To CD3.5 or not to CD3.5

Either player is superb; I personally felt that the FMJ had the edge (more detail and space between notes) but the fact that the CD5 can take a HiCap tips the balance back in its favour.

Interesting points: the FMJ has a very similar DAC to the (very expensive) dCS Elgar upsampling DAC, and this shows in a very organic and un-CD-like sound. The CD5 really seems to benefit from the HiCap - I auditioned the CD5 in an all-Naim system with both non- and HiCap- demos.

If you have an all-Naim system, I can't see any reason to look beyond the CD5. If you find a good source of decent, s/h CD3.5s, though, let me know ;-)

I think you wouldn't be unhappy with either player; I also tried a CDX against the CD5/HiCap and the CD5 blew it away (IMHO) for less cash.
The dealer told me to be surprised, but I didn't really believe him.

HTH

John (still debating/looking for the right CD player)

Does this mean the flatcap is not even worth considering??

Hifi is a funny thing. We all like different things, and I have to say that just maybe the CDX isn't quite the sound I'm looking for. I stand by my comments.

John

I suggest further listening and making your own mind up as I suspect that it is source (i.e. disc) sensitive.

One CD played at the dem sounded much better at home on my cheap Marantz than the CD5, but I suspect that the CD5 may be revealing it's true worth, wheras my Marantz covers up some of the nasties.

Certainly the discs that sounded superb on the CD5 did not have the same emotional impact at home.

Andy.

Andrew L. Weekes
alweekes@audiophile.com

I’ve been having similar-ish experiences. We have a fairly 62/HiCap/2 x 160/Roksan RokONE system fed mostly be a Heybrook TT2/RB300/DV10X4 (vinyl). Having lived moderately happily with an Arcam Alpha 7 CD player for some years (still don’t think there is anything near it for the money), we had the opportunity of an extended “dem” of a CD5 in our system, as a friend bought one, but didn’t want to install it until he had finished redecorating his sitting room. Thus, we were able to connect a brand new, cold CD5, and listened to it a lot over the next two weeks. We were careful always to leave it on repeat whenever it wasn’t actually being used. It sounded better than the Arcam immediately — bigger, with more “performance” and interestingly, more bass but much less obviously. The most impressive thing was that to my ears, there was no particular indication that you were listening to a CD – it just put the music into the room in that flowing, logical way that turntables have which makes the whole thing believable.

After almost exactly 10 days, it quite suddenly changed, and we realised that we had only been hearing a small part of what it could do. A “running-in” milestone had been passed, and absolutely every part of the music snapped into sharp focus in a way which both discouraged and ultimately defied analysis – it was just marvellous. Then we had to give it back – humph.

So I looked at the cost involved, and concluded that a used CDX (at slightly more money than a CD-5 + s/h HiCap) would be better value, and began to keep an eye on the classifieds. By a complete coincidence, I was also able to try a dealer demo CDX (already run-in) in the system for a couple of days.

How shall I put this? I expected the CDX to be like the CD5, only “more + better”. It wasn’t. Undoubtably there were some things which it did a lot better, but you don’t go to a gig and then just listen to the sax player (for example). It didn’t weave music into a credible thread in my opinion, and could sound slightly rough and busy. Loads of push and drive, and plenty of instances of notes appearing where I hadn’t noticed them before, but the whole presentation seemed to me to be “head” rather than “heart”. The magical, indefinable balancing act which the CD5 pulls off was gone, and it was obvious that CDs rather than records were in use.

I have no doubt that technically, the CDX is a superior unit. Obviously it is also optimised for use with an XPS, which is a completely different proposition financially! As a standalone unit, however, in our system, with our music, at that time, it was quite clearly not as believable a performer as the CD5. The CD5 with a HiCap must be very special – I think I should buy one.

Best;

Mark

(I still don't like this
software very much)

quote:

---

Having lived moderately happily with an Arcam Alpha 7 CD player for some years (still don’t think there is anything near it for the money)

---

I quite agree; I think a lot of people are prejudiced against this brand due to its prevalence in the budget-to-mid-range market, but I've always found their kit to really deliver more bang-per-buck than any other kit. I've often been stunned by how good my A10 amps sound, especially on several layers of Mana - I think the cheap casework detracts from the potential sound quality, which decent supports alleviates, somewhat. I've said it before, and I'll stand by this to my grave, but an Alpha 7 on a couple of layers of Mana will destroy a CD3.5 on none. Put them both on Mana, and the CD3.5 is (of course) ahead, but it's a real eye (and ear) opener.

