I have the transport version. Go to Oracle-Audio.com and you'll be able to read the specs for both. |
hi Tabl10s
I know the website. Witch transport do u have 1000 or 2000 ?
In fact, I wrote "CDP", but I'm only interested about Transport - 2000 vs 1000. I'm using dCS for digital convertion.
Do u compare both tranports.
ths |
|
Laurentd,
The CDT2000 & CDT1000 are pretty much similar in soundstage, dynamic, incredable in mid-bass. The difference is appearance only... I have cdt1000 and very happy with that even I haven't got a proper DAC for it. Just connect it to my old CDP which has digital input and the output is only 44,1KHz, but it's a big difference when compare with the old CDP. Imagine that I got a right DAC for it then......
If you love the appearance then you have to pay more for CDT2000 with the same sound as CDT1000. The CDT1000 is not bad at all, actually very nice looking, I just made a custom tempered glass base for it and looked so cool. But if your pocket is full then it doesn't matter... your call... enjoy the music... |
>>If you love the appearance then you have to pay more for CDT2000 with the same sound as CDT1000.<<
That's not quite true. The CD-2000 has a much more sophisticated and innovative suspension system than the CD-1000. In a highly resolving system, the superiority of the CD-2000 is quite apparent. Both however, share the same transport and electronics.
Disclaimer: I sell Oracle.
Bill Feil
AudioFeil International |
ths bill.
You'd said "In a highly resolving system, the superiority of the CD-2000 is quite apparent"
that's THE question. How could you describe me THIS superiority. Does it make large improvement in sound stage an imaging for example ?
ths
Laurent |
Since you apparently like the '1000, you might as wellpurchase one. |
"In a highly resolving system, the superiority of the CD-2000 is quite apparent."
Well, I didn't say they are the same, just pretty much similar. I heard them both with Martin Logan Pro and Audio Research MkIII, using Audio note 3x DAC, and then MF Trivista 21... and the sound was not much diffrence. And the Saleman of the store also agreed with that So I don't know what other HIGHER SYSTEM that Bill listened to ??? And don't know the above system I've listened to is high enough for the CDT2000 !!!???
Honestly, I prefer the CDT2000 over the CDT1000 because of the look, but with the price of CDT2000 over CDT1000 (and has only "more sophisticated and innovative suspension system than the CD-1000", unless I won the lotto....otherwise wouldn't waste bucks on it. Because "Both however, share the same transport and electronics."
That's why I told Laurent : it's your call ! If you can afford then go ahead.... |
Are you saying that the AN 3x isn't much better than the Trivista 21? |
I was comparing CDT2000 vs CDt1000, not DAC comparation |
I own the Oracle 2000 and have it hooked-up via using a Stealth Sextet digital cable (AES connection) with a Accustic Arts dac MK4 and it is absolutely amazing.
I did have a Oracle 1000 transport that I also demoed in the same set-up, you can not compare the two.
Right from the get go the design is totally different.
The two do not sound similar, if the 1000 did I would have bought it and saved a whole lot of money.
Now this is with my set-up so others may differ.
|
Dev
Lynn at Oracle sez the the BNC is the best output and that the two uit sound the same. |
Tab110s the two units sound different.
Again I will say if they weren't I would have bought the 1000 and saved allot of money.
Lynn at Oracle is a nice person but I will have to disagree with her if she has made this statement, ask her how she came about with her conclusion. I would like to know what system she had set-up to do this evaluation including cables.
I had both the 1000 and 2000 hooked-up to the ACCUSTIC ARTS MK4 via AES and the differences were absolutely obvious that they sound different in my set-up.
I do not live that far from the manufacturer and would invite a demo comparison at my own home because it's a no brainer, if Lynn is making such statements then she is not doing justice for the Oracle product line.
Now I do want to make it clear that you Tab110 are the one saying this about Lynn and not me, (1000 sounding the same as the 2000)which I totally disagree with.
I have not yet tried the BNC connection mainly because I have a AES Stealth Sextet digital, if the BNC is better that will only be a bonus, I will get one down the road to try and find out for myself.
In the past I have done some comparisons between AES and BNC, there were differences but better! nope and that is why I have AES digital connections.
|
I'm sure the system used was probably all thier own products. Lynn doesn't return emails very quickly and the company takes vacation a few times a year.
The 6moons reviewer qouted Lynn as saying that they differ only in the suspension. Since you since in Canada, it'd be more easier for you to contact the company. |
Tab110, I would not go by what the 6moons reveiwer (Ken) said fistly he obviously prefers the looks of 1000 over the 2500 and has not even evaluated the two, please.
Secondly he actually never even had a 2000, he had a 2500. Some of these reviewers are so in their own world and I personally don't rely on their reviews. Even his system set-up, please.
Prior to me actually getting the 2000 I asked questions about the two, what I was told was that the electronics are very "similar" not the same but when it comes to design they are totally different and in a resolving system the 2000 will sound different and be superior.
