Hi folks.
Went to see (not hear) a CDS-II/XPS today. The reason I didn't hear it is that it was a flying visit, really to scope out a couple of things (availability, new price and to have a look at the thing) and I have to say that it's a bizarre looking beastie indeed. But then, it's the sound that counts, and if it's half as good as you lot claim then it's well worth checking out!
Anyway, to cut a long story short, I am planning to borrow said CDS-II/XPS and a CDX/XPS at some point in the next month or so (prior to April) and when the new tax year comes I might just indulge... 
A few of questions that perhaps someone could answer:
(1) What is the warranty/guarantee on the CDS-II/XPS (and also the CDX)?
(2) I am concerned about what I am led to believe happened in the case of the CDS, i.e. parts availability problems, leading to repairs requiring a complete update to the player. What are the weaknesses of the CDS-II in terms of build (i.e. what tends to go wrong if anything) and has Naim protected its customers from a similar thing happening to the CDS-II?*
(3) Is there any performance constraint on how close the XPS can be located to (a) the CDS-II and (b) other sensitive equipment, e.g. preamps? I would probably site the XPS above the CDS-II (on the lower tier of a wallshelf) and have the CDS-II sitting on the top of my 3-tier rack (below the shelf)
(4) Has anyone tried the CDS-II with the better Nordost interconnects, specifically SPM Reference? This is what I use and I am keen to get feedback on whether it's a synergistic mix or whether (like the Chord Anthem that I heard on Monday/Tuesday) it perhaps might not be the best thing to use? This is a v. important consideration.
(5) If I buy a CDS-II, do I get the connecting lead for attaching it to the XPS? What about a standard DIN:DIN interconnect - is this included too?
(6) Have any revisions occured to the CDS-II since launch that might make a new model (i.e. 2002) more desirable than an earlier model?
That'll do for now. Gotta do this right, as I am assured by my dealer that prices will rise by a few percent in April, which in the scheme of a six grand CD player is quite a lot of beer money!
Of course, if I can find a s/h CDX, or CDX/XPS, then I'll jump at that, so if anyone wants one I will pay a good rate for a decent one - contact me privately if you are looking to move up the ladder or across to another brand! This would, of course, enable me to phase my upgrade as the rest of you do...
Yours, bewildered by the magnitude of spending that amount on a CD player,
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 12 March 2002 by Alex S.
My 'mild critique' is in absolute not realtive terms. I was being offered that preamp for 800 quid if memory serves. I was comparing it to the DV L100 offered at £1350 and a choice of my 32.5 or 82/Supercap. As such it offered the best VFM, especially considering DNM's generous upgrade policy. Had I been my normal skint self I would have bitten Martin's hand off for the s/h DNM/ex-dem Crimsons offered for a total cost of not very much. Luckily, I had an 82/Supercap/250 to dispose of so I could buy DVL100/HX1.2 with the proceeds (and pocket the difference of £650).
The DNM philosophy of 'open window' but fast preamps and low powered power amps (with sensitive speakers) is exactly the route I would probably take if I were starting over. The thing is I'd go the whole hog and move away from solid state to valves - which brings me back to the Canaries and the Living Voice OBX. In the meantime, I'm very happy with my room-filling, unforced, musical, multi-talented (but not perfect of course) CDS2/DV/O'Heocha combination.
A worry is that I may soon be tempted to try out some expensive Nordost (or Kimber) cabling to see if it works equally well in my system.
Alex
Posted on: 12 March 2002 by Alex S.
I am not trying to pick an argument with you but I disagree completely with your thesis. Furthermore AFAIK its based on 20 minutes in a hotel bedroom.
In said bedroom it was also concluded, by Andrew I think, that a CDS2 was now the limiting factor in a top of the range Naim system.
So that's two opposite arguments, formed on the basis of very scant evidence, each of which I dispute, but not strongly since I was not in a position to judge either.
Alex
wondering if any of the above makes any sense
Posted on: 12 March 2002 by Mick P
Alex
No I do not think you are argumentative.
