First impressions of a CDX2

Posted by: timster on 27 May 2003

First post, so here goes (system: CDX2, 112+FC2, 250, fraim, ProAc Response SC1.) After finally getting my sweaty paws on my bonus, I decide that rather than doing something practical like paying down some of my mortgage, I'll replace my CD5 with a CDX2. Now, I have just been _extremely_ happy with the CD5 (+FC2), and as many others on this forum have written, it is simply ace, period. Naturally, more of the same would be just the ticket! So, last Saturday I drop off my CD5 and pick up my brand spanking new CDX2. Get home, plonk it on the fraim, switch on and start listening.

First impression is that it’s quite different. Indeed Roll Eyes. I characterize it as "less bright" (somewhere else it was referred to as "darker") and as a consequence I found I would crank the volume up more. I found that complex (?) passages could be more easily followed because of better separation between the layers of music. For example, listening to Coldplay's
quote:
Clocks
, the bass line was not only clearly separated, but also had better definition, more weight I suppose. I also heard improvements in micro dynamics where they were better resolved, more fleshed out. As an example, listening to
quote:
Way to Blue
by Nick Drake, besides the cello, I clearly heard a double bass (Jeez, don't anyone say that there wasn't one, otherwise this will mean all this is simply in my head. You've been had my boy!) Anyway, I would say that higher volumes could be achieved simply because of a reduction in what I perceive as glare and grunge (muddled micro dynamics that the kit can't figure out?) Now, when I first listened to a CDX (not a CDX2) at the dealer, I felt that the CDX did not improve where vocals were concerned, and I find the same is true with my CDX2 at home, although it is too early to say for sure. Definitely no worse, but no better. Classical music will be next, should be interesting. Finally, the one aspect that I am a little concerned with is that I have this strange feeling that perhaps some of the PR&T may have got lost. I wonder if anyone else has experienced this phenomenon?

I'm looking forward to the next month as it burns in and hopefully the *missing* PR&T will resurface, or I'll be forever chiding myself for not staying with what I felt was a supremely balanced system that I loved. I would definitely say that the CD5 + psu is an incredible combination. It's strange, I changed all my equipment (except speakers) to naim over the last 12-18 months and arrived with a system that I was utterly satisfied with. That was what I wanted to achieve when I set out on this journey. Sure, the bigger and more expensive kit sounded better, but I was just as happy with what I had. Before I bought the CDX2, I was concerned that somehow I might upset the balance of the system I'd arrived at, and now I'm worried that I may have just gone and done this Confused. Instead of staying happily off the upgrading bandwagon, I feel maybe that I've just gone and got aboard again, and I definitely don't want to do that (way toooo expensive!)

That's it. I hope I didn't ramble too much Smile.


N.B. The 5 series definitely does have a brighter naim logo than the new reference kit. Maybe that's a reflection of their performance too...
Posted on: 27 May 2003 by J.N.
Welcome aboard

You've just learned the valuable lesson that 'better' isn't automatically 'better'.

You must give the CDXII time to come on song - a couple of weeks will get you most of the way there, but brand new kit can take up to 6 to 8 weeks to really sing.

The CDXII has a bigger, fuller more powerful sound than your CD5/FCII. The rest of your system (and room) has to deal with and control this extra energy. That could be why you are apparently losing some PR&T? A less weighty sound is 'faster'. New kit can also sound a bit 'thick' for a while, so give it time.

Happy listening. (Tim?)
Posted on: 27 May 2003 by Lightkeeper
Timster !

First of all, congrats for new player.
From my experience, speakers with better resolution potential need more to come up song than average speakers. This could be easily to understand with electronics, so why not with cd players too.
Give him a month or two.

Ozren Smile

p.s. nice post
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by david r
Timster - you are in deep trouble!

CDSII, 52, 135's and SF Electa Amator II's
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Allan Probin
Timster,

I bought a new CDX2 recently. It took about four weeks to get to the level my demo unit exhibited from cold. It's still forging ahead.

