Why "Source 1st" advocates have a tough time

[E-Stat]

They regard this 800GBP ($1,600) CD player as being as good as ANY CD player out there...

I think you need to re-read the review. That was neither the conclusion nor does the comparison with a single competitive unit support that notion.

"Our reference Naim CDS3/555PS (circa £10,000) delivers more of the harmonic detail of acoustic instruments and has more authority and scale."

B) there really isn't that much difference between CD players anymore...

Such is a relative determination.

rw

[Ajani]

I think you need to re-read the review. That was neither the conclusion nor does the comparison with a single competitive unit support that notion.

"Our reference Naim CDS3/555PS (circa £10,000) delivers more of the harmonic detail of acoustic instruments and has more authority and scale."
rw

If you read the full context and not just extract the part where the Naim is better, you'll see that the Cyrus bettered the Naim in other areas (refer to the 2nd & 3rd paragraph in my extract below)....

Quite simply this player is astonishing. Not astonishing for the price, you understand, but astonishing: full stop. In its areas of strength – timing, dynamics and punch – this player is comparable with the very best machines around, regardless of price. We should repeat that: regardless of price.

Our reference Naim CDS3/555PS (circa £10,000) delivers more of the harmonic detail of acoustic instruments and has more authority and scale. The Cyrus counters with better organisation and improved agility, and delivers the leading edge of notes with greater precision.

Which you prefer comes down to taste. Consider the price difference and you'll see just how great Cyrus's achievement is.

Also, read the part I've bolded and you can see that my interpretation of the article is fairly accurate... let's not nitpick over words, reviewers are heaping massive amounts of praise on mid-priced (by audiophile standards) CD Players...

[E-Stat]

If you read the full context and not just extract the part where the Naim is better...

If the Naim is better, then how can the Cyrus be "as being as good as ANY CD player out there"?

Also, read the part I've bolded and you can see that my interpretation of the article is fairly accurate...

A Ford Taurus is comparable to a BMW 530i.

rw

[Ajani]

If the Naim is better, then how can the Cyrus be "as being as good as ANY CD player out there"?


A Ford Taurus is comparable to a BMW 530i.

rw

Would be a valid point IF the Naim was all around better... but clearly the Naim was only better in some parts and the Cyrus was better in others...

Anyway, I'm not going to continue to argue on the wording of the article... I've provided the link and posted a large quote so people can make up their own minds...

The point of this thread is really to stimulate a discussion about whether all the praise given by reviewers on CD Players ranging from the Marantz SA8001 and Bencmark DAC1 (both Stereophile Class A rated) to the Cyrus and Cambrige Audio 840C, is making it difficult for people to see the point in spending large amounts (above $2K) on a CD player...

Why should someone who sees a $900 CD player rated as class A, think that they should consider a $4000 one???

[E-Stat]

...but clearly the Naim was only better in some parts and the Cyrus was better in others...

"The Cyrus counters with better organisation and improved agility..."

What exactly does that mean?

Why should someone who sees a $900 CD player rated as class A, think that they should consider a $4000 one???

Because they seek more than "comparable".

rw

[Ajani]

"The Cyrus counters with better organisation and improved agility..."

What exactly does that mean?

No idea... ask reviewers on WhatHiFi? they thought it was a valid observation somehow...

Because they seek more than "comparable".

rw

Ahh... I see... nothing wrong with that... why should someone settle for 'almost as good' if they can afford the best?

[E-Stat]

No idea... ask reviewers on WhatHiFi? they thought it was a valid observation somehow...

Why do you think it is valid if you don't even know what those terms mean? I confess that I was not impressed with the (lack of) depth of the review.

Ahh... I see... nothing wrong with that... why should someone settle for 'almost as good' if they can afford the best?

Or afford any number of other players/DACs that are likely better in some fashion or another. It is evident that magazine is UK centric. Its list of reference components is very limited.

rw

[Feanor]

If the Naim is better, then how can the Cyrus be "as being as good as ANY CD player out there"?


A Ford Taurus is comparable to a BMW 530i.

rw

That's what I drive and it's huge value, if not a performance, machine.

It's reasonable to expect a $5k player to beat a $1k player. And although it might not always be the case, it tends to be. As I recall, the 'Phile review was actually a bit tepid on the 8001 and I didn't come away with the impression that they considered in the "ultimate" category by any means.

What this thread really comes down to is that a $1k CDP can come a lot closer to a $5k player than a $1k speaker can to a $5k speaker. That I agree with.

As ever, value is purely in the eye of the beholder. Those damned poor people are so biased by their lack of money.

[Ajani]

That's what I drive and it's huge value, if not a performance, machine.

It's reasonable to expect a $5k player to beat a $1k player. And although it might not always be the case, it tends to be. As I recall, the 'Phile review was actually a bit tepid on the 8001 and I didn't come away with the impression that they considered in the "ultimate" category by any means.:

Jim Austin compared the 8001 to the Benchmark DAC1 and his reference Marantz SA15S1 and said:

weeks of comparative, level-matched listening through a decent system revealed only very subtle differences—so subtle that it took me weeks to gain any confidence that they were real

Combine that with this:

It may be affordably priced, but the Marantz SA8001's measured performance is beyond reproach.—John Atkinson

And a Class A rating

and all that makes a very bold statement to readers...

http://stereophile.com/hirezplayers/1007mar/

What this thread really comes down to is that a $1k CDP can come a lot closer to a $5k player than a $1k speaker can to a $5k speaker. That I agree with.

