I am considering either upgrading my current system CDX/XPS,82Super, 135's, SBLs. My CDX and 82 sit an a Mana amp stand (phase 1). I am considering either upgrading to:
1. 52
2. CDX,82 to phase 2, 4 tier amp stand for XPS,Super&135' & Stands for my SBLs
The cost is similar or very close. I didn't want to post this on the Mana forum because it is to promotional for me. My concerns with the 52 are that it might reveal the limit of my CDX and push me to a CDS2. I am concerned the Mana will bring out something negative or just change the character of the sound making it different and maybe getting away from the "Naim" sound. What would you vote for and why?
John
Posted on: 12 December 2000 by John
For James:
I borrowed a CDS2 for two weeks and was not knocked out by what I heard. The player is better but with my setup the differences where not important to me. The Mana stand significantly closed the gap between the players. This is why I am considering a 52 instead.
For the Mana I was sold on getting a 2 tier for the source and preamp. Have you done a side by side comparison or is the setup you are recommending waht was sold to you?
Thanks for your input!
John
Posted on: 13 December 2000 by John
Neil:
Thanks for you input. It sounds like you have a CDX/XPS,52. Does the CDX sound negative in anyway wih the 52? Hard? Bright? to forward? Or have you found the soundstaging to help in this regard? I love the presentation of the CDX and really don't want to be forced into a CDS2 because of something negative the 52 reveals. I like to receive other peoples opinion who have lived with the equipment as well as home demos, as demos can be very limited in what you learn.
Thanks
John
Posted on: 13 December 2000 by John
James:
If you look through some of the prior threads I wrote a significant amount about the differences. I came to agreement with Arthur Bye that using a television as an anologue the CDX was flat with the contrast slightly turned up and the CDS was flat with the color slightly turned up. For me the increased contrast gives a more live realism in the timing and attack. Is this real or not real, I don't care. When I stopped analyzing (left brain listening) the CDS2 emotionally (right brain listening) didn't provide me with anything more. I listen mostly to Jazz. The CDS2 resolved the sounds of the instruments better but I felt at the expense of the timing and attack. I am not the only person who feels this way. IMO the CDS2 provided more Hi Fi gains rather than musical. Just my 2 cents.
John
Posted on: 13 December 2000 by John
Neil:
I don't know why my e-mail doesn't work. I will try yours.
OK you don't have that option listed. Try johnlitt@infoserve.net
I would love to hear your opinions. I live in Canada so I don't think a demo is feasable. Thanks
for the offer.
John