Refer back to Audiofiel's thread, even though he is a dealer he has made a accurate statement when he said;
"That's not quite true. The CD-2000 has a much more sophisticated and innovative suspension system than the CD-1000. In a highly resolving system, the superiority of the CD-2000 is quite apparent."
Tab110, I had the Oracle 2500 player prior to getting the 2000 transport and have to say I prefered the Accustic Arts combo. When I initially received the Oracle 2000 I did not open it up right away, it sat unopened for some three hours mainly due to my findings of the 2500 but then I reminded myself that it was a transport and would be hooked-up via with my Accustic Arts dac. I sure am happy I did because from the first cd and first note I heard I have been impressed, the best I have had in my system period. Also I want you to know that my 2000 is the most current model so if you have an older one changes have been made, mainly the lazer.
Also I did not not even take Oracles own word and got a 1000 to compare for my self, the 2000 is better period and does not sound the same.
|
Dear Sir,
My name is Lynn from Oracle Audio Technologies.Please send me an email to: lynn@oracle-audio.com and I usually reply to all of my emails within 24 hours.Or you can reach me at 819-864-0480 . It will be a pleasure to talk with you.
Please note that the CD 2000 -2500 and the CD 1000-1500 have the very same electronics, very same circuitry and the same CD laser drive mechanism, the Philips CD PRO II.
Please let me know if you need more assistance. You can always visit our website at : www.oracle-audio.com. Please let me know where you are located and it will be my pleasure to direct you to one of our distributors. Thank you for your interest. Lynn |
Manufacturer rep. great, I have allot of questions Lynn;
#1 Firstly what are your qualifications?
You mention in your thread above the CD 2000 - 2500 and the CD 1000-1500 have very same electronics.
#2 Does "very same" mean identical?
#3 The 2000 is a transport and the 2500 is a player so how can they be the same and the same goes for the CD 1000-1500?
#4 Have there been any modifications made to any of the units you speak of?
#5 Are there sound differences between the pieces.
#6 There was some mention that you said that the 1000 sounds the same as the 2000, is this correct?
#7 If so what did the system consist of, speakers, amps etc. and how did you do this evaluation.
I am a proud owner of the 2000 and using it with the Accustic Arts Dac MK4 connected via Stealth Sextet digital.
I personally had a 2500 in my system and I prefer the Accustic Arts combo using the Accustic Arts Drive MK2 over it.
I almost did not try the 2000 because of my experience with the 2500 but realized the 2000 is a transport which I was looking to match up with my Accustic Arts Dac so I decided to try it. I am happy that I did because the improvement was what I was looking for, I preferred this combo (Oracle 2000 and Accustic Arts dac MK4)
I also had a 1000 and tried it in my system, the difference between the 1000 and 2000 was dramatic in my system, I preferred the 2000.
It would seem very senseless to offer the 2000 which is substantially more expensive than the 1000 if they sounded identical, they are both transports and both need a dac.
|
05-08-07: Dev
Manufacturer rep. great, I have allot of questions Lynn;
#1 Firstly what are your qualifications?
Well she's the owner. Perhaps a better question is what are YOUR qualifications?
LOL
Money can always buy great equipment but it can never buy good listening skills. |
Dear Sir,
You will find the exact identical electronics in our CD players 2500-1500 and CD transports 2000-1000 and the same CD drive laser mechanism. Top loading CD PRO II laser from Philips, selected because of its sonic capabilities.All Oracle Audio devices share the same electronic circuitry ( 2500-1500 ) and ( 2000-1000), remote control, external power supply and dust cap.
The CD 2000-2500 utilizes the 4 pillar suspension system to control unwanted vibration and is housed in a brushed aluminum chassis. The Oracle Audio CD 2000& CD 1000 is a CD transport system supplying your DAC with the clearest digital signal. The CD 2500 utilizes the same transport and suspension as the CD 2000 , but also incorporates an integral DAC. The DAC 1500/2500 players have their own internal D/A converter using the 12S signal from the laser drive. The internal DAC is based on the Cirrus Logic Crystal one bit chipset and is 24 bit.
Isolation VS suspension:
The CD 2000/2500 series utilizes the suspension/ isolation/ vibration control system found on the famous Oracle Delphi turntable. The efficient suspension system includes:
- for stability- the 4 suspension towers using 7 different mechanical filters including sorbothane dampers, grommets, springs, delrin pillars and spring sleeve.
- acrylic base
- now that the main chassis is suspended, the chassis also has a sorbothane ring decoupling the chassis from the transport mechanism
The CD 1000/1500 uses an isolation / vibration control system. There is a sorbothane ring decoupling the transport mechanism from the main chassis. There is also sorbothane ring to additionally decouple the main chassis from the footer system. The footer system uses urethane feet to further reduce vibration. We find a lot of mass/weight with this unit.Thank you for your interest . Lynn |
|
