Itchy Scratchy CDX

Have no recs for you just wanted a bit of comerardery in my (6) hours of need.

snigger.

quote:

---

I know, I know.. get a CDX I hear you all chorus, and sure it is a fine machine.. BUT.. surely there must be some alternatives????

---

I heard the Densen a month or so ago and it sounded very nice to me. I haven't heard a CDX but my dealer says the B400XS v CDX to be "very interesting".

I think both players cost roughly the same.

I have heard B400 v Naim CD5 and prefered the Naim. However, the B400XS is much better than the standard B400. Also the B400 can be upgraded to 'XS.

Steve B
Merry Christmas to all.

Better still, I'd wait until Chord release their CDP next Summer (with the DAC inside it) and dem it aginst a CDX.

Also, I'd want to know the rest of your system and how much you want to spend ultimately. Would a CDX be a stopping off point towards CDX/XPS -> CDS2? MHO is that a bare CDX purchase more or less forces you down that road but others disagree and see no shortcomings in the stand alone player.

Alex

Merry christmas!
Jun

You have a CD3.5

Try adding a Hicap to it, it makes a lot of difference. £800 new or £400 s/h.

I have a CD3.5+hicap in my dining room and it sounds great.

Regards

Mick

However, I felt that ultimately, the CDX would be better in the long term, as it can be upgraded with an XPS, and ultimately swapped to a CDS2.

The jump from a B400XS to a CDS2/XPS would be a painful one.

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

And no, I have other stuff to spend money on apart from hifi so a cds is probably not going to happen..

Rest of stuff is Flatcap on 3.5> 92r> 180> PMC floorstanders. The speakers are still newish & not totally run in but are getting there. They are a major change after 5 years living with a pair of Royd Minstrels!

Would be nice to add a Hicap to the pre and upgrade the cd but can't do both. Which bang per buck upgrade would you suggest?

Oh, and Mick.... what makes you think its not my real name?
If you have a 3.5> Hicap in the dining room what the hell you use in the lounge? CDS I would guess.

Any and all recommendations on the way ahead are welcome

Cheers guys

Cheers tho'

quote:

---

So Alex..

You're obviously not a fan of a standalone CDX?

---

Alex really doesn't like the CDX!

His view puzzles me a lot, as the things he does not like about it I have thankfully never heard a CDX do! Alex criticises it for being bright, hard, relentless, all traits I have thankfully yet to hear. In my experience the CDX does not do anything badly, ok its no CDS2, but it is one of a very small handful of players that as a die-hard analogue fan I can enjoy without reservation. As for its presentation, the word is solid, it is not warm, not bright, definitely no digital tizzyness, just big and solid with everything lined up in time the way no cheaper CD player I have heard can remotely achieve. It is IMHO is a completely different league to a CD3.5 / Hicap.

I read with interest Alex's recommendation for a Chord product, I fully admit I have not heard the DAC in question, but if Chord have managed to produce a product that plays music, it is definitely their first. Chord sound big, syrupy and stodgy, very US high end. I have gone to great effort to audition Chord stuff in the past, and IMHO it blows chunks. I notice the big Chord amps are full of blue lights now, just like a riced up Toyota, though I doubt any amount of go-faster stripes etc will get them to groove.

quote:

---

Rest of stuff is Flatcap on 3.5> 92r> 180> PMC floorstanders. The speakers are still newish & not totally run in but are getting there. They are a major change after 5 years living with a pair of Royd Minstrels!

---

What I would do is perhaps quite radical - I would dump everything bar the speakers and redistribute the funds as CDX, 102, 140. If you could afford to do it all and keep the 180 even better The 92r is nowt special, definitely not up to being sat in front of a 180. I would get a 102 before a Hicap. In my opinion there is not a lot of difference between the 140 and 180, I can even see some preferring the 140 as it sounds a little warmer, but the difference second hand is about 400 quid, and that’s money that can be redirected upstream where it makes far more difference. A CDX, 102, 140 driving a good pair of speakers is a great system, and ripe for adding a XPS and NAPSC to at the earliest opportunity, and that would be a great stopping point.

Tony.

In the context of my system you would probably go 102 next, correct? Shortly followed by CDX? Is the 92 that shabby...? I could sell everything except the FB1's & 180 and do as you suggest BUT Naim second hand is not easy to get in NZ and buying new is not really an option as long as I have this frigging mortgage!

