3/12 Listening Session Report

Adam_Reiter · « **Reply #20 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 07:22 pm »

Quote from: Mad DOg

Adam,

thx for weighing in w/ your impressions...you are aware that there were 2 different Silversmith cables that we were listening to...The Silver and the Palladium. just want to be sure since you made no mention of the Palladium.

Opps, I thought I typed up a diddy about them. I must have missed the cut and paste from notepad.

I added my impressions of the Palladiums.

Thanx, Fo.

Mad DOg · « **Reply #21 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 08:27 pm »

Even though I am very familiar with my system already, I find that I am able to learn even more about it (good and bad) during these listening sessions...

Comments by component

McCormack UDP-1: All I can say after Saturday is that I have COMPLETELY underestimated the capability of this universal player. I had read all the good and not so good reviews of this player and had the chance to directly a/b it to a number of digital sources while it was still breaking in and it had always fared pretty well. These comparisons included:

1. EA modded Sony DVP-S7700 CD transport/Dodson DAC-263/Dodson "skunkworks" digital cable
2. EA modded Sony DVP-S7700 CD transport/Dodson DA-217MkII/Dodson "skunkworks" digital cable
3. Onix CD-1
4. Onix CD-1 (used as transport)/Dodson DA-217MkII/Dodson "skunkworks" digital cable
5. Esoteric DV-50 UDP (thru the high quality analog RCA outputs)

Some additional sources that I've heard in my system and a/b'd to some of the others above...
1. Audio Alchemy DDS-Pro CD transport / EA modded P-3/A DAC
2. Audio Alchemy DDS-Pro/ P-1/A / MW LII P-3/A DAC
3. AA DDS-Pro/Benchmark DAC-1
4. Denon 3910

Please keep in mind that the McCormack was 2 weeks new still breaking in all the while as I was conducting these comparisons. After the first 10 hours of burn in, I found myself preferring the sonic qualities of the UDP-1 over all the others above for Redbook. The UDP-1 was able to bring the superior highs of the Dodson DAC-263 and the engaging, musical qualities in the midrange that the Dodson DA-217MkII delivered and it was able to do it all in one nice, tidy box! While the DAC-263 had DVD-A capability, my DA-217MkII did not. With the UDP-1, I was now afforded DVD-A capability as well as SACD!

Since I was not entirely sure just how good the UDP-1 was, I decided to get the highly regarded and favorably reviewed Esoteric DV-50 to compare w/ the McCormack. I expected the Esoteric being a full $2K more in price to just blow the UDP-1 out of the water. After all, the TEAC with is specially engineered feet was built like a brick shat house tipping the scales at close to 50lbs while the slender, seemingly underbuilt UDP-1 weighed in around 20lbs.

The Esoteric up and oversampled everything to a variety of ungodly, headspinning rates while the McCormack didn't seem to do diddly squat for redbook.

As usual, one should never pre-judge any piece of gear

, and I was about to be "edumacated"!

Even with less than 20 hours of run time, the lightweight McCormack was beginning to flex its muscles easily exerting a seductive musicality in the midrange the the Esoteric was lacking regardless of which digital filter setting was selected. The highs were more detailed open and transparent and the bass more impactful, extended and dynamic. This lil' player was showing just how special it was for redbook which is the format most of my software happens to be on. This alone made the choice easy as to which one I would decide to keep. However, I also decided to compare hi-rez formats and here's where the DV-50 exerted its superiority over the UDP-1 which was still nowhere near being fully burned in (I did not know this at the time). On SACD, the preference swung in favor of the DV-50. On DVD-A, the differences were not so clear cut. Fortunately for me, I have the fewest number of SACDs in my collection so the choice was clear. Out went the DV-50 and the choice to keep the UDP-1 was made.

I began trying some of the tweaks that Peter Moncrief mentions regarding isolation cones. Unable to try exactly what he recommends, I place BDR cones under the UDP-1 - two in the rear and one in the front. Air, hi freq detail and transparency were all improved. I experimented with some power cords and found my Electraglide Reference Tri-glide to work best with it.

