Playback Designs MPS-5 player is certainly worth an audition. I'm amazed by its ability to sound so smooth and dynamic with just the right about of resolution. Customer service is very good. Jonathan and Andraes were very responsive to my questions and concerns.
I´ve bought the Nagra CDP - a great sounding and very well build cd-player with the most accurate sound I´ve ever heard from a cd-player. It´s for sure nothing for overly bright systems or all tube lovers. But in combination with tube amplification the cdp is a dream machine (at a very high price point). Unfortunately none of my emails was answered by playback designs. Bad customer service I would say. The amr was to warm in my system but played very well in a friend system with solid state amplification.
That's right, Audiohifila, the AMR cannot play SACDs. However, with hybrid discs, I prefer by a wide margin the sound of the AMR playing back the PCM layer to the sound of the EMM Labs SE separates playng back the SACD layer. Since nearly all my SACDs are hybrid discs, it was an easy decision for me to go back to a digital source without SACD capabilities.
Nonetheless, once the Playback Designs player arrives, I guess I'll be back in the SACD game...
Well, I'll be able to tell you about two out of those three. I've already had a one month home demo of the Meridian 808.2i and as noted above, I have been promised an in-home demo of the dcs Puccini in the near future. AMR is unlikely as we have no dealer here and they refused an in-home demo as they indicated that they were selling every unit they were producing and didn't need to demo the player to anyone (besides I'm not that big on tubes).
John, this is an interesting discussion. I suspect we might be defining the term "smoothing" a bit differently. I took the term to imply a veiling or lack of resolution. However, I sense that you might be using the term to refer to a slight shift of the tonal balance to the warm side of the spectrum.
I would agree that the Jena Labs cables add a dose of warmth. You might have noticed that I have replaced all but one pair of the Jena Labs cables in my system. I will likely replace the one remaining pair of interconnects in the near future.
The darTZeel electronics are more of an enigma to me. They are the only solid state amplification devices I have experienced that preserve the rich harmonics you hear in a live acoustic music event. Are they adding or "coloring" something to achieve that? If so, then that implies that the recording/engineering/pressing/playback process robbed the music of something in the first place in that the end result is music that, to my ears, is more faithful to the live event. Is it possible that most other solid state electronics are the colored components that bleach some of the natural harmonics out of the music? Maybe. I think these are difficult questions to answer due to the lack of a reference point.
Mrtennis, I agree that "analytical" does not equal "accurate." I chose my words carefully in my earlier post. I should also emphasize that, while I find the EMM Labs gear to be more analytical than the AMR gear, I have found the EMM Labs gear to be among the least offensive in this regard. There are a lot of high end digital sources out there that are more analytical sounding (which, to me, means less natural and less organic sounding) than the EMM Labs equipment.
Mrtennis, to respond to your question, I do find that the AMR CDP has greater timbral accuracy than the EMM Labs gear. By comparison, the EMM Labs gear exhibits a bit of digital glare and a bit of a processed, unnatural sound in fortissimo passages, has slightly overripe bass, and has a bit of a hyped "in-your face" presentation. The AMR CDP does the best job I have ever heard from a digital source in the reproduction of massed strings. It gets all the sweetness, textures and wood resonances that you hear in a live orchestral performance. I have not yet personally experienced another digital source that manages to reproduce massed strings with this degree of timbral accuracy.
That being said, I think the EMM Labs gear is among the best digital sources available. I'm being very critical in picking apart one of the top performers in a field of digital sources that, in my opinion, all still have a long way to go to match the performance of a top-flight analog rig. Prior to hearing the AMR CDP, I accepted the digital glare/hardness in peak orchestral passages as an inherent weakness of the digital format. I could not detect the other shortcomings I mentioned until I was able to conduct a direct comparison with the AMR CDP.
