Worry about my CDS

quote:

---

So do I have to worry? Or ist it just normal for the CDS1?

---

Yes, and yes.
If your Nextel ring looks in good nick than it may be some other apect of the CDM-4 transport that is wearing out. Either way not good. A 1994-vintage CDS1 with moderate use would be ready to start showing transport-related failures about now.

I very recently had my 1995-ish CDS1 rebuilt into a CDS2. Currently I have both the original CDSPS (with black Burndy) and XPS to power it it with. Regardless of which power supply I use, the S2 is far, far FAR better than the CDS1. Furthermore there is no more of ERR, whirring, ticking and access failures, which by itself would be worth the price of entry. Add to this unflappable mechanical reliability an enormous leap in pure sonic performance and your path is now well illuminated. Keep the CDSPS and send your CDS1 and burndy back to naim (through your dealer) for the S2 rebuild. I know there are a (few) vociferous defenders of the CDS1 who say there is little to no benefit of the CDS2. They are however simply wrong, very wrong. Let me give you an example of just how much better the S2 is over the S1.... my girfriend now uses the system to play music throughout the house (just open the door and turn volume to 11 o'clock). Before the S2 arrived she found it unbearably harsh and aggressive, even seated downstairs three rooms away. Now she loves to have music playing wherever she is and can enjoy what she hears. And if the difference is vast one floor down, three rooms away.. you should hear what it sounds like in the room the speakers are in!!!!

The S2 demolishes the S1 in those very same and critical areas where the S1 stomped all over the Karik/Numerik, the Meridian and all other worthy contenders at the time.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

Intersting comments, but not entirely unexpexted.

I have a horrible feeling that Jun only bought his cds1 second-hand recently, so I can sympathise with his anxiety.

I have been contemplating upgrading my cds1 with the cds2 transport, but keeping the cdps and grey burndey. Now I know we have been through this before, but on a scale of (say) 0 to 10, where 10 represents the full cds1 to cds2 change including power supplies and burndey, how much would you put down to the cds2 transport, how much to the burndey and how much to the xps??

I appreciate your views might be different to Paul S's views (and mine if I ever do the up-grade), but your this is not an easy up-grade to dem and the dealers don't make much out of it (apparantly) so your unique advice would be most appreciated.

Cheers

Don

I'm keeping my fingers crossed... maybe that 52 will get here before my cds requires a transplant.

BTW, keep those observations (reviews) coming!

regards,

dave

Ron, please tell us about the difference when you switch back to the CDPS/grey-burndy from the XPS/black-burndy!

Jun

quote:

---

I have been contemplating upgrading my cds1 with the cds2 transport, but keeping the cdps and grey burndy. Now I know we have been through this before, but on a scale of (say) 0 to 10, where 10 represents the full cds1 to cds2 change including power supplies and burndey, how much would you put down to the cds2 transport, how much to the burndey and how much to the xps??

---

As usual, trying to assign hard objective numbers to mere quality is like trying to describe color. Someone once said that trying to write about music (or sound) is like dancing to architecture.

But lets see if I can semi-quantify these important changes.

A CDS1 is in the same league (but different) to a CDX/XPS. The latter may be more tuneful in bass and a tad less coloured in the all-important midrange, but it does not have quite the swing, the swagger and the panache of a CDS1.

Now all CDS1 were issued with gray Burndy cables. The black burndy only became extant following the demise of the original CDS1. A limited amount of CDS1-ready black Burndies were made and may or may not still be available. When I swapped over to a black Burndy for the S1, there was a great reduction in the perceived grain and a very unpleasant peaky midrange colouration. For the price of $500 this was a very nice upgrade on the CDS1, taking it comfortably above a gray Burndied CDX/XPS.

I would give the following arbitrary scores.

CDX alone ...4
CDX/XPS with gray Burndy.... 6
CDS1/CDSPS/gray Burndy.... 6.5
CDS1/CDSPS/black Burndy....7

CDS2/CDSPS/black Burndy.......9
CDS2/XPS/black Burndy.....10

This is more likely than not a non-linear scale. But hopefully it shows that there are very large jumps between a naked CDX and a CDX/XPS and another very large leap beween the CDX/XPS and the CDS2/CDSPS.