I guess what I'm really asking is this....
If I can do ONE THING to my set-up to make it much more musically convincing what should that thing be?

Bang per buck as I said...

Cheers

No I am not a fan of a stand alone CDX and I refuse to bow to the pressure to admit that my dislike was the result of the player being either faulty or badly setup.

Tony quotes me for describing it as 'bright, hard, relentless', indeed, these are adjectives I would use, together with 'musical, involving, exciting'.
I work from a premise of liking all Naim products, some more than others, so these adjectives are used to describe relative qualities rather than absolutes.

Part of my problem with a stand alone CDX is to do with cost and expectation levels. I had no problem with my CD3 which is a lot worse but cost less than half. I expected a bigger improvement for my money. I also felt rather disappointed that IMHO it took another expensive purchase of an XPS to get the player to dipense with the negatives and accentuate the positives. Fortunately, redeye, the CDPS is a cost-effective upgrade and with a black Burndy will get you about 80% of the way to an XPS. I lived with a CDX for 3 months before I felt obliged to add a PSU, whilst I lived with the CD3 for 6 years.

Perhaps the CDX or CDX/XPS is the best CDP at 2.5K or 4.5K but if spending that sort of money I think it would be foolish not to audition alternatives. Actually, I'm not a fan of CD period and find a CDS2 the only really satisfying alternative to vinyl that I've heard.

The Chord DAC is much admired when paired with players such as the Rega Jupiter. Try it and see. Most Chord amps I've heard have been as Tony describes but not all. I've heard some mid-range Chords sound very good. Again set-up seems vital, as is cabling and support.

With regard to Tony's zealous pursuit of source first and flat earth, I only half agree. Source first is safe, musical and usually provides the most rewarding upgrade path for the money spent, but, and for me this is a big but, the sacrifices you make include unfashionable virtues such scale, volume, depth of field and the tingle factor you can get from real punch and authority at high volume, oh, and bass.

Redeye, probably none of this helps. Trust your own ears and decide what's best for you.

Alex

quote:

---

In the context of my system you would probably go 102 next, correct? Shortly followed by CDX? Is the 92 that shabby...? I could sell everything except the FB1's & 180 and do as you suggest BUT Naim second hand is not easy to get in NZ and buying new is not really an option as long as I have this frigging mortgage!

---

I fully understand the mortgage element, its one reason why my system is so small! My bet is that the CD3.5 needs to go prior to the 92, but by buying a 180 you have dug a sufficient upgrade hole for yourself that the 92 does need to go later. Another option is to try and find a old CDI or CD2, both are IMHO much superior to the 3.5 but are also much cheaper than a CDX, may mean enough budget left for that 102.

It might be worth your while dropping Rico a email, he has good NZ audio contacts and might be aware of some second hand kit knocking around. There is possibly also the option of getting second hand UK kit shipped out.

Alex:

quote:

---

Part of my problem with a stand alone CDX is to do with cost and expectation levels. I had no problem with my CD3 which is a lot worse but cost less than half. I expected a bigger improvement for my money.

---

I am sure this is the root of our differing opinions. Its all about perceived value. To my ears the 3.5 simply does not cut it, ok, it may be the best player at 1k or whatever, but to my mind it is still below the level that would prevent me just pressing stop it and putting a record on. The CDX is the cheapest player that I have heard that does not instinctively make me reach for the vinyl. Don't get me wrong, I still prefer vinyl, but the CDX is honestly good enough to forget and enjoy music through. The bizarre thing is that what irritates me the most with the 3.5 is the round earth aspects (and I bet that ain't what anyone expected me to say!), it just sounds to flat and grainy for me. It plays music pretty well, but I need more refinement, and the CDX brings this in large amounts. The CDX has depth, solidity, and real weight.

The bottom line is that yes the CDX is bloody expensive (it is the most expensive item I own), and I would balk at paying that amount new, but it works. The CD3.5 at 1000 quid is IMHO dearer because for me it doesn't work, so if it doesn't work I may as well buy a second hand Rotel for 100 quid and pocket the change!

quote:

---

With regard to Tony's zealous pursuit of source first and flat earth, I only half agree. Source first is safe, musical and usually provides the most rewarding upgrade path for the money spent, but, and for me this is a big but, the sacrifices you make include unfashionable virtues such scale, volume, depth of field and the tingle factor you can get from real punch and authority at high volume, oh, and bass.