Over the next week or so the UDP-1 continued to improve, but I had no idea what level it had improved to until Saturday's listening session where I was able to benchmark it against the amazing Dodson DA-218 in a direct a/b comparison. After hooking up the Dodson DA-218 which I have now heard 4 times, I was expecting to hear a HUGE difference between the UDP-1 vs. the Dodson. While the Dodson 218 certainly plays on an impressively grand scale, the difference between it and the UDP-1 was not nearly as pronounced as the price tags would indicate. In fact, the McCormack was dropping my jaw due to how big it was playing! For hi-rez formats? the McCormack is "OFF THE HOOK" good! I have no doubt that it is now surpassing the performance of the DV-50 on hi-rez formats.

The Dodson 218 is still the BEST digital front end I have heard - PERIOD - and I'd still love to own one for redbook in the future, but right now the UDP-1 is not leaving me lusting for more which is high praise indeed! After all, the shelf space on my equipment rack for my digital source has been a revolving door for the past 5 months since I first heard the Dodson 218! I can safely say that my search for a satisfying digital source has come to an end! As an added bonus, this one box solution plays it all and comes at a perfect time as the shelf space vacated by my dedicated CD transport has given way to a turntable!

Another shocker was discovering just how capable the UDP-1 is as dedicated CD transport...

Folks, at $3.5K, the UDP-1 is a bonafide steal of a deal! it does redbook and hi-rez like no other player i've heard before!

Well, that was a lot more than I had planned to write.

Stay tuned for the next installment...

Adam_Reiter · « **Reply #22 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 08:48 pm »

Agreed. The McCormack is one hell of a player. For someone not wanting to spend money on a Dodson 218, I'd have to say that the McCormack should be your next choice.

As far as the McCormack being a transport for the Dodson 218, I'd sure like to hear how it could possibly sound any better. Not for under $20k I would assume. That combo is simply a class of its own.

Mad DOg · « **Reply #23 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 10:30 pm »

let me just preface this next post with this...

the Aesthetix Callisto linestage that i've been listening to is one of the earlier units. Jim White confirmed that since this unit was manufactured, numerous things have been improved upon. i will be sending it in for the Signature upgrade at which time Jim will incorporate all of the latest revisions to bring it up to date.

as such, I have been duly impressed by this linestage. having messed around w/ some tube linestages in the past, i never thought i'd bother w/ tubes again. after all, they're noisy, temperamental, not quite neutral enough, not quite transparent enough and generally rolled off in the highs and also lacking in bass control, dynamics and impact. so exactly why did i even bother to try the Callisto?

heck, i don't know what demon possessed me, but i'm sure glad it did!

cuz the Callisto is the FINEST linestage I have heard in my system. it is extremely transparent, revealing, neutral, lacking in coloration, and dynamic! i was always curious to hear what a reference linestage would sound like in my room and now i know. and i don't think i will be able to go back!

yes, it's big (with its outboard PS) and bulky, but man, does it sound AWESOME! and to think that it will only sound better after the upgrades...

while the Callisto is a tube linestage, as Jon L already mentioned it has none of the tubey colorations and shortcomings i have experienced w/ tubes preamps in the past...the tone is almost identical to that of the EVS passive stepped attenuators, but with far improved dynamics and drive! music flows out so effortlessly with better pace and more weight especially at lower volumes. soundstage is wide, deep w/ excellent separation. there is no congestion when the material gets complex and the soundstage does not collapse. since it is so transparent and lacking in coloration, it will NOT add any additional warmth so if you're not happy with the sound of your source, the Callisto will not make your predicament any better. if anything, due to its revealing nature, it will probably make it worse. for example, when i had the Esoteric DV-50, the overall sound of my system bordered on the neutral side of analytical and uninvolving. that all changed w/ the arrival of the UDP-1. since i had the Dodson DA-217MkII which has a wonderfully engaging midrange, i knew the Callisto was responsible for the kinda ho-hum sound i was hearing w/ the DV-50. however, if you're already happy with your source and are looking for more transparency and dynamics, be sure to add the Aesthetix Callisto to your list of linestages to consider! it is just DY-NA-MITE!!! it will not disappoint! and if you have room for dual power supplies, i'm told that it will only increase the sense of ease of which dynamics flow from the system.

next up: quick comments on the amp and speakers

KeithR · « **Reply #24 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 11:09 pm »

I'm curious to how the Dodson vs. my old Linn Unidisk would compare?