I would suggest that ALL CDS1 users very strongly consider having their CDS1 rebuilt to CDS2 and using (at least initially) the CDSPS. This will however usually require the additional purchase of a Black Burndy as the original gray ones are somewhat of a bottleneck. But I still have no doubt that even with an old gray Burndy the CDS2 will be a far superior source to a perfectly performing black Burndied CDS1.

These are preliminary ratings as when I did the CDSPS to XPS swap on the CDS2, the entire system had been powered down for a couple days and all units were cold. I have the XPS in the system now while the CDSPS has been plugged in and kept warm for about a week. This weekend I will be doing the fully warmed up XPS vs the fully warmed up CDSPS comparison to a small audience. Keep your eye on this spot.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

many thanks for the reports to date, very helpful and encouraging....looking forward to further updates. Hope you and your friends enjoy the listening.

Cheers

Don

While I usually find your reports to be spot on I have to disagree with you on the CDX/CDS1/CDS2 comparison. I own all three players and have demoed them for some time now. The CDX and CDS1 should have Mana to be heard in their best light.

There is a much larger difference between the CDX/XPS and the CDS1 (you gave a .5 difference) than between a CDS1 and CDS2 which are much closer to one another.

While the CDS2 does have higher levels of resolution and is smoother(read analog) when compared to the CDS1, the CDS1 has more PRaT, especially with Mana.

I can understand why someone may prefer a CDS1.

The CDS2 was originally sold with a grey Burndy (ask me how I know) which was not included in your comparison.

There are too many permutations here. All of these players are excellent with difficult to detect flaws.

BTW: Jun, I've had my CDS1 for over 2 years. It's done the clicking business the whole time and never gotten any worse. You can get rid of most of the residual graininess you can hear a higher volumes with a black Burndy and Mana.

Question:

What can you do with the old grey Burndy's? I've got three of them now.

Arthur Bye

quote:

---

While I usually find your reports to be spot on I have to disagree with you on the CDX/CDS1/CDS2 comparison. I own all three players and have demoed them for some time now. The CDX and CDS1 should have Mana to be heard in their best light.

---

I tried both CDS1 and CDS2 on the phase 2 Mana wall shelf. The S1 was marginally better than on a low-rider amp-stand; the S2 was worse. The LP12 that normally is on this stand is orders of magnitude better on it than anywhere else.

quote:

---

There is a much larger difference between the CDX/XPS and the CDS1 (you gave a .5 difference) than between a CDS1 and CDS2 which are much closer to one another.

---

When I made the original comparison 3 years ago, I found the CDS1 to be much closer to CDS2- this may be for several reasons. Firstly I had a shiny new black Burndy for the CDS1, while the very early production model CDS2 had only the gray Burndy- which is somewhat of an impediment. Secondly as with many new products, it may have been refined since its conception, and consequently a far better player circa late 2001 than it was in 1998. I stand resolute in my assertation that my CDS2 is leagues ahead of both the CDS1 that I owned for years or the CDX/XPS that I tried in my system a few times.

quote:

---

While the CDS2 does have higher levels of resolution and is smoother(read analog) when compared to the CDS1, the CDS1 has more PRaT, especially with Mana.

---

I agree that the CDS1 is improved by Mana. The CDS2 however is decidedly NOT. All I can say is that my late 2001 vintage CDS2 betters the 1995 CDS1 in every concieable way, and by a margin that is at least equal to that between the 82 and the 52. And in the same fundamental ways too.

quote:

---

The CDS2 was originally sold with a grey Burndy (ask me how I know) which was not included in your comparison.

---

In the old forum I did that very comparison with the CDS2/gray Burndy. Now however there is not a gray Burndy in sight. I too had replaced the ones on the 52, the Snaxo and the CDS1. For me the CDS1/gray Burndy was a non-competitor which although equal to the CDX/XPS/gray Burndy in some ways (and better in a few others) was far less neutral in tonal balance.