I am almost certain I'll end up with a CD5 plus either a secondhand HiCap or a new Epona PSU, despite being sorely tempted by the Arcam FMJ - I think the FMJ will bear the bare-bones CD5, but the CD5+PSU will beat the FMJ in the demos I've heard.

I'm constrained by my rack arrangement, however, as I can't have a top-loader, so it's the conventional CD players for me...

John

quote:

---

I think the cheap casework detracts from the potential sound quality, which decent supports alleviates, somewhat.

---

Certainly the case rings like crazy, although I hadn't realised how much unitl I put played the Arcam with the demo CD-5 on top of it – huge improvement, but definitely from the "shooting-yourself-in-the-foot" school of tweaks.

Putting a Yellow Pages on the Arcam achieves the same effect, and changing all the smoked glass to (less-resonant?) clear glass further improves things.

quote:

---

I'm constrained by my rack arrangement

---

Try being more assertive with it

Best;

Mark

(I still don't like this
software very much)

quote:

---

Certainly the case rings like crazy, although I hadn't realised how much unitl I put played the Arcam with the demo CD-5 on top of it – huge improvement, but definitely from the "shooting-yourself-in-the-foot" school of tweaks.

---

It's a danger, isn't it - trying out new kit, the urge to upgrade can be expensive

Anyway, the levels of improvement from a few layers of Mana was so great with the Arcam CD player that it honestly put paid to my plans of immediate upgrades. OK, so on the most complex music it can still lose its way slightly, but it's a completely different player to the slightly dull, lazy sound that the non-Mana'd player exhibited...

Maybe a vukwich on top will do some good - I have to admit to not having tried any other tweaks since getting Mana, but if it can improve the sound further, then the CD5 can wait a wee while longer - bigger fish to fry (Speakers!)

John

quote:

---

Having lived moderately happily with an Arcam Alpha 7 CD player for some years (still don’t think there is anything near it for the money)

---

I agree with this - I've owned two of these over the past four years, and enjoyed them muchly. The just make music. I too, found the phonebook/technical text/bunch of mags made an improvement via case-damping. Also tried the distinctly round-earth 'paint the inside of yer case matt black' tweak, which I am pretty sure improved things [although lack of opportunity to A/B this precludes firm 'ruling' on this]. Next step up from an Alpha 7 is a CD-3; this includes Alpha 8 and Planet, IMHO.

If one was looking for a used bargain sub CD-3 money (without one or 'tother already in posession), my two picks would be Alpha 7 CD, or CD63 KI. 'Must be noted I've not back-to-backed these two players.

Rico - musichead

I like it, it is great value at the price, but off-of Mana it is a bit too laid-back and fuzzy on the timing thing. Mana corrects all of this. More Mana brings it up to CD3 levels; on Phase 5 (as mine is) it is amazingly capable (to my ear, the lowly Arcam 7 on phase 5 Mana sounds better than either a CDX or a CD5+HiCap do OFF Mana, but level the playing field and the Naim kit will obviously blow the A7 away).

Now, I spoke at length to Hooch last night about his highly-modified CDS - now that's a beastie I would like to hear!!!!

John

quote:

---

I have to stress that if you're not going to put this player on Mana, do [u]not[/ul] buy it!!

---

Jeez, John - that's a bit extreme. The Alpha 7 is what it is. If it's bettered with other kit (cables, stands, Mana, power... whatever)... that's another question.

If one has a decent system together in the first place, this may be a way to spend... but from the POV of someone with (say) £300-£400 to spend on a used system, diverting 60-odd percent of the funds into a support (no matter what you think of it's performance) - as anything less will make your chosen source *unlistenable* - is taking it a bit far. Sadly, our hypothetical student might call for a straightjacket (wrong as he might be) for one suggesting distribution of his limited funds in this way.

I'm sure you have a point in the context of a multi-thousand (that is, more than 1000) pound system. I'd be really interested to listen to the difference between a Phase-5 Alpha 7 (sounds a bit Blakes 7, no?), and a bog-standard CD-3 (and of course, a CD-3 on same table), - I'd be prepared to be amazed.

Still, good of you to illuminate that your Alpha 7 brings you such satisfaction courtesy of the supports on which it rests! Many might forget/overlook that such performance might be wrought from a player easily sourced at around a Ton from Loot.

