Here's something I typed earlier today for my local forum. A friend of mine, Bill had ordered the MPD3 but he was out of town when it was delivered so he kindly offered the unit to me to test and pen down my thoughts:
=================
I spent most of yesterday trying to configure my MacMini 2010 to add DSF files to iTunes but kept encountering a number of problems. One issue I suspect had to do with running ScarletBook.exe to extract the stereo DSF files because ScarletBook is a Win32 app and the extracted files might have been problematic. Spandau Ballet True worked fine using ScarletBook in a Win7 64 bit OS but not Carpenters. Most of the files I extracted were also half the expected size and when I played them back on PureMusic, I kept getting static. Jeff had no problems on his 2009 MacMini (the larger form factor version) but he was running Lion on that machine.
In the end, I had to use my old NetBook to run ScarletBook and it was damned slow. Also I used my MacBookAir 2011 with Lion to add those files to iTunes before copying the iTunes folder to the MacMini. A lot of workarounds but everything seems to be working fine now
[img]http://i965.photobucket.com/albums/ae132/doggiehowser/5af2cb36.jpg[/img]
First impressions were good. The MPD3 had the "house sound" similar to the bigger brother. There seemed to be a nice mid bass bump that I always liked.
In my friend Jeff's system, the MPS5 was a tad more resolving. We were playing the theme from Shaft by the late Isaac Hayes (most may remember him as Chef from South Park) and it was a good track for testing because it starts off with very few instruments and progressively more are added on. Jeff feels the MPD3 just stopped short of the MPS5 in keeping control of the instruments sounding distinct and separate, but honestly, I think we are splitting hairs here. As I mentioned before, the last mile is always the hardest and in hifi, the law of diminishing return really kicks in hard, with the MPD5 more than twice the price of the MPD3.
With the technical issues out of the way, I decided to run some tests.
[b]EMM Labs XDS1 SACD vs MacMini/PureMusic/MPD3/DSF playback[/b]
Frankly I don't know how fair this test is to the MPD3. We normally don't consider computer playback to be equal to the spun disc so the MPD3 is already handicapped in this respect. Ideally, I should have used the MacMini as a source to both the devices but the XDS1 doesn't have a DSD capable input :(
Still, these were the only 2 DSD DACs I had in my system and I thought it might be fun to compare the two.
Both the MPD3 and XDS1 were powered off the Sound Application RLS240 conditioner, but the XDS1 was using an ASI Liveline power cord while the MPD3 was using the similarly priced ESP Reference. Both were using ASI Liveline XLR interconnects. The MacMini was also powered off the same conditioner but with an Acrolink P4020III power cord. The Locus Audio Cynosure USB was used to link the MacMini to the MPD3.
As it turned out, I had the Carpenters Singles SACD and the DSF files so it was easy to do an A:B comparison.
And to be honest, the MPD3 didn't fare as badly as the price differential would suggest. I liked the more pronounced mid bass signature on the Playback. When I first got the XDS1, I found it very lean in the mid bass, compared to the loaner MPS5. I did manage to alleviate this problem with the Sound Application conditioner and the ASI Liveline power cord but even with these tweaks, the MPD3 still sounds fuller. My standby track is the 刘雅丽 CD where there is a double bass in track 9. It usually sounds quite muted except on Alan's system. On my system, the MPD3 brings that double bass closer to Alan's system.
The XDS1 did have a lower noise floor and it was a smoother more analog sound. But I had to listen very intently during certain passages to notice the difference in noise levels. What was more apparent was that the MPD3 soundstage was a few steps in front of the XDS1 in my system.
[b]EMM Labs XDS1 disc playback vs EMM Labs as transport with AES to MPD3[/b]
Here's where I discovered a feature on the XDS1. When I was playing the SACD of the Carpenters, the AES input on the MPD3 reported it was getting an 88.2kHz signal. Weird. So I was able to toggle back and forth between the same song played on the MPD3 (fed 88.2kHz) vs the XDS1 (playing the SACD layer).
Even with the DSD-PCM conversion, the MPD3 IMHO sounded closer to the XDS1 than when I fed the USB input with the DSD rip. I suspect the quality of the Esoteric transport is just better than a computer transport. I tried toggling back and forth, and it was much harder to tell the difference. In my case, the preamp is behind me and when I aim the remote at the back to reflect off the rear wall, it's never easy to tell if the amp actually switched inputs so it's almost a blind test. The ARC switches so quickly with no click or muting. It was only with one more familiar track that I found a bit more air and extension on the XDS1. But that's really not an apples to apples comparison since they are fed different signals (DSD direct on the XDS1 vs DSD-PCM on the MPD3) but it was an interesting comparison anyway.
Switching to the CD layer on the Carpenters, the differences are much closer again, with no DSD to PCM conversion this time. The arrangements on Carpenters were quite simple so I decided to try a more complex track.
I switched to my old standby Superstition by Stevie Wonder from the SHM CD 3 disc Love Eternity Harmony collection. This time, the difference was a tad more noticeable. The mid bass track on the song is more pronounced on the MPD3 and as a result, it slightly overwhelms the other layers in more complex tracks. I also noticed the highs/cymbals was slightly better defined on the XDS1. Not as "crashy". The XDS1 is just a bit more resolving and a bit smoother across the frequency range.
[b]In A Nutshell[/b]
I just want to thank Bill for his generous offer to loan me his unit even before he's had the chance to listen to it.
If this review seems critical of the MPD3, it was not my intention. It's really an incredible machine that provides really esoteric high end performance at a price point that doesn't require a second mortgage. It definitely punches way above its class. The small differences I noticed are in comparison with silly priced gear and the fact that it sounds so close is nothing short of amazing.
I really should have compared the MPD3 to the Meitner MA-1 which is retailing for the same price. From what I've heard at HER, I really think Playback should have no worries about the MA-1. The MA-1 is also based on the same principle... trickling down the technologies from their higher end model but it seems to have distilled away too much of their formula and it sounded very uninvolving compared to their flagship. The MPD3 on the other hand feels like it's gotten most of the guts and glory of the bigger brother. I think Playback wisely decided to "cripple" the MPS3 by only providing a RBCD transport. If it had an SACD transport, I suspect it would seriously cannibalise sales of the MPS5.