To be entirely fair in comparisons we need to compare the latest CDS2/XPS/black Burndy with CDS1/CDSPS/black Burndy, which is exactly what I did. It may be instructive for you to listen to a current CDS2.

As you own the CDX/CDS1/CDS2 and can compare them at will, then you have a decided advantage over me. But I was only CDS1-free for less than 3 weeks before the S2 was reborn and delivered. And it is doing things that the CDS1 never even hinted at. This weekend I'll try to have one of my friends bring over his CDX so I can redo this comparison.

What it eventually reduces to.. regardless if you are the owner of a CDX/XPS, a CDS1 or a CDS2, you have an exceptional front end compared to almost all other sources, and to criticize would (almost) be churlish. But that is what this forum is here for, and sometimes small differences can make or break a systems integrity.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

[This message was edited by Ron Toolsie on THURSDAY 27 December 2001 at 16:31.]

quote:

---

I agree that the CDS1 is improved by Mana. The CDS2 however is decidedly NOT.

---

should naim provide an upgrade from cds2 to their next reference cdp
wouldn't providing the same from a cds1, be possible ?

CDX alone ...4
CDX/XPS with gray Burndy.... 6
CDS1/CDSPS/gray Burndy.... 6.5
CDS1/CDSPS/black Burndy....7
CDS2/CDSPS/black Burndy.......9
CDS2/XPS/black Burndy.....10

My scale:

CDX alone ...3
CDX/CDPS with grey Burndy.... 4.5
CDX/XPS with black Burndy.... 5.5
CDS2/CDPS/grey Burndy.......7
CDS2/CDPS/black Burndy.......8
CDS2/XPS/black Burndy.....9

Please note that changing the player is far more important than changing the power supply and that changing the Burndy colour is about as important as changing the PS box.

Alex

PS James, MHO is that Mana and CDS2 should be kept apart. With the choices you list I'd go for Ikea.
Star Base is the best support I've heard for a CDS2.

Jun

The CDS2 certainly doesn't get worse with the Mana but to get it working the best with it, I found that replacing the glass with the board gave good results.

WHy is this the case? i.e why does the CDS1 work better with the Mana than the CDS2? I'm not entirely sure but I have some theories.

Firstly it's a question of design, I think the CDS2 is better engineered from a isolation standpoint than the one. I've had a peek a the innards of a CDS2 and it is order of magnitude more complicated than the CDS1. The original CDS1 and CDi (that I owned too)used the Philips chipset that is very microphonic and Naim used a less sophisticated isolation main board isolation technique than in the CDS2. If you look at the innards of the CDS1 the Main Board with the DACS has two rubbery sort of things at each end as decouplers. The CDS2 boards area more sophisticated beast with four boards vertically stacked on tuned coil springs (that's why you must never invert the player unless it is locked down).

I think the transport used in the CDS2 is fundamentally worse than the CDS1 but Naim have cleverly compensated for this but writing and designing the transport software in house which controls it's more erroneous parameters. The CDS2 is more sophisticated than the CDS1 in this regard (this is just a guess from me!).

regards

Dev

ps. I would avoid moving the CDS2 around too much, it is quite a sensitive beast and should treated as one would treat and LP12.

Ahem.

At the risk of being churlish (I thought that word was only allowed to be used by James Joyce or Rex Stout.)

My experience with Mana on a CDS2 is similar to yours. I detect no improvement with Mana, but I also hear no further deficiencies on Mana. I know that there are those on the Mana Forum that say you just need to add more soundstages, but I've tried adding three without any positive result and stopped there. I think the improved suspension on the CDS2 may have a lot to do with this.

You've made me curious though that there may be some differences (other than black Burndy) between my 1998/99 vintage CDS2 and a current spec one. I've seen several posts in the past few months by CDS2 owners comparing it to an LP12 on equal terms. I have found that, while they are both excellent, the LP12 is a clear winner every time. At least with my CDS2 and Naimed LP12.

