Decisions, Decisions
Posted by: Stephen Bennett on 16 May 2001
Hi all.
Ok, so I've decided on the Intro II to partner my 32.5/110 Linn LP12. I still have my original Arcam CD player (recently fixed and upgraded by Arcam). I listened to the Intros at the shop using both my Arcam and the CD 5. The CD 5 was superior to the Arcam in every way, but by no means was the Arcam bad, so I decided to go for the Intros rather than a new CD. I've been offered a 3.5 for 500 quid. Is this significantly worse than a 5 do you think? A grand for a CD player is really out of the question right now - perhaps for ever. I have a serious addiction to recording to fund:-). Should I get a 3.5 until I can afford a 5? 3.5 now, Hicap later and then a 5 next year? Any other suggestions for a decent CD player around 500 pounds?
Regards
Stephen Bennett. Composer and sound design. (UK)
http://chaosstudios.gen-next.com
henry fool http://www.collective.co.uk/henryfool The Fire Thieves: http://tft.gen-next.com
Author of 'The Fast Guide To Logic' http://www.pc-pubs.demon.co.uk/fgel.htm
and 'Making Music with E-Magic Logic Audio http://www.pc-pubs.demon.co.uk/mmela.htm
Posted on: 16 May 2001 by Bruce Woodhouse
I used a Meridian 506 for years in an otherwise Naim system and liked it, acepting that the style of their players is rather warm and smooth and best suited to classical rather than rock. Have not sold it yet either... I would guess it would come in under your price on s.h market
Posted on: 16 May 2001 by John C
I know most people disagree with this but the 3.5 is not much different than the CD5. The CD5 is am more smooth refined player and the 3.5 has its harsh moments on bright recordings but is an excellent player at the price. At 500 quid its a bargain. I have a 3.5 and wouldn't consider changing it unless I could get a CDX. I can't believe you would get anything better for £500. If funds didnt allow for a Hi-Cap you could add a FC2 to CD and pre-amp. Makes a big difference.
John
Posted on: 16 May 2001 by Top Cat
The CD3.5 doesn't sound as good to my ears as the CD5, but both are good and probably streets ahead of the original Arcam CD player you have - try also to hear an Arcam 9 CD player as a counterpoint, and don't forget the inimitable Rega Planet in its current guise. But, the CD3.5 is still a fine player, more classic Naim than the CD5 IMHO.
John
Posted on: 16 May 2001 by Top Cat
Whilst the Linn is nice, it's left behind by the FMJ CD35 in my opinion. Haven't heard the new Diva range. The FMJ CD35 and the CD5 are at about the same level of performance in my experience, although the HiCap on the CD5 moves things more solidly in the Naim's favour. The Linn is okay, but I've never liked Linn CD players (although the CD12 is very nice)...
John
Posted on: 16 May 2001 by Todd A
I own a 3.5 and was also able to do an A/B comparison of the 3.5 against the 5 and I couldn't really tell you which is better. They're different. The 3.5 sounds better with jazz and rock, and on classical the presentation is different though neither is better. The CD5 is smoother, but if you can cap a 3.5, the difference melts away. Take the plunge. Spend the 500 pounds. Nothing in that price range comes close to the 3.5. (Of course, you could wait until used 5's show up out there.) Bottom line: the 3.5 is a great player.
Posted on: 18 May 2001 by Scott Mckenzie
I too have carried out the test between the CD5 and CD3.5 as I have been looking for a replacement to my Arcam 7SE for sometime, I personally prefered the 3.5 as IMO it looks better and sounds more like most other Naim equipment, the 5 seems too laid back in comparison, it is by all means an excellent player, but £500 for a 3.5 is a steal - I haven't seen any less than £700 yet. I think it would be well worth buying it and you could add either a Flatcap (2) or Hi-Cap. If you aren't interested in the upgrades, then look at a CD3, which is basically the same as a 3.5 but cannot be upgraded with either a flat or hi cap.
Scott