One tip, if you feel the burn-in has stalled after a week or two, try switching it off for a couple of hours and start again. It should come back within a day to where you left off but then carry on improving.

Allan
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
I posted a rather lengthy opinion of the CDX2, and one of my findings during the evaluation regarding the timing and pace of music is that it is heavily influenced by what the CDX2 is plugged into.
I experienced meaningful differences going directly to the wall for ac over power strips.
I also commented that I found the presentation of the CDX2 to be darker compared to the CD5/hi, but I don't find it volume dependant. It's still slightly darker, tonaly speaking, even at ear bleeding levels.
My biggest disappointment with mine is that I find no differences ("improvement") in the dynamics of the presentation when compared to a CD5/hi. I felt (and still do) that for the money some gain should have been realized.
The CDX2 has some obvious upgrades over the CD5/hi, in that I find it to be a more accurate device overall with better bass rendering.
It presents micro-dynamics better than the CD5, because I think, it's noise floor is lower.
I was (and still am) disappointed with it's lack of macro dynamics and somewhat less incisive nature. Granted, those qualities may or may not be as musically important to you as better timbre or deeper bass lines.
For my tastes, dynamics are a huge part of the emotive process of music. On this point alone I feel the CDX2 does not warrant it's price.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by garyi
Allen.

Surely you arn't being serious?
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Tuan
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Shedlock:
I posted a rather lengthy opinion of the CDX2, and one of my findings during the evaluation regarding the timing and pace of music is that it is heavily influenced by what the CDX2 is plugged into.
I experienced meaningful differences going directly to the wall for ac over power strips.
I also commented that I found the presentation of the CDX2 to be darker compared to the CD5/hi, but I don't find it volume dependant. It's still slightly darker, tonaly speaking, even at ear bleeding levels.
My biggest disappointment with mine is that I find no differences ("improvement") in the dynamics of the presentation when compared to a CD5/hi. I felt (and still do) that for the money some gain should have been realized.
The CDX2 has some obvious upgrades over the CD5/hi, in that I find it to be a more accurate device overall with better bass rendering.
It presents micro-dynamics better than the CD5, because I think, it's noise floor is lower.
I was (and still am) disappointed with it's lack of macro dynamics and somewhat less incisive nature. Granted, those qualities may or may not be as musically important to you as better timbre or deeper bass lines.
For my tastes, dynamics are a huge part of the emotive process of music. On this point alone I feel the CDX2 does not warrant it's price.


Bob

Why dont you try the CDX? You may like the traditional Naim sound.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Tuan - I don't believe it's the "traditional Naim" sound issue! I've had scads of digital devices from numerous manufacturers, both my own personal devices and review samples.
The CDX2 is a very good CDP. For it's 5K stateside price, it falls short as a vfm upgrade over a CD5/HI.
Therein is the crux of the matter. Compared to other like priced devices, it is expensive. When compared to the CD5/hi, (which I am told deviates from the "traditional" sound!) It has more "fidelity" but isn't one whit more musical, or possesed of that ephemeral quality of "musicality".
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by timster
Thanks for the replies. JN, yes, "faster" (less weight) would but the right word and in someways has a definite appeal, to me at least. Bob S, I agree with your sentiments too, but I will continue with the CDX2 until it is properly burnt in. I hope the 'fidelity' doesn't get in the way of the music...
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Timster - I have mine for many months now, including an extended powered down time for a trip to NANA for the PIC replacement/ugrade.
Fear not, the "fidelity" doesn't get in the way of the music! My argument simply comes down to that the CDX2 is different, not better, for a lot more money.


Bonnie Raitt's Road Tested currently blaring away in another room.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Allan Probin
quote:
Surely you arn't being serious?


Actually garyi I told a slight fib. I left my demo unit spinning a CD for an hour before I first listened to it.

Allan
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Well ------ perhaps if one were buying from scratch, a CDX2 might be a good starting point--

Still, when a used CD5/Hi combination can be had over here for less than half the retail of a CDX2--------

I guess if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't! Perhaps if one is thinking along the lines of an upgrade path, a CDX2/XPS2 positions the buyer in the long term for the high end Naim head units.