I hope to have the Playback Designs CDP in for comparison within the next week or so. My evaluation will center on classical music, which probably comprises about 80% of my listening and which I regard as the most challenging style of music to accurately reproduce (particularly large scale works involvoing a full orchestra). Dcstep, the guy who sent his AMR packing made his evaluation using exclusively rock and R&B recordings, which leads me to wonder whether there might be a different outcome to the extent the evaluation is done based on acoustic music. I should have the basis to judge for myself soon...
Read the reviews here and at the Audioasylum of Playback Designs MPS-5. It's gone head to head with a couple of Emms in those reviews. I'm taking mine to Austin in September to A-B vs. a dcS stack. A new owner wrote me a couple of weeks ago that it put his AMR on the UPS truck.
I can tell you it's excellent, but until I do some more A-B that's pretty much the limit, except that it's equally great sounding in either balanced or unbalanced mode. It has the advantage of being a SACD/CD combination player and it's got digital-in in several formats.
by the way, "analytical", is not a synonym for "accurate".
if the emm is analytical, it is significantly colored. how is that a basis for recommending it for purchase ? who would want to own an "analytical" sounding component ?
when listening to the amr vs the emm, in which case is the timbre of an instrument rendered more like the actual instrument ?
from what i have gleaned, the amr will be less timbrally inaccurate than the emm.
both players are inaccurate, as no component is perfect. one may create a more natural representation of reality than the other. that is the player i woould want to own.
is the amr the last word with respect to timbre ?
perhaps there is another player to compete with it, such as the audio aero capitole mk 1 and the lector 7 mk 1.
In my opinion the AMR does not lack resolution at all. I had the chance of auditioning it in my system. It is a very good player indeed. On the other hand it still sounded somewhat colored to my ears. I just dont get it why a source should have tubes...It doesn't make sense to me.
08-05-08: Cincy_bob John, I understand your point, and I don't disagree. The only thing I might add is that I do think it is possible to put together an audio system that is faithful to the sound of live music and that does not require any of the components to do any "smoothing" per se. The notion that an audio system needs to have something in the chain to achieve some masking or smoothing of the sound implies that there is something inherently unmusical, unnatural or flawed with the recording/mastering/pressing process or the software format itself.
You are correct Cincy_bob, however, IMHO the digital format IS basically flawed. FWIW, I see that you are using Jena Labs cables and darTZeel amplification, which are wonderful components, but many would consider "smoothing".
What one may consider "accurate" another may consider "bright" or "smoothing" depending on the ancillary equipment. For example, Jena Labs Valkyre were my reference cables until I purchased my reference speakers, Verity Audio Parsifal Encore's. At that point the Valkyre's sounded too warm and lifeless. The Verity's are notoriously warm speakers, so combining them with warm cables was a no-no. Silversmith cables added much more life and "accuracy".
The bottom line is that most of us use "smoothing" components/cables at some point in the chain, especially when digital is the primary source. When someone calls their single component/cable "accurate", it's usually because it mates well with their other "not so accurate" components/cables.
Interesting discussion about how to achieve the best sound. I feel that a high-quality source that is faithful to the recording is the place to start. I would give equal footing to the source and the speakers. I've invested more in proper set-up for the source than in any other component in 3 different systems.
What goes in between the source and the speakers should not smooth or mask, but help let the source realize its greatest potential. This means quality components, attention to power, cabling, connections, and isolation. Many high-quality components respond quite favorably to optimization and tweaking. The concept of a cable that removes information, without taking the proper pains to set-up correctly, seems to be going in the wrong direction.
As a generality, going from around the 5k to 10k price tag for digital results in a 3-fold improvement in performance.
John, I understand your point, and I don't disagree. The only thing I might add is that I do think it is possible to put together an audio system that is faithful to the sound of live music and that does not require any of the components to do any "smoothing" per se. The notion that an audio system needs to have something in the chain to achieve some masking or smoothing of the sound implies that there is something inherently unmusical, unnatural or flawed with the recording/mastering/pressing process or the software format itself.