Mad DOg · « **Reply #25 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 11:15 pm »

Quote from: KeithR

I'm curious to how the Dodson vs. my old Linn Unidisk would compare?

well, here's how it'd compare on SACD...

scoreboard
Unidisk = 1 Dodson = 0

maybe i can get a unidisk to compare on redbook and DVD-A...

PhilNYC · « **Reply #26 on:** 15 Mar 2005, 11:53 pm »

Quote from: Mad DOg

scoreboard
Unidisk = 1 Dodson = 0

maybe i can get a unidisk to compare...

MD...the real test would be Unidisk SACD vs. Dodson Redbook...

Mad DOg · « **Reply #27 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 12:29 am »

Quote from: PhilNYC

Quote from: Mad DOg

scoreboard
Unidisk = 1 Dodson = 0

maybe i can get a unidisk to compare...

MD...the real test would be Unidisk SACD vs. Dodson Redbook...

Hi Phil,

i was just joking! since the Dodson doesn't do SACD, it can't score any points w/ that format...

i've discovered that there are many factors that will greatly affect the Dodson DA-218's performance which i'm sure you already know...transport, digital cable, power cable and the right power conditioning...the Unidisk only needs to worry about a power cord and power conditioning...even so, i have no doubt the 218 would hold it's ground quite well and possibly even outperform the Linn on redbook and DVD-A...wouldn't surprise me. both are quite good...i've heard them both in someone else's system but not w/ the same system config. different power conditioning, power cords and ICs...so hard to say, but both sound EXCELLENT!

PhilNYC · « **Reply #28 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 01:05 am »

Quote from: Mad DOg

Hi Phil,

i was just joking! since the Dodson doesn't do SACD, it can't score any points w/ that format...

Yes, but Ralph Dodson designed the DA-218 with the explicit goal of bettering the performance of Redbook over even the best SACD players out there. So it's actually a gauntlet Ralph relishes....!

Quote

i've discovered that there are many factors that will greatly affect the Dodson DA-218's performance which i'm sure you already know...transport, digital cable, power cable and the right power conditioning...the Unidisk only needs to worry about a power cord and power conditioning...even so, i have no doubt the 218 would hold it's ground quite well and possibly even outperform the Linn on r ...

Yep. And one that you missed is isolation/vibration control. I was involved in a shootout between the DA-218 and the Zanden tube DAC. Zanden was wiping the floor with the DA-218 until we put the DA-218 up on some brass cones (the Zanden was on top of some ultra-expensive Harmonix tuning feet)...and suddenly the tables were turned...! (actually, neither was so drastically ahead or behind...I was just trying to inject some drama into the description!...but the cones did make a difference, and the review of the DA-218 in Stereotimes.com (http://www.stereotimes.com/CDDAC111004.shtm) also made mention of this...

KeithR · « **Reply #29 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 02:58 am »

The Unidisk 1.1 is effectively 95% as good as a CD12, so I would think would more than hold it's own.

I remember Mad Dog not wanting to see it go

Mad DOg · « **Reply #30 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 03:57 am »

they are both quite magical! i wouldn't be turning down a long-term date with either of them!

Mad DOg · « **Reply #31 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 03:59 am »

Quote from: PhilNYC

Yep. And one that you missed is isolation/vibration control...

right you are! i've discovered this to be very important as well...and that the same devices don't have the same effect on different components so it's really tricky...

RoadTripper · « **Reply #32 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 04:14 am »

I have two questions that I don't believe have been covered. 1) What music (or music types) was being auditioned? 2) What dB levels were typically being achieved?