Even then, the XPS2 practically doubles the price of the combination, and nowhere have I read that it doubles the performance.

In the context of a stepping stone on a pathway, it may be best skipped over. As an end purchase, eh -----

With all the posts on the CDX2, I've yet to read anyone countering or mounting an offensive to the contrary.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by steve watts
Timster

I can relate exactly with this.

I strayed from a 3.5/Hi to an late model CDX and had the same feeling of unsettling the balence of a system I now realise that I was perfectly happy with.

It's taken a whole load of fiddling of the units/cables/speakers and adjustment on my part to get used to the 'different' sound. It seems that previously it was very mid range focussed and I missed it.

Now there is much more bass and detail that comes through without necessarily being aware of it until it's gone, if that makes any sense.

Stick with it. I wouldn't go back now.

Steve
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Steve - you make a good point about the contrasts, and I believe it is necessary (if at all possible) to check and validate your current experience against your prior reference .
Although you are refering to the CDX as opposed to the CDX2, I wonder. How many other changes have you made in your audio evolution that also required such adjustments to get used to "different"? I don't put that out to be contentious, merely that every other step "up" I've made, the benefits/improvements were readily apparent.
My experiences changing front ends, including cartridges, turntables, tuners, etc., never required such adjustments.
In an earllier topic I posted that the CDX2 has a character that it imposes on the music, and as you point out, that has to be accomadated. That is not the same as a new source showing previously masked limitations or set-up issues in a system.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by steve watts
Bob,

Fair comment.

I have never made adjustments before but felt that I needed to now in order to accomodate the increase in energy that was being delivered. I know that this is a feature of the room and I had probably never found the optimum position for my speakers before. It has always been trial and error and had not been an issue.

Different ball game now, especially since the addition of the XPS.

I was just relating to Timsters self doubt about the change as I also experienced this for a good few weeks. One thing that I have learned is that 3.5/Hi or CD5/Hi are excellent value for money and that an overall balence between the units and it's environment is crucial to the end result.

Steve
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Steve, did you find the addition of the xps an improvement to the overall dynamics, and perhaps the scale?
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by timster
Bob, some questions -
1. Like Steve, did you feel a need to do additional tweaking because it was different?
2. Did you wait for the CDX2 to burn in before plugging the ac directly in to the wall?
3. Given the choice, would you have stuck with the CD5+hicap? Have you considered going back?

tim
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Tim

1.) W/the possible exception of the increased low frequency info (Moved the speakers farther into the room), finageling things didn't change the character.

2.)Didn't wait for it to settle in, noticed the change instantly and others have experimented on their own and posted similiar positive results. Mine was plugged into a wiremold.

3.)I've already posted that if I could do it all over again, I wouldn't. The CD5/Hi are here, although I listen to the CDX2. I actually posted the CDX2 on audiogon and ebay for about 30 percent off retail w/ no takers. The other two pieces have people taking numbers to buy them.


Still, although it may appear I am being overly negative about the CDX2, perhaps you should read the earlier posts where I state it's strong points and positives. There are worse things in life than being "stuck" with an excellent cdp! I just don't feel it was as much as a step "up" as "over" for the money.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by steve watts
Bob,

One of the best things that I have done is add the XPS. It's up there with the improvements to the mains and adding a Hi to the 72.

I don't think it has extended the scale as such but has transformed the dynamics. On certain discs, the bass comes with a big swell of power and authority that is addictive but at the same time the rest of the range is clearly discernable.

It is this change of emphasis to the sound that took a while to adjust to. It seems much broader based than before.

I have to admit, I have removed the XPS several times to check things and always quickly put it back. It makes that much difference.

I was very pleased with my 3.5/Hi and was able to compare it against the CDx before I made the decision. I always saw the CDX/XPS as the natural succesor.

I was actually thinking of trying a CDX2 vs an 82 for my next move!

Steve
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by ClaudeP
Just thinking...