Point one, the test was conducted in the 10th floor stateroom of the Marriot which is used for business presentations. I know this because I have been wined and dined there in that very room several times. Business meetings etc. It is a fairly large room but the Naim system coped well with it.
Point two
Naim played the CDS2 into a 52/500 system and then played the same music at the same volume with the 552 for comparison purposes.
My wife, who incidentially could not give a tinkers cuss what Hifi I use, remarked on how good the 52 was and expressed astonishment at how much better the 552 was. It was just as good an improvement as the 52 is over the 82.
The CDS2 NEEDS the best amplification to prove what it is capable of.
The 82 is barely tolerable for a CDS11, the 52 is damm good and the 552 is pure magic.
This was also the majority view of those who took the trouble to attend the show.
Take my word for it, it is too good for a 82. As I previously stated, if you go up to a CDS11, you also need to go up in the pre and power amp stakes.
Regards
Mick
Posted on: 12 March 2002 by Martin Payne
(Copied from the other - hijacked - thread).
quote:
CDS-II/XPS is very good but my overall impression at the end of my week with the player was that I fell it is voiced with a different character than the CDX. It's much bigger sounding, sure, but I'm not entirely sold on it either. Perhaps as others have said it's a warm-up thing, but the 'size' of the notes (i.e. fat) was a real departure from the relative 'normal' sized notes of the CDX - in the context of my system.
TC,
one possibility for you is CDX + XPS. This is very much a balls-out CDX - twice the price, but more than twice the player. Better value than the bare player.
I've recently been trying to find the postings that I made when I first heard the CDSII in JN's system, and then my own.
For me, there was a burn-in (i.e. not warm up) issue with JN's brand-new CDS-II over the first three or four weeks. It had a less tight/punchy bass than his CDX/XPS over the whole of this period. My own went through something of a similar phase. I guess this is not your problem, though, as the player is thoroughly run-in.
For myself, I have been struggling with this 'fat' (and slightly dulled) sound for a long time in my system. To an extent, this was with both the CDX & the CDSII. I have been through many changes in my system over the last couple of years, including blowing a lot of money on stands. These helped by bringing out a huge amount of music, but the basic character still remained. I was convinced that it was a room problem, especially after replacing Isobariks with DBLs didn't resolve it.
A couple of weeks ago I tried a fraim-style glass-and-three-ball-nutters arrangement under my player. The basic character of my system has changed quite dramatically, and I now believe that this player is remarkeably sensitive to what it sits on.
I'm not suggesting that my particular arrangement would work for you, but it might explain what you experienced.
If you are still considering the player, I would suggest that you take your rack to the shop and get them to demo the CDSII on it against fraim. Five minutes will tell you whether it resolves the issue.
Steven said:-
quote:
The CDS2 just sounds so much more natural, and issues of PR&T and tune just suddenly seem like hi-fi artifacts.
This is a very good summary.
cheers, Martin
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
You mention Fraim. Sorry, not an option at this point in time.
I thought a bit more about the CDS-II/XPS thing last night, and had some more thoughts on preamps and whether there could be any truth in the 'buy a 52' argument.
Firstly, let's get this straight: I will not be buying a 52 or a 552. I am heading down an alternative path to the Naim amp one (by choice) and the only preamp upgrade in my forseeable future will be the new 3D-range of DNM preamps - either the Twin or Six, depending on funds and priorities at the time. This is because (to my ear) a DNM preamp does things in a different way (and to my preferences a far more musically valid way) than a Naim, with the caveat that I've not heard a 52 or 552 before.
Secondly, if Mick is to be believed then the source-first philosophy is a lie. If the source first philosophy is true then Mick must be talking nonsense. To my mind, the analogy with camera lenses is very apt. With the 'scene' being the source and the 'lens' being the preamp, consider thus:
A cheap camera lens, whilst not as good or as sharp as a Zeiss or Leitz lens, will still let the essence of the 'scene' through. Anyone will be able to tell the quality of the view regardless of whether the lens is a Uranus F/2 or a Cheepo F/5.6. It's what the photo IS that counts. Sure, better lens, same scene, almost certainly better picture. Also, conversely, perhaps the better lens will reveal aspects of the scene masked by the cheaper one, which may in itself detract from the image, which is why in some ways a better preamp on a weaker source is a BAD thing.