Thanks

Mad DOg · « **Reply #33 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 04:25 am »

Black Light Syndrome "Duende"
Mapleshade Sampler "Mellow Saxophone"
some church choir piece of Adam's
a 24/192 sampler w/ Jim and Steve's recordings

the others will need to chime in w/ some of their other selections...

volume ranged anywhere from about 80dB to 95dBs...

Adam_Reiter · « **Reply #34 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 03:38 pm »

The Church piece was also on the MapleShade Music Festival sampler. Its called "Shady Green Pastures" Song 13. Mellow Saxophone is song 1. Both are great pieces.

Mad DOg · « **Reply #35 on:** 16 Mar 2005, 07:05 pm »

Amplifier: Jeff Rowland Model 10 stereo amp

smooth, neutral sounding amp with great clarity, separation, pace, balance, and overall refinement. has a nice sense of weight and authority in the midrange and bass that the newer 201s seem to be missing especially at lower volumes.

a 20A Cryo'd VenHaus Flavor 4 PC w/ Furutech gold connectors only served to further refine bass and offer better separation. GREAT power cord at an affordable price!

while the amp has been discontinued, i'd highly recommend it if you can find it on the used market. at 150WPC @ 8ohms and 275WPC @ 4ohms, difficult loads can overwhelm this amp, but for most speakers, they seem to work extremely well. they drive the 4 Jrs, Thiel 2.2s, and Onix Reference 3s just fine.

Using a passive preamp, the Thiel 2.2s can be a tougher load to drive and have caused the Rowland to loose some composure at higher volumes with material containing a good deal of continuous low bass. not a situation the amp encounters often.

Speakers: Von Schweikert VR-4 Jr

these speakers underwhelmed me when i first had them. the culprit was the datalink jumper. recessed, univolving, polite is the way i'd describe the sound using the datalink. using high quality jumpers HUGELY improves the sound! shotgun bi-wiring, which i have been doing for the past few weeks, further improves on the bass definition and articulation. overall extremely neutral sonics and revealing so they will take on the characteristics of components upstream.

as i have already mentioned, i have NOT mass loaded these because i have a bad back and they will be moved around a few more times so i have no desire to add an additional 100 lbs to an already substantial amount of weight. as has been mentioned in the past by others, mass loading further improves the sound of these speakers and tightens the bass.

so much has already been said about these amazing speakers in the 2 reviews on www.positive-feedback.com and other rags (online and printed) that there's really not much more to add except that they continue to amaze me. they were definitely resolving enough to allow us to hear distinct differences between transports, players and cables. these speakers deliver much more than their $4000 price tag and small size would lead one to believe.

next up: cable impressions...finally...

Mad DOg · « **Reply #36 on:** 17 Mar 2005, 08:08 pm »

All,

I just found out that the modded Sony 7700 transport I have in my possession DOES NOT have the Superclock installed...Obviously the Superclock would improve the performance very possibly closing the gap we heard between it and the UDP-1 as a transport altogether...nevertheless, it is already a very good transport in current form.

Adam_Reiter · « **Reply #37 on:** 17 Mar 2005, 08:17 pm »

Awweee man..... Darnit.

Hmmmm.... I bet that would make a BIG difference. Here I thought it was the fully hot rodded version.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #38 on:** 17 Mar 2005, 08:26 pm »

MD...so what mods did the S7700 have? Everything except the Superclock? Jensen caps and all?

Mad DOg · « **Reply #39 on:** 17 Mar 2005, 08:26 pm »

Steve Nugent knows what he's doing and how to get good sound...I've been messing w/ his modded P-3/A (has almost all the latest improvements) using my UDP-1 as a transport and it's pretty amazing. just using all of Steve's interconnects (digital and analog), it is nearly indistinguishable from the sound i get from my UDP-1's analog outs running the Silversmith Palladium ICs...I'm going to try his DAC w/ all Silversmith cabling to see how much more the sound will improve...