course, you are correct; it will be fun, one way or the other. Part of the "hobby", right? :-) Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
"And what the point would be, comparing something that has a switching-mode power supply with a linear power?"
Hmm, considering the old Stravinskian recommendation by which a tree is best judged by its fruits, rather than solely by its roots, evaluating the relative audible prowess of Esoteric K-01 and EMM XDS1 side-by-side in the same system may be a rather fun experiment... And if sonic results turned out inconclusive, that would be an interesting finding as well.
G |
Anyone compare the K-01 to the EMM XDS1? And what the point would be, comparing something that has a switching-mode power supply with a linear power? Regardless everything else (digital processing, DACs, analog output stages, etc.), just the power will make such a difference that one will go for the EMM or Esoteric based on the so called "synergy" with the rest of the audio system owned. As simple as that! Hope this helps! Best wishes, Alex Peychev |
Anyone compare the K-01 to the EMM XDS1? |
Anyone compared the K-01 to the EMM XDS1?
The XDS1 sounds really nice right out of the box.
'never heard the Esoteric. |
Golden words matjet that I shall heed... I would definitely do some careful at home trials before committing to any clock... or any new CDp, including K-01... A false positive can turn into an, uhrn.... Expensive proposition:)!
Saluti, G. |
Thanks alot guys for all the value info on breaking in the K-01. Will look into obtaining the esoteric break in disc.
On G0 rb clock benefits, sharing the below clock specs i read about when i was reading about the K-01.
Esoteric D-01/D-03: ±3ppm
Esoteric D-02/K-01/K-03: ±0.5ppm
Esoteric G-03X: ±0.1ppm
Antelope OCX: ±0.02ppm
Antelope Isochrone Trinity: ±0.001ppm
Esoteric G-0Rb: ±0.00005ppm
Antelope Isochrone 10M: ±0.00003ppm
Basis specs, that should explain why adding a more superior clock to the K-01 will hear some improvement.
In reality, one needs to hear for themselves if the improvement justify the cost for the clock.
Cheers |
Guidocorona,
Try the G-orb at home for a few weeks before you buy. Let me know what you think after a few weeks of home testing. |
"Unless the A-B comparison is performed as a blind test, it is useless; psychology can play tricks on audio perception."
Very good point matjet.... Fact is that, I did perform exactly that "blind" test with G-0Rb clock on K-01 at the Esoteric suite at RMAF... I started from an extremely skeptic position, because of past experience on X-01... But I had to change my mind.... and I seemed to have no problem determining when the clock was on or off.... How was my test "blind"? rather simple actually... I am in fact a blind audiofool and could not see what setting was being activated on the machine. G. |
My Esoteric based APL NWO-M has a bunch of the latest AKM DAC chips in it. Although the machine sounded very good new, after about 359 hours, each format sounded significantly better to me.
In addition, there was no difference using my Esoteric G-os rubidium clock with the NWO-M, however when I used the clock with the UX-1 Ltd as transport only with another DAC, the clock DID make things sound noticeably better. I was not in the Esoteric room when the clock was A-B'd with the K-01 at RMAF. I now wish I had been Based upon my limited rubidium clock experience, I would agree with Matjet as to the clock's best use.
If indeed the clock made the K-01 sound better than just the K-01 by itself, as my friend Guido witnessed at RMAF, it totally calls into question the quality of the K-01's internal clock(s), I would think. Not sure how you can really AVOID such a conclusion. Again, I would want to hear the A-B myself, in my own system, before I can draw any conclusions about the K-01. |
Hi Matjet, it is quite possible that K-01 takes enormously less break-in than X-01 and its Ltd variant, for whatever reasons.
Up to now, for most equipment I have had in my system, except for certain wire products and conditioners, I have detected very significant audible yet subjective evolution for a duration ranging from 500 hours to 1200 hours, as I have occasionally reported in a handful of articles. It is also entirely possible that my experiences are pure self-hypnosis. Unfortunately, I can only report what I think I hear, and then make weak extrapolations solely based on my personal involvement in audible matters.
G. |
Guidocorona,
The break-in issue of electronics in hi fi equipment is an interesting topic. Although everyone seems to feel that break in of cables/electronics is important and results in improved sound. Most recomendations (if not all) are based on theory, not documented scientific experimentation. The results are subjective. My K-01 is fully broken-in. Does it sound better today than it did the day I bought it (once it warmed up)? I have no idea. The audible improvement, if any is subtle. I would need to do a direct A-B comparison of a broken-in unit to a non broken-in unit to detect a difference. The improvement is not dramatic and not easily detected IMHO. I am not saying breaking in equipment does not improve the sound. I am just saying, to my ears, the improvement (if there is an improvement) is subtle, On the other hand, when I upgraded my player from the X-01 D2 to the K-01, the improvement was easily detected, no A-B comaparison was required to detect and describe the improvement in sound, it was quite dramatic.
I also received an email from the retailer (audiofeil) with the same recommendation. I appreciate his help. I have heard from other's that break-in must be continuous. But, maybe Audiofeil is correct. Who knows the REAL answer? Probably no one, it is all based on theory, conjecture, opinion. I suggest that you call Esoteric, USA, and ask them directly for their recommended break-in protocol. Please let us know what they say.
By the way, I did speak with Mark at Esoteric a few times (I can't remember his last name) when I bought the unit, he sent me the break in cd, no charge. I can't remember any specifics on break-in other than it needed at least 500 hours and each filter/setting needed to be done for 500 hours, as if starting over. My unit was one of the very first sold in the U.S (I think it was the second one). They were churning them out very slowly at that time.
The Esoteric K-01 is a phenomenal cd/sacd player. I know you will enjoy it tremendously.
The Esoteric break in CD, by the way, is actually made by Isotek, Esoteric just put their name on it. |