Yep... ironically, I think source is a valuable part of the audio chain as are amps, speakers, cables and room acoustics.... I'm not some source hater... I just don't think source 1st is the correct approach... but that's just MHO... I think my views are closer to Mr. Peabody (just that I call it "Source Last" while he 'seems' to think of it as "Source First"), To summarize my opinion:

1) Find the Speakers you like... Speaker is most important in determining the sound of your system simply because they have the most variety... Put it this way... A Planar lover will probably not like a typical box speaker regardless of what electronics they pair it with, but they'll still like Planars even when paired with cheaper electronics (he'll just upgrade them eventually to refine/improve the sound)...

2) Find an amp with suitable Synergy and power to drive the speakers you like... Frankly, you should probably do steps 1 & 2 at the same time if you can....

3) When you have found a pair of speakers you really love and have capable amplification to drive it, then you look to upgrade source to make the most of your system...

I don't believe that you are always best served by upgrading speakers... Simple real budget example... take say the B&W CM1 bookshelfs and compare them with the 805S bookshelfs... The 805S certainly sound better, but are triple the cost... if you really like the B&W sound, you're probably better off upgrading the entry level HT Receiver and DVD player you have driving the CM1s, than trying to spend triple the price of them to get the 805S.... IMVHO, there is often a far bigger difference between using entry level electronics on speakers you like (instead of more price appropriate gear) & just jumping to a higher model in the same brand's speaker line...

Clearly there is a point at which your electronics are good enough that you can turn your attention to upgrading speakers again (if you so desire) or you could just kick back and enjoy your music...

So to pick on Mr. Peabody again (just kidding, just using him as an example), he has found a pair of Dynaudio's that he really likes... thus it is more practical and much cheaper to upgrade the electronics driving them, than to try and find more and more expensive Dynaudio speakers...

As ever, value is purely in the eye of the beholder. Those damned poor people are so biased by their lack of money.

Yeah, well that is the problem with talking about audio... it's very easy to offend people... the Audiophiles with loads of cash invested in a high end system are offended if you say anything that would remotely imply that they could have spent less money... while on the other hand, many persons with very humble budgets are deeply offended when their gear is dismissed as mid-fi, mass market or just not high end... so you tend to have a war of egos going on... low budgets claiming that high end is all about smoke and mirrors and high budgets claiming that the most subtle differences are worth tripling your budget over....

Frankly I fall in neither camp, so I tend to at times piss off everybody... I see (hear) a lot of smoke and mirrors in audio, but at the same time I see (hear) real differences as you move up the price and quality brackets....

[E-Stat]

That's what I drive and it's huge value, if not a performance, machine.

I'm not knocking Ford, nor would I knock my choice, Honda. Each offers a value proposition that involves some compromises. Agree? Assuming they are completely equivalent to higher performance models, however, is stretching it. Like the shallow review.

rw

[Feanor]

I'm not knocking Ford, nor would I knock my choice, Honda. Each offers a value proposition that involves some compromises. Agree? Assuming they are completely equivalent to higher performance models, however, is stretching it. Like the shallow review.

rw

There's no saying that a Taurus is great car in any sense of performance. I bought mine used, a fleet car less than a year old. For me a car is a necessity not a luxury: what that means is I am willing to spend what it takes to fill the need but not cent more for entertainment.

In the present context it is clear to all but a couple of die-hards that the rational person looking for value in an entry or mid-range system will end up spending more on speakers and likely amplification than on a digital source -- or the big scam, expensive cables

[emaidel]

Until reading this thread, and clicking onto the link provided by Ajani, I had never read the Stereophile review of the Marantz SA-8001. I think had I read the review earlier, I would have owned the 8001 a lot sooner!

I purchased mine primarily due to blackraven's comments on it and the fact that other members own one and like it. While blackraven opted for the Cambridge Audio 840 over the 8001, that unit's price tag of $1,400 simply put it out of the running for me. I knew Stereophile had rated it highly, but not that it had given the 8001 a "Class A" rating.

Few components have provided me the listening pleasure and satisfaction as does the 8001. Before purchasing it, I'd never heard an SACD through a 2-channel system, and even regarded SACD as more of a passing fad than of any medium of substance. Now, I'm a die-hard supporter of the SACD format, and continue to be impressed by the performance of the 8001, whether it's a CD or an SACD that I'm listening to.

When the CD medium was introduced in 1983, one of its claims was its ability to have a far greater dynamic range than other source material. Unfortunately, with few exceptions (Telarc, for example), dynamic range didn't change much with the CD's available. I've now found that many CD's I own, which didn't seem to have that great a dynamic range now do on the 8001. Why that's so, I can't explain, but it certainly is noticeable. The warning that appeared on older Telarc discs to be cautious with the volume setting so as not to damage one's speakers now has an all-new relevance.

Is the 8001 the equal of an $8,000 player? I have no idea, as I've never heard an $8,000 player, and I'm in no position to judge. If Stereophile says it is, then that's nice to hear, and it makes me happy I've made a wise buying decision. Most of my components are from companies that have made it their primary focus to offer products with performance on par with other, far costilier stuff (Adcom, Parasound, Dahlquist), and if I were to take the price tags of those more expensive items my stuff has been compared to, then I'd be able to say that my entire system is worth about $50,000! Is it? No way, but I like it, and so do others with knowledge of how good audio components should sound.