My experience with the black Burndy is that it made a very significant difference on the CDS1, removing most of the high volume hash. I only demoed one and the difference was immediate and obvious. The differences on the CDS2 were much more subtle; more like the lifting of a diaphanous veil. I couldn't really tell the difference until the cable was broken in and I tried the grey Burndy again to compare.

I agree with you that we are nit picking over small differences between excellent players. FWIW Michael Fremer managed to give a bare CDX a class "A" stereophile rating. The 3.5 and the CDS1 also managed the same rating. Where does that put the CDX/XPS and CDS2? They are both a marked improvement over a bare CDX. I think the rating scales here are too divided. The sound between these players is much closer, especially when compared to $100 Circuit City kit.

In the end my upgrade advice is:

black Burndy = must have (all players)
Mana = should have (CDS1/CDX only)
CDS2 = only if you can afford it, like the sound (hard not to), and if you think it's worth the extra money.

If all this is too expensive Adcom makes a nice $1,000 player (GFM-750 I think.) Sony's old XA7ES is pretty good too. They run about $1,200 used (out of production now) and do the Round Earth thing really well.

Arthur Bye

Why no mention of the Fraim in all of this?

The CDS2 on the Fraim is quite an experience and I suggest should be included in the equation and discussion here.

P

I hear what people are saying about the head upgrade but the cost is not negligible (to say the least!) and the player already sounds enthralling. Surely Naim can repair Jun's CDS1 if necessary for much much less, or is there a problem with replacing the transport (I know the CDM4 isn't made anymore)?

One of the great attractions of Naim gear, indeed some would argue THE major attraction, is that products arent dumped into obsolescence every year and remain servicable for many many years (usually decades). Are Naim suggesting that the only way to repair a CDS1 is to spend a whole stack of cash getting an upgrade to a player that already sounds great. Naim have repaired amps for me in the past for practically peanuts. Doesn't this similarly apply to high-grade items such as the CDS? Surely the initial pecuniary outlay has to be taken into consideration? I for one don't want to be faced with a 2K repair bill when my CDS gives up the ghost. A nice repair job will do just fine so that I can go on enjoying its virtues. It aint a PC you know!

Steve

I agree Ron regarding the merits of the various CD permutations--there is a substantial jump up in musical performance with the CDS2 compared to the CDS1.

The only addition I would suggest to Ron's rating scale is that the CDX/XPS with black Burndy is equivalent in ultimate performance to the CDS1/CDSPS with black Burndy; scoring a 7 on Ron's scale.

I also think the thread illustrates how people can have varying opinions of the same player--it appears as if Ron and Arthur are hearing essentially the same things but place different values on what they hear.

Cheers and happy holidays!

Bo

First of all, congratulations to Ron for his CDS upgrade. I'm very happy with mine and it makes a good compliment to the 01.

As for stands, I made a very interesting comparisson with the CDS 2 on a very solid dense wooden coffee table with and without cones and the Wilson Benesch Triptych, a dedicated source stand that uses nanoengineered carbon fiber composite materials and two layers of glass and ball bearings/cups. The difference was really very remarkable. The rest of my system is 52/250/wilson Benesch ACT 2. A 500 is in the cards in the new year. I listened to some old Cranberries recordings from their first album, I thought it was a good place to start because their songs have an unusual mixture of silky/nuanced/expressive vocals and a powerful rhythmical drive with frequent timing/tempo changes. In short the perfect testing ground for PRAT/Fluidity/Delicacy/Detail.