Maybe the 3.5/Hi combination (and the CD5/Hi) combination for the same matter) is so good at doing the essential that it's close to the limits of the medium potential... but CDSIII owners could tell us better.

Or maybe the CDX2 is just not as great a success as the other Naim CD players. (If I recall, the only Naim CD player Stereophile puts in its Class A recommended components is the CD5 - for what it's worth).

At any rate, personally I will think of upgrading my 3.5 the day Naim makes an SACD player...
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Everyone has different musical priorities, and what is important to me may not mean anything at all to you, and vice versa.

I think the character imposed on the music is that of the Pacific Microsonics chip. I didn't like them in the Arcams I've heard, and positively hated it in the Levinsons. I've heard lots of Pacific Microsonic implementations, and all of them are readily identifiable to my ear.

Obviously a great many people aren't bothered or find them the least bit offensive, hence their ubiquitous use in higher end players.

I don't think for an instant that the CD5 is near the limits of the medium. It is just a powerfully executed set of balances that makes it so compeling.

So I guess I'm "stuck" with my CDX2, as I refuse to take a brutal loss on it. Eventually (and that means no time in the foreseeable future) I'd like to hear it with an XPS2 and see if that addresses my complaints about the macro dynamics. If it does, then in the mean time I've bought half a player ------
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by redeye
Bob S

You have a private topic awaiting your inspection


regards
red
Posted on: 29 May 2003 by Naimed-In-NY
As someone painstakingly saving up his pennies to go from a mid-fi cdp to a CDX2, I must say this topic has interested me immensely. Needless to say I will make the necessary comparisons before handing over my money (e.g., CD5 v. CD5/FC v. CDX2 v. CDX2/XPS2) - I would do that even if I never saw this topic. However, I am curious as to whether any/many forum members did a serious evaluation of the CD5 v. CDX2 before purchasing and decided to go for the CDX2 and why. So far, it looks like most commentators on this topic feel that the CD5/FC comes very close to the CDX2 and that the CDX2 represents poor VFM. Do others agree? If you did not see yourself ever swinging for an XPS2 (or at least in the foreseeable future), would the CDX2 still be worth the extra cash over a CD5 or CD5/FC? Thanks for your thoughts.

MBM
Posted on: 29 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Naimed in NY - Because of a dearth of dealers, I was not able to do a demo prior to purchase.
(I know, I know ! But dealer demos are hardly the best of circumstances, home is always best)
My comments are based on the CD5/hi v a CDX2, and an FC2 combo, although VERY good, is not the same thing as with a hi.
Also, you should check the thread, Paging Bob -The Shedlock (something or other) wherein I wrote of the obvious strengths of the CDX2 over the aforementioned combination.
My primary complaints are the "equal to" dynamics, and the signature of the Pacific Microsonics chip set.
As for the dynamics, well, the XPS2 may address that. I'd love to hear one in my house, but with no immediate plans read:cash) to purchase one, I can't see anyone loaning me one. Then too, the dealer who told me the CDX2 was the best thing since sliced bread also said the XPS2 was a poor vfm, so go figure.
After yesterday's discourses in this thread, it occured to me that perhaps a different interconnect (Ahhhhggg a heritic!) may be worth investigating. I threw a Chord cable in for grins, and, lo and behold, it does indeed address some of my complaints. Hardly conclusive but encouraging nonetheless.
It goes against my grain to have to experiment with wires, particularly when I came to NAIM to get away from that very thing.
If there was a JD Powers survey of initial satisfaction for the CDX2, Naim HQ would not be happy with my response. I bought an expensive player that I am not entirely happy with, then I had to pay to ship it out so it would play non-redbook standard discs, and now I may have to mess around with wires to get it sounding right.
By all means my friend, go and listen for yourself. THAT is the only way you'll know if it's right thing for you.

[This message was edited by Bob Shedlock on THURSDAY 29 May 2003 at 14:50.]
Posted on: 29 May 2003 by Bob Shedlock
Naimed - check your private topic posts.