Esoteric x-03 se vs ARC cd3 mk2

The CD3 is out of production as far as I know. X-03 has been released in the US just several months ago. X-03 has a higher quality transport. CD3 is likely a lot less expensive on the used market. Ultimately the best is simply the one whose sound you find most involving. As for being an investment. . . no high end audio gear ever is. . . they are only expenses.

call over at aberdeen components and talk to ANTHONY PADILLA. you might be surprised what he tells about the esoteric dv50s vs. the X-03 se and why !!!!!! before buying anthing call him. tell him BILL L. said you would have some interesting things to share about the two units. the man is THE BEST when it comes to understanding how and why things work and to make them sound better.

regards

bill
ps try www.mauimods.com as well to send email.

Needless to say, there is also an upcoming Esoteric DV-60, to replace the DV-50, although little is known about it at this time. Ultimately, regardless of what you will read on this thread, or anywhere else, or what any dealer says, it can be only your own auditory cortex that judges a new unit.

The ARC CD3 MK2 is still in production. Their new CD7 is in ARC's reference series line up and not a replacement of the CD3.

06-14-06: Guidocorona
The CD3 is out of production as far as I know.

I beleive this statement is incorrect.

In any case, I have not heard X-03, but I do own CD3 MkII.
I like it a lot. I think it has a very good transport. The only problem for some people may be the fact that this is a top loading player. Aside from this, performance is really really good. Especially when run through its XLR outputs into a balanced preamp. To me, the CD3 MkII is a much better player than DV-50S, although I haven't heard this one in my system, I heard it plenty of times to come to conclusion about its sonic character. Very good player, but in my opinion not as good as CD3 MkII. If you have a lot of SACDs to play, then may be you should consider Esoteric. Otherwise, ARC player would be my recommendation for redbook playback.
Also, check out the review of ARC where it gets compared to separates as well as Esoteric X-01.
this is ARC review http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/audioresearch_cd3mkii.htm

and this one is a review of X-01
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/esoteric_x01_limited_followup.htm

Oops, my bad Audiophile1. As you pointed out above , the AR CD3 Mk. 2 is indeed still in the Audio research catalogue, and it is described at:
http://www.audioresearch.com/CD3.htm

Thank you for your responses so far. I am currently
leaning toward the ARC cd3 mk2- but I have the issue of
finding the proper cabinet area for a top loading unit.
Also, I am concerned about a possible upgrade or replacement by ARC in the near future.

there will always be an upgrade concern. Get your player used on a-gon, so you can sell it later to get the latest model. Nut personally, I think ARC will not issue a new player within a year or two anyway.

Guido,
I only go by the insides of the dv-50s, and Dv-60, Ux-03, and such. I have the Dv-60 for bout 3 weeks now.
Anthony
Aberdeen/mauimods

Thank you Anthony, as you may be the only one who has direct experienced both DV-60 and X-03, what are the sonic differences between the two?

Anthony,

What are your experiences with the differences in the DV60, DV50S & X03?

Saxo, I have listened to a DV-50 and an UX-3 in the same room with the same music on the same day two weeks ago. . . . unfortunately it was not on the same system, so my findings are very suspect. My outward impression is of the DV-50 to be warmer, less detailed, and with slower transients than the UX-3. The DV-50 system also displayed a larger but less specific sound stage than the system with the UX-3. But. . . how much of what I heard can be imputed to the players? And how much was instead caused by the rest of two very different and yet equally disappointing systems?
I hope Anthony can shed some better light on these excellent devices.