anyone prefer cd3.5 to 5?

It may well be a question of taste.

The 5 plays the music with more air and space around instruments. It is also more refined and neutral-sounding.

The 3.5 (crudely) exhibits good PR&T and tune, but has a rather flat and unfocussed soundstage. It can also be a little over-insistant in its portrayal of music - giving the impression that you are hearing a caricature of the performance.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal.

When I owned the 3.5/flat, I tried the CD5/FC2 as a prospective upgrade.
I certainly didn't feel the need to "upgrade" to the 5.
I agree with Steven's summary, but the differences are quite subtle, especially if you're not a/b-ing them. Besides, the 3.5 looks better.

...and once you add a Flatcap, or better still a Hicap, the whole ballgame changes in the sonic department.

As for the looks, I really like the look of my new CDX which has recently replaced a CD5/Flatcap2 - and I have got to lose a now superflous shelf into the bargain.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal.

Steve,

Can't you spell X... P... S... ?

Peter

I've owned a 3.5 with Flatcap for about 3 years.
Recently had a close listen to a 5/FC2 and will agree with ST that it IS a better sound especially with the volume wound up a bit.
Wouldn't consider changing tho'. The CDX is a different kettle....

Which cd player are you using now?

When I recently upgraded my whole system, I just for fun tried to "upgrade" my 3.5 with a SuperCap: this was such a huge improvement!! Incredible, that the *Caps make such a big difference...

I used to play my 3.5 with a FlatCap, but the SuperCap really transformed it... Of course this combo doesn't make financial sense!

Jun

The CD 3.5 has a very different sound than the CD 5. The 5 is smooth, more like the Thunder CD player I borrowed, but woth more PrAT. It's a very nice CD player. The 3.5 is more raw, contricted perhaps, but still, a very nice CD player. Some may prefer the presentation of the 3.5.

The CDX is very different to both.

Regards

Stephen

>When I bought the 3.5 1998 and demo'ed it
>against the same priced Linn player, the Linn
>player was dull and uninvolving in my opinion
>and the 3.5 rocked.

Exactly thats why I bought the 3.5 instead of the Linn...

Jun

quote:

---

Of course this combo doesn't make financial sense!

---

Depends what you pay for the Supercap I guess.

Hope its all working well for you.

Alex

Did you visit my profile...?

"clearly if you go for a 5+HC to begin with you are in the CDX, Ikemi etc money area."

Naaaah!

The CDX is much better than a CD5/Hi.

(I shan't comment on the Ikemi)

It is not simply more dynamic and authoritative. It is more tuneful, and more detailed also with much greater air, space and soundstage depth.

I suppose that a lot can depend on the partnering equipment, etc.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal.

try:

http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=67019385&f=48019385&m=1011903553&r=6871906753#6871906753

regards,

Mark

That's just greedy!!

Alex

Jonathan old chap

If we must be formal

It is either Steven Toy esq or Mr Steven Toy.

It is never Mr Toy Esq

Regards

Mick....in slightly pompous mood

I see what you mean.

Moneywise you are quite correct.

Your resulting presumption that the CDX versus CD5/Hi is a no-brainer is valid.

Doh!

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal.

quote:

---

Mick....in slightly pompous mood

---

So you ease off on the pomposity at yuletide?

Have a good one,

Alex