---

Again its all down to value. Within my budget I had two choices, to put together a system that really plays music with the best of em, but has some serious compromises in frequency response and scale, or to get a far bigger sound with a fraction of the finesse. I chose the former route, though admit I am lucky in not being a volume freak at all. I wish my system had a bit more low end heft, but I honestly would not trade the musical subtlety, openness, or clarity it currently has to get it.

Tony.

Hmmm, Xmas day - triple time plus an extra hundred quid...

Triple time plus one hundred quid......buy an XPS you tight fisted ***

Regards

Mick...preparing for the invasion of the grandchildren

The high volume comment certainly rings bells. I've never been convinced about the control of the 3.5 when wound. Happily the PMC's excell at volume but are crying out for more quality going in. They're such a neutral speaker that they really let you know whats upstream (good & bad).

I will see if I can scare up the combo of Rega/Chord for a listen but don't fancy my chances much. Don't think Chord are here either.
The weather may be better but the choices can be limited in some areas.

Incidentally, your new boxes are one radical looking piece of kit....
Hope they Rock 4 ya

Tony,

quote:

---

Within my budget I had two choices, to put together a system that really plays music with the best of em, but has some serious compromises in frequency response and scale, or to get a far bigger sound with a fraction of the finesse. I chose the former route

---

Redeye, I'm not just annoying Tony and do usually believe in source first, but, working from where you are now, you already have the PMCs, FB1s I presume and the Naims you list, since you're in NZ, I would urge you to listen to a Dynavector HX75 power amp. This I would audition with CD3.5/Hi-Cap/92, could be interesting. Set that against CDX/92/180 and see what you get.

Alex

Appreciate all the well meaning responses but I'm still none the wiser as to which box should get biffed first. Maybe I should do as Tony suggested and sell the 3.5>FC>92 then bite firmly on the bullet and get a (hopefully) 2nd hand CDX>102.

Or maybe just getta huge pile o'Mana and some NAD kit??
Piggie would be so proud..

Option 1 could be biffing the 92 - the bottleneck in your system - for a 102 or 82. Looking to up the ante on the CD3.5/FC next.

Option 2 is biff the CD3.5/FC and get a real CD player - ahemm a CDX. Then do the pre.

OR you could leave your destiny to Mr M and see what lands second hand, in the meantime you can save for that M*** you're dying to try

Me - I've just moved my speakers out from the wall another 5cms and increased the value of my system by $1k. You could try that in the meantime?

Jay

Understandably

quote:

---

Originally posted by redeye:
Appreciate all the well meaning responses but I'm still none the wiser as to which box should get biffed first.

---

If you're buying second hand in a scarce environment, maybe you need to buy whatever comes up first?

cheers, Martin

quote:

---

I wouldn't get the bleedin'Mana in the front door Jay.
She'd take one look at it and barf
Understandably

---

Just say you made it in metal class in the 2nd form. She'll understand

Jay

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

Without the addition of an XPS which blew the 508 away I would have been torn between these two.

I never seem to here Meridian mentioned on this forum, I think they have a very different design philosophy to Naim.

Bruce

There's one in the Hi-fi World net classifieds, but you'd probably have to buy the CDS to go with it, not a bad idea BTW. There's also an XPS at £1300.

Stick it in the wants list of Loot and see what happens.

Ask Naim's big dealers to look out for you. They are not that rare. Most people upgrade to an XPS when they convert CDS1 to CDS2.

Also, look at Jun's CDS Thread and maybe badger some American friends who seem to be hoarding them.

Alex

[This message was edited by Alex S. on THURSDAY 27 December 2001 at 10:01.]

Jack ourselves directly into the mains.

Seem to remember reading an otherwise glowing review in S'phile a few years ago which said much the same as above.

When pushed can lose it just a bit. May just be down to the light-weight 3 series construction. Anyone ever noticed that if your 3.5 is on top of the rack and ends up with 20 or 30 cds>cases piled on top of it the thing tends to sound more controlled for the added weight on the case?

No, seriously...??