I'm not sure that's the case. Personally, I try not to introduce any component into my main system that has the effect of masking or smoothing over anything. Components that mask or smooth things over tend to compromise resolution, clarity and transparency.
As for the AMR CDP and the EMM Labs gear, there seems to be a basic assumption underlying some of the posts here that the EMM Labs gear is inherently more resolving. However, I have not found this to be the case. I have found both the AMR CDP and the EMM Labs separates to be very highly revolving components, and I have not personally found that one has an edge over the other in this area.
I would agree with the general notion that the EMM Labs gear tends to sound more analytical, while the AMR CDP tends to sound more musical. However, I doubt anyone has any real basis to assert that either source is inherently more neutral or more accurate than the other. As some have pointed out, that's a difficult assertion to make since we all lack a reference "neutral" benchmark.
I am very interested in trying the Payback Designs CDP to hear for myself how it stacks up. The advances that have been made in digital playback in recent years are really very encouraging.
Cincy_bob, what Argyro is saying is that it is best to have a very revealing source, and then you mask it downstream with cables, speakers, amps, et al.
As I said before, there are many ways to accomplish good sound.
Some, like Argyro, prefer a true source and 'smoothing' cables and/or speakers. Others may choose more 'true' speakers and cables, but want a more 'smoothing' CDP.
Bottom line is we all are seeking the same grail, but have different means of approaching it.
Re this one 'right' thing v 2 'wrong things' stuff, what I can't get my mind around is how does one actually determine that the 'right' source is in fact perfect? Is there some way of listening to this 'right' source without considering the 'rightness' of the rest of the audio chain, including room/set up/ etc. I can't figure out what constitutes a 'right' audio system.
Now if I had a perfect (right) audio system perhaps I could distinguish the differences between sources and pronounce one of them the 'right' one. But if the downstream system wasn't (just by chance mind you) perfect, perhaps I'd make a mistake and think the wrong source was the right source.
Guys, thats why our hobby is so great As Audiofeil said you can reach the desired results following many different approaches. It would be boring any other way.
Argyro, I have a different perspective on the comparison of the EMM Labs equipment and the AMR CDP. I ran the EMM Labs SE separates for an extended period and then eventually bought the AMR and ran it for comparative listening purposes for several weeks. My benchmark is large scale classical music, and there was no contest in my system with this style of music. The AMR eliminates a certain digital glare that tends to exhibit itself with the EMM Labs gear in peak passages, and, overall, the AMR has a more natural sound with the best ambience retrieval and portrayal of hall space that I have personally experienced with a digital source. YMMV, I suppose.
08-05-08: Argyro If you like a soft, pleasing sound, with more body that what was recorded go for the AMR. If you like to hear what is exactly written on the cd (WITHOUT BEING HARSH) go for the EMM LABS CDSA.
You may want to write IMHO (In My Humble Opinion) after a statement like that Michael. I've heard the EMM Labs CDSA, and IMHO it is harsh. I'm not saying it isn't accurate, as digital is a format prone to harshness, that's why I prefer analog.
However, whether one chooses a smoother sounding CDP (AMR) and uses more revealing cables (Nordost, Stealth, etc) and/or speakers (Wilson) or one uses a more revealing CDP (EMM Labs) while using cables/speakers to smooth out the sound (PAD/Verity) is up to that individual.
I've bought products over the years based on others' opinions. I've also auditioned many in my home before purchase. Your car analogy doesn't work for me. If I drive a Ferrari around a dealer's "neighborhood", it's going to drive the same way in other places (at least if I drive it on a highway, a neighborhood street, check out it's acceleration, handling, etc) It's quite a different story with audio components. If I heard your system and liked it better than mine (or less than mine), for example, I wouldn't know if it was because of component A, B, C, D...or the synergy among the components...or your room, etc.