Migrating this across, even the most basic preamp will let the essence of a musical 'image' through, even if the finest detail may be lost.
So, Mick's argument is nonsense.
Few would argue that a CDS-II/XPS is the last word in musical reproduction - it is a mighty fine CD player, but I really doubt it could beat a top turntable musically. It certainly couldn't hold a candle to mine, and I think the same would be true of my old LP12. The differences between the vinyl and CDS-II sources is clearly audible, undeniable and irrefutable when heard through my current preamp, and I'm sure you'd hear it through something as lowly as a Nait-2 - TonyL, this is your cue 
- so ultimately the source-first maxim must hold.
Comments, gentlemen?
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Alex S.
Mick,
Let's agree to disagree then, but I think TC has chosen a different path preamp-wise. All I would say is that I have never heard a 52 sounding that bad and that I didn't know the music being played, apart from the Dido which was just disected.
TC,
The fact that you are using 2 sources means you can argue it both ways. A good vinyl set-up will always outperform a CD one. This means you can do one of two things: buy a cheaper CDP and accept that it is a secondary source or, buy a CDS2 and reach some level of satisfacion with the CD source relative to vinyl. I fear that a CDX may leave you stuck in the middle, but that's your call.
Also, I think Martin's right about a little experimentation with regard to CDS2 support. I know you're happy with QS ref but I have noted that certain equipment prefers certain supports, a blanket approach is a compromise, and a good one, but finding the optimum supports for sources must be worthwhile (if looks are not too important).
Alex
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
Hi Derek...
Here's the rub: nobody's talking about duff back-ends (matron!). Whether or not an 82/SC, 52, my DNM, etc. is to your preference or not is one thing, but they are all superb preamps relative to 'the norm'.
So, let's not kid ourselves that this 'backbone' argument is the issue here. There's something else at play and it's not a weakness in the amps (otherwise the turntable wouldn't sound any better - and believe me it does) - so it must be a setup thing.
So, the CDS-II/XPS has been away for nearly a week now, so it's a bit late to try, but here's the things I did:
* let warm up (a week, maybe not enough?)
* POST - came back with no errors
* ensure CDS-II/XPS are as far away from each other as possible.
* CDS-II's shelf was bang on level, even tension on each spike.
* old puck replaced with new puck
* care with cabling taken, alternative interconnect tried which improved things a bit
Which doesn't leave a lot. Don't be mistaken, it did sound good. It just didn't blow me away as much as it ought to have done at the price.
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Mick P
Mr TC
My point is basically simple.
I was very content witn my previous set up consisting of
CDX+XPS/82+SUPERCAP/250
This seemed to me to be a perfect balance, where every component brought out the best in the others.
I then replaced CDX with a CDS11 and it was obvious that good as it was, it needed a 52 to bring out the best. The same would apply in reverse.
The simple truth is that the CDS11 and 52 need each other to get the best overall sound.
I suggest the same applies to the 552 and 500.
Regards
Mick
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
You've changed your tune, somewhat. You were implying that the reason that the CDS-II/XPS didn't completely blow me away was because of some flaw in the remainder of my system- either preamp, power amps, wires or speakers.
Now you say "to get the best". Well, of course, I agree with that (even though I'd still choose a DNM Six preamp over any Naim preamp, as it suits my preferences better) as to get the BEST out of a thing, you have to ensure that everything is spot-on.
However, that wasn't the issue.
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
So, when are you getting me a PA3^S?
It's a route I've wondered about many times before - after all, trading in my monoblocks, upgrading the DNM to 3D Six and getting a PA3^S would push my vinyl playback into the stratosphere, way beyond imagination. But then I'd have no money to buy a decent cd player.