Rico - musichead

quote:

---

Also tried the distinctly round-earth 'paint the inside of yer case matt black' tweak,

---

Blimey, Rico – hadn't heard of that one! Makes sense, though as presumaby the inner surface of the sleeve case is bare metal. Possibly just adding a generous layer of paint helps damp it a bit, although I'd have been tempted to try it sans case (insert legal disclaimer of your choice here)...

However, our Alpha 7 is currently feeling seriously outclassed (and unplugged) as Julie & I suffered an attack of the "soddits" on Saturday (this is when you go "sod it" and then blow a load of money)... and came home with a CD5 — (sigh) only about 9days to go till it's cooked!

Best;

Mark

(I still don't like this
software very much)

quote:

---

I'd be really interested to listen to the difference between a Phase-5 Alpha 7 (sounds a bit Blakes 7, no?), and a bog-standard CD-3 (and of course, a CD-3 on same table), - I'd be prepared to be amazed.

---

It is a bit surprising, really. When I originally upgraded my rack from a Quadraspire to a Mana six-tier, a CD3.5-owning friend and myself tried a couple of experiments to compare the 'Mana effect'. I had both racks at the time - I eventually found a buyer for the QS, but it took around a month or so.

Initially, he brought his CD3.5 over to my place, and we tried CD3.5 off vs. A7 on, CD3.5 on vs. A7 off, both on (I have a spare shelf, so this was possible), and both players off.

The findings were as follows:

Arcam Naim
off off - 1
off on - 2
on off - 3
on on - 4

Results
1: CD3.5 was quite a bit ahead in terms of PRaT, as the Arcam sounded a bit laid back and softer. It was warmer sounding, though; we both felt it sounded better on female vocal.

2: CD3.5 on Mana was comprehensively better in all areas, including female vocal, and seemed to have an invisible HiCap attached, so significant was the improvement.

3: The Arcam clawed back on the PRaT, and its off-Mana lethargy seemed to have vanished. We were surprised at how much detail this £300ish quid player was digging out of the pits. On one level of Mana, it was easily the equal of the CD3.5 (sitting on the QS rack).

4: Both players sounded much better than they had off-of Mana, and (surprisingly) they were much more closely matched in terms of detail, musicality and PRaT. However, the CD3.5 won overall, although at this level it came down to individual differences in taste and depended more on the music we listened to.

A month or so later, we repeated the test, except this time at my friend's house. On his all-Naim system, the synergy of CD3.5 and amps (250), etc., gave it the home advantage, although the results were again surprising. As my friend didn't have a spare QS rack in his house we compared the differences between Phase 1 and Phase 2, and (by and large) the results echoed what our previous experiment had shown. Increasing the Mana by one level brought the cheaper player up to about the same level as the CD3.5; with the CD3.5 on Phase 2 and the A7 on Phase 1, the CD3.5 trounced the lowly Arcam.

I feel we were fairly rigorous, double-blind testing aside (hey, life's too short) but the differences in this kind of experiment are so great one doesn't need to muck around that way - it's as obvious as night and day.

It just goes to show you what older machines can be capable of, given the right supports.

John

PS. The ultimate result: First leg: Arcam 1, Naim 1; Second leg: Arcam 1, Naim 2 (Naim wins 3-2 on aggregate, and proceeds to the knockout stages )

congrats to you and Julie on your attack of the 'soddits'.

Perfect timing though; just as the wetsuits get a chance to really dry out, eh?

Rico - musichead

I always wondered about Naim's "pre-Hutter" slab-sided supports which always used to appear in their pictures – never saw them anywhere else.

Best;

Mark

(I still don't like this
software very much)

quote:

---

Perfect timing though; just as the wetsuits get a chance to really dry out, eh?

---

Well, that would be the sensible, logical view wouldn't it?

However, the soddits struck with a vengeance during October, as a result of which we both have new (s/h) boards (7'6" & 7'4" mini-mals), so we're off to N. Devon this w/e to give them a thrashing and fill up on Hick's Special Draught. Hopefully it won't get any colder...

Best;

Mark

(I still don't like this
software very much)

quote:

---

My gut feeling was that the changes were additive rather than subtractive

---

Hmmm... interesting. I suppose much of what the supports did was to increase the detail which the player was able to extract from the CD, so in that sense, yes, it is additive. However, the supports also took away that veil of mung that I was up-unto-that-point unaware of - think of it like T-Cutting a clean car; it might have looked clean, but when you start with the polish, you realise just how dull it actually was.

Of course, you hit the nail on the head when you suggest that everyone's mileage may vary; of course, this is always the case, but generally, the Mana supports produce extremely favourable results in almost every case...

John