Mark levinson 30.5 and 31.5 vs todays cd playerrs

Wow, Levinson defense force mobilize! Levinson makes some good and some great products (for example, I feel that their 326S pre is something special which is why I own it) but that doesn't change the fact that many of their recent line of products simply can't compete in terms of performance with more contemporary products. If that wasn't the case, they wouldn't be updating almost they're entire line this year. afaik, the only products that will remain in the lineup are the 326S, No51 and an updated No40 (True HD and DTS HD MA decoding, etc.); everything else is either EOL (No32, 320S, 390S, 33H, 432) or will be this year (pretty much their entire line of amps).

Frankly, given the performance of the 326S, I can't wait for Levinson's new products, particularly their No33 preamp which will be going up against the Ayre KX-R to find a place in my system later this year (assuming the No33 makes it out in H2 08 as expected). If I didn't have the Ayre MX-Rs I'd also be exited about the No53 and the higher end reference monoblocks. It's time to let the old Levinson out to pasture and embrace the new and improved Levinson which looks like it's going to be a huge step up performance-wise.

I do agree their current line of 400 series amps is something to be desired. I don't know what they were thinking? Levinson used to build large beefy amps with nice big heatsinks. To me that is an amp, not one without them.

great equipment even by todays standards but I prefer the Spectral cd transport and dac, I find them a little warmer sounding

I currently own a ML #35 dac and a Muse Model Five transport. They are connected with an Acoustic Zen MC2 aes/ebu digital cable and all I have to run it is a cheap Denon 1803 receiver. This setup is definitely the most analog, richest, and smoothest sounding I've heard to date but doesn't quite give me the 3d sound and presence that I like. Do you think it would be worth my time and money looking into a separate amp and pre-amp?

I plan to in the future but I want a good foundation to start on first. It is to my understanding that I have a fairly good digital cable so I hope there's no problem there. It is also to my understanding that the 30.5 trounces the 35, but I can't afford a 30.5. My first setup was a Marantz cd-67 se used as a transport feeding the signal to a Theta DS Pro Basic dac.

That setup was nowhere near as rich, detailed, smooth, and analog sounding as the ML 35 I have now, but it had some decent presence and to me was quite vivid. Somewhere along the upgrade path I lost my way. Should I try a different transport? Or is the ML 35 simply not capable of delivering the vivid 3d sound stage and presence which I desire? I was thinking about possibly trying an Accustic Arts dac-1 if I can find one in my budget range ($1500-$2000). Suggestions would be most welcomed and greatly appreciated.

dear mr. teajay,
i have no problem having a disagreement with an experienced listener such as yourself. there is no question, as i stated previously, that some newer players (many of which cost upwards of $10,000) offer more detail and in many audiophiles' opinions a more musically realistic sound than the ml-390S. BUT a used 390S is comparitively inexpensive, built like a tank and is (STILL) an awfully good-sounding cdp. i too have upgraded my m.levinson 360s/37 to a newer, "better" digital front end- EMM labs DCC2-SE/CDSD-SE. I immediately noticed a marked difference- the EMM stuff uses a whole different set of mathematics to convert the ones and zero's which can sound "odd" to someone (like me) who had never heard this before. it also revealed more details, had a lower noise floor, and therefore i was fairly satisfied with my (not so cheap) purchase. but guess what? IMHO it did NOT make my levinson gear sound "unmusical" in any way, shape, or form. the ML components still, in my frame of reference (otherwise known as my opinion), had superb bass, very open and airy sounding, and very smooth. the EMM's treble WAS cleaner and less hashy, but not night and day- more like "X" percent- i would have a hard time stating a "number" here, but it would not be all that large.
if i took the levinson stuff out of the closet and re-installed it, my 30 or so SACD-only discs would get dusty, but i would still have music, GREAT sounding music, to enjoy just as before. i have very good wire, ML-33H AMPS (OH, OF COURSE, THAT MUST BE THE PROBLEM RIGHT THERE!), and von-schweikert vr-9 speakers, which are sufficiently revealing, so perhaps the problem is my hearing, which i am the first to admit is not as acute as some people i know (or at least they seem to hear minute differences i cannot).
anyway, all this does not make me right or anything like that, but every review i've read in both audio mag's over the course of several years has had positive impressions of levinson digital, and often IN COMPARISON with other, sometimes very VERY expensive digital gear. so if someone was dumb enough to spend $4000 on a used 390S just because i said go do it, they might hate the sound, but perhaps 7 or 8 times out of 10 they might agree with me that they DID NOT have to spend $10K, or even $20K, on esoteric or emm or whatever (how much was the acoustic arts player you now enjoy?) to play redbook cd's and get a very big chunk of the available information off the disc. another point i might make here is that even compared to my aries turntable, the levinson front end held its own providing the cd was recorded in a competent manner. gee that's odd, i spent just around... $4000- for the aries/arm/cartridge (a benz M-09).
i use a lucaschek phono stage, which is supposed to get the job done with minimal fuss (adjustments).
anyway, i would sincerely hope that if someone who has actually done the comparing can pick out some cdp's in the $3k to $5k range (used, so we are comparing apples to apples), that sound markedly better than the levinson, then that would obviously be preferable. i just don't think it would be an easy task.