On the wooden coffee table the CDS 2 sounded fine, very detailed and fluid, rich, silky - all the things people say about it. Yet there was a vagueness of timing emphasis that made the songs less gripping, less interesting, flatter. Yet on the WB stand (A real thing of beauty which, sadly, they don't seem to make any more- a 1965 Maseratti equivalent?) the sound was very different. The beats and subtle breaks in timing were all locked on, the soundstage was bigger and much deeper, the tones equally rich, but the bass so tight it almost made the CDS 2 seem smeared (on the coffee table). It really dug into the music and layed down the law while giving up none of the tonal beauty the CDS 2 is capable of, in fact improving it. Also, the music seemed to gain about 1/2 an octave in the bass. I went back and forth several times on about a ten second fragment of a song and then did the same for other songs at faster or slower tempos, but the results were always the same. The CDS 2 had balls-to the wall clout and timing on the Triptych, and sounded flatter, more smeared, brighter (even a bit agressive in the highs) on the coffee table.

I realize there are many audio solutions to a problem and there is no one correct answer. All I can say is that the CDS 2 appears to be VERY support sensitive and if you have stands that don't seem to change it much from a very solid wood coffee table (not ikea!), you may not be getting the most out of it. I'm saying this because I have often heard on the forum that the CDS 2 is not sensitive to stands and has great tonal accuracy and an analogue sound but doesn't time as well as it could. I would like to have a CDS 1 to try for comparisson.

Dave ‡

The upshot of all of this is that my LP12 (on Mana) and my CDS2 are virtually indistinguishable. I tend to use a few recordings of known fideilty (Art Davis's - A time remembered) and some water lily stuff to occasionally test this. There is absolutely little difference between my excellent sounding LP12 and CDS2, if you do find a difference I would suggest that either the CDS2 or LP12 is not working well as it should.

best regards

Dev

I generally agree with you regarding the CDS2/LP12 comparisons. I've been able to listen to Chris Kosters system and on his system it appears as if the biggest differences are driven more by the software than the player. (And this with an LP12/Aro/different cartridges/Prefix K/Supercap/etc.) I have not heard his entire system Fraimed, but did hear how the CDS2 benefitted from the Fraim--the Fraim was the essential element to the CDS2 equalling the LP12, at least on some recordings.

Cheers,

Bo

quote:

---

The upshot of all of this is that my LP12 (on Mana) and my CDS2 are virtually indistinguishable

---

I hope to check this out soon!

Regards and Happy Christmas,

Alex

I suggest you get your LP12 serviced.

I recently heard a CDS2/52/500/NBL setup and loved the sonics but was not impressed again by the CDS2. I demoed one for two weeks a year back. A Rega P9 on a midline Rega system at the same show was more emotionally expressive. The CDX/XPS, CDS1 and CDS2 are all great players. The CDS2 is the better of the three but still suffers from digititus. A great player but it still doesn't touch the performance of a good TT. My preference is the CDS1 and if the CDS2 and the CDS1 were the same price I would probably still choose the CDS1. I have yet to hear the CDS2 sing.

John

Surely Naim can repair Jun's CDS1 if necessary for much much less, or is there a problem with replacing the transport (I know the CDM4 isn't made anymore)?

AFAIK, Naim stockpiled original CDM4 cds1 trays specifically for fixing broken/worn-out cds1 players. In addition, I believe they recover the trays from cds1 units that are traded in for upgrading to cdsii. (although I believe they hang on to your old cds1 for as long as possible, just in case you change your mind about the cdsii!!!)

I'm not sure about the price of repairs, but my guess is that a new tray and a general service to a cds1 would set you back about £500 if you lived in the UK.

Certainly worth Jun making an enquiry.

Cheers

Don

quote:

---

although I believe they hang on to your old cds1 for as long as possible, just in case you change your mind about the cdsii!!!

---

I doubt it--it probably gets parted out a few weeks down the line. No one I know of has ever gone back to a CDS I from a mk II player updated through us--see Ron Toolsie's post(s) in the other threads.

Dave Dever, NANA

quote:

---

I very recently had my 1995-ish CDS1 rebuilt into a CDS2. Currently I have both the original CDSPS (with black Burndy) and XPS to power it it with.

---

Ron

If You are planning to sell the CDPS please contact me on E-mail.

Regards Tomas

This seems to have solved the problem completely.

Fraser