I'm not saying the Playback Designs isn't spectacular - or even "the best". I'm only saying $10,000 is too much for me (and some others) to spend on a product I'm not *certain* I'll love in my system.
If you like a soft, pleasing sound, with more body that what was recorded go for the AMR. If you like to hear what is exactly written on the cd (WITHOUT BEING HARSH) go for the EMM LABS CDSA.
I didn't ask to just listen to it, I offered to deposit half the cost of the player up front and assuming it's as good as he claims it is, I would pay the second half upon purchase. He refused. And comparing test drives of cars to audio products is inappropriate as one has nothing to do with the other.
I'll hopefully be in-home auditioning the dcs puccini, the Linn Klimax DS and the Spectral SDR-4000S over the next month and will make my decision amongst those and my current Wadia.
I was skeptical that a cd player could sound much better than the emm labs but this the playback design is amazing cd/sacd/server unit.
Some things cannot be home tested. A ferrari can be tested at the dealer only. Hey you can come to Los Angeles and hear it at my house and I am just a lowly customer and audiophile. I am sure Jonathan would let you hear it before you buy it just that he can't loan it to you. There are many people who know own playback that would be happy to let you hear it.
I cannot imagine anyone who is looking for a cd player that would not be mesmerized by this cd player. Only someone with a tin ear or someone who only listens to vinyl and is biased against any other form of music playback in my opinion would not be impressed by this player. I have not heard the dcs puccini but that is $20k for the stack. There are some players that I have not heard but I have heard many pricey ones and this is remarkable and heck mine has only 50 hours on it so it will get even better.
When I asked Jonathan for just such a thing he indicated that he didn't need to offer an in-home trial as people were buying the unit sight unseen. When I pressed as to when, if ever, he would provide in-home trials, he was noncommittal although he indicated that if he did it would be after the price of the player was jacked up to 15K. Given the lack of an established resale market for the player, the history of changing product lines at his company and the lack of an in-home trial, I took the player off my list.
...but at $10k, I would expect at least some kind of 30-day trials be granted.
Much better yet, an in-home demo without cost (or at nominal cost, applicable to purchase) or obligation. Would you buy a car sight unseen and without a test drive?
Tried to contact the guys from playback designs but didn´t get any response. I wanted to know where in Germany you can buy these players. In the meantime I´v bought the Nagra and I´m VERY satisfied with the results.
I have had the top of the line emmlabs cdsd se, the reference marantz, the reference cary, and others.
I just received the playback designs cd/sacd player and it easily is the best of the bunch. The presentation is natural and relaxed yet the bass is deep and tight, the vocals are transparent. I am floored and it has not even broken in yet!
there are plenty of really good cd players out there but from what I have heard, this is the best by a country mile!
I have had them all and the Ayre is the best believe it or not. I thought the Esoteric was the worst. Sold them all for my Modwright Transporter which is better then them all. The audio Aero was to soft for me. The Wadia is very close to the Ayre but it can be a little to much overtime. Ayre is just right.
,,regarding the Ayre C5xe Universal player mentioned above... I have the unit, and it sounds its awsome best via the balanced outputs. The plastic tray is a non issue for me. It has been very reliable, and sounds great.
today I´ll listen to Esoteric X-01 D 2 vs. Audio Aero Prestige SE. I´ll keep you posted. Important for me is that the divice has to sound excellent through its unbalanced outputs as I use a single ended class A triode integrated amp which is outstanding and won´t be replaced for a very long time.
I have owned the Esoteric X-01LE & Audio Aero Capitole Mk.II SE amongst a few other good players.
However, if you are looking for a quality redbook player, make ceratin to at LEAST audition the AMR CD-77 prior to making a final decision. Not only does the player sound phenomenal, it also has a USB input for setting up a music server down the road.
Another vote for the AMR CD-77. After purchasing the unit for my personal system and hearing the player, we decided to represent the line, however we have no insight on a European sale. Look up a dealer!
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.