Do you know if a PA3^S could happily drive my Neats?
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
...with the idea that a great percentage of the bread-earning populus could afford a 52 or whatever, but the argument I put up was that such a purchase would not be necessary to hear the benefits of a superior source, such as the CDS-II/XPS, over a bare CDX.
My own experience suggests that there was some kind of issue needing addressed, either with the setup of the CDS-II/XPS, or a warm-up requirement, which accounted for the mild dissappointment. Mick tried to use the old 'but you need an XX to benefit from a CDS-II/XPS' argument, which is (to use fishmonger terminology) a load of cods.
Therefore, the jury is still out re: the CDS-II/XPS in the context of my system, which I know is more than capable of resolving more than enough detail to discriminate between lesser- and greater- sources.
At the moment, my dealer has suggested I try for some context by loaning me the original Simaudio Moon Eclipse CD player, but this time with the necessary leads and feet. I have to say that (after 1 hour playing) it has reversed my opinion of it by surpassing the CDX in all departments, but then so it bloody well should given its price peg of £5K. Whether it sounds better than the CDS-II/XPS is going to remain a mystery until I get to the bottom of the reasons why it didn't blow me away. That is my real dilemma.
I have to say, though, that I'm intrigued by the similarities between CDS-II and the Moon - both use leaf-sprung internal suspension, offboard regulated multi-channel PSUs, top-loaders using magnetic pucks, minimal signal paths and so on. I know the Moon DAC is newer, being a true 24bit/96KHz DAC, so theoretically the two players should be comparable sonically, which is part of the reason I wanted to hear the Moon again.
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Mick P
Mr TC
I may talk cods in your opinion but at least I am following my own advice and enjoying my system like never before.
You need to stop debating and start buying.
Buy the CDS2 complete with 52 etc.
If you have other financial priorities, fair enough, but you still have to admit that a CDS2/552/500 will beat anything most of us have heard.
If that is cods, I am happy to remain a fishmonger.
Regards
Mick
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
quote:
I'd be interested to hear it again properly set-up 'cause it would have to be an awful lot better than last time to even remotely come close to being worth its price tag!
I quite agree with you. I suspect that those feet make a bigger difference than one would think. It's definitely doing things it didn't do before, although whether it's worth the cash is quite another matter indeed. I'll keep you posted, but I have this machine on loan for a week, so as to let it warm up (they thoughtfully included a manual this time, which comes with a big warning saying "This product may take several days to warm up and deliver optimal performance" or something like that, so it may well be in a CDS-II/XPS kind of 'give me a while' category.
At least there will be no excuses should it fail to make the grade this time, as I've got it setup almost by the book (apart from the PSU which has to sit on the floor due to lack of shelving, but I'm sure that won't affect it too much)...
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
APpreciate what you're saying re: Valhalla, but I'd hardly suggest that the Red Dawn DIN:DIN I borrowed, or even the stock cable, would restrict things by the degree we're talking about. In any case, I use SPM throughout the rest of the system, and it's hardly holding things back - if anything, it's often a bit too truthful!
Valhalla is one of those things, like crack cocaine, which one apparently should never try lest you want to commit 110%... so I'm avoiding. In any case, it can't be DIN terminated, and whatever CD player I end up going for, I'd still need DIN termination at the preamp end...
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 13 March 2002 by Top Cat
Hi folks.
Yeah, the Moon Eclipse is a strange player in that it has both digital inputs and outputs at the back, not to mention the usual array of analogue connections.
As it turns out, yeah, you're right about the lead. If required, a jumper lead takes the digital output and feeds it straight back into the digital input, which is then converted into a 24/96KHz or something like that. Therefore, there are two circuit topologies one can choose from - standard 16 bit and the fancy one. When I had the player before, I was missing the feet and this cable, so I can only assume I was listening in 'standard' mode, which might explain why I was relatively unimpressed at the time.
So, next task is to find a suitable digital lead - it's a TOS link or something; I guess it's not a standard item included with the player, maybe the dealer can help.
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
