The New CDS-II agenda...
Posted by: Top Cat on 22 March 2002
As you may or may not know, I've been looking to get a new CD player for some time now, and have tried a home demo of a CDS-II with XPS power supply. Whilst it had some great characteristics going for it, ultimately it left me feeling 'is that it?' and I was a bit underwhelmed.
Now, the agenda has changed. Whilst I've listened to other cd players, I'm still holding out for this 'magic' that the CDS-II/XPS is reported to deliver. I have come to the conclusion that a number of possible explanations for my underwhelmement (is that a word?), some more plausible than others.
(1) Could the CDS-II/XPS be overrated in a big way? Unlikely, why would people spend that sort of money if it didn't do what its legendary status would suggest? I can't see this being the case, as most people are unanimous in their feelings on this player.
(2) CD as a format will never reach the lofty heights of a great record deck playing a good pressing of vinyl. Quite possible - the CDS-II/XPS I listened to fell quite some way short of my TT and what I recall of a full-monty LP12.
(3) My system is so crap as to be unable to discriminate the finer qualities of the CDS-II/XPS and therefore I'm listening through a 'dirty window'. I feel this is extremely unlikely, as the system sounded fantastic with the CDX and is ridiculously good with vinyl - sure, the preamp falls a little short of a 52 - it's approximately in the same class as an 82/SC - and the amps, wires and speakers are all in a similar league.
(4) Perhaps the CDS-II/XPS I borrowed from my dealer was not performing optimally? Maybe I didn't give it long enough to impress (it had a week on almost constantly, so that idea seems less likely) or perhaps there was something fundamentally broken with that particular player - perhaps it needed a service, or had been dropped or transported without the screws in place? - this would certainly explain my ultimate disappointment in it.
(5) Could the voicing of the CDS-II/XPS be somewhat different to that of the CDX and (for better or worse) perhaps I don't like it. I'd be surprised, as I like the sound of the CDX so much, and the 'Naim sound' is fairly consistent IMHO.
So, I'm at another crossroads. I am back to my stand-in secondary source, a cd recorder which whilst great for its price, is so ridiculously outclassed by my turntable it's difficult to comprehend.
What I'm wondering is: where can I hear ANOTHER CDS-II/XPS, perhaps one that is warmed up fully, known to be in perfect order and maybe in the context of a similarly spec'd system? Is anyone in my area able to help?
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
On the subject of differences between cd players - sure, I heard them easily - it was more a matter of the CDS-II/XPS disappointing, in the light of my expectations after the CDX.
I've come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, it wasn't for me...
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
quote:
Did you dem on a 100% Naim system ?Using a CDS11 and someone elses amps is mongrelising and Naim does not mongrelise well.
My answer to this is no, I did not since I do not find Naim amps offer me the sound I desire. I have extensively demo'd up to the 82/SC/250 as possible routes for my main system, but none of these (at times vastly more expensive) combinations have come close to the sound I get with my DNM preamp:Crimson 640D power amps.
As I said before, perhaps you are blinded by the price, Mick, and you listen with your wallet, but I use my ears and whilst I enjoy Naim, it is not my first choice (although I use a Nait-2 in the second system and am happy with it). I would be very happy with an 82/SC/250 system had I not heard DNM, however.
My system is probably a mongrel system - as are so many others. I selected every component I own on the basis of comparative and musical audition. Sure, I haven't heard a 52 (Mick, I can almost hear your response coming at me already 
) but then if I had the cash to spend on a new preamp, I am sure a DNM 3D Six (when available) will offer me a sound more commensurate with what I am looking for, and probably at a 552 level for half the price.
I'm not knocking Naim amps - they are a superb product for many, and I appreciate and enjoy much of the sound when I hear it - but my experiences and preferences, and a number of careful and considered auditions have shown me that it is not the only viable choice at the price and to my ears not the right one.
After all, you don't think I'd buy a plastic preamp with two volume controls and no remote for that amount of money if it didn't blow everything else away at its price and above?
I may be mad but I ain't stupid.
So, if a CDS-II requires Naim amps to do its best, then it must be removed from the list as a suboptimal product for my musical goals.
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
quote:
Interesting points you have made. What intrigues me the most is the above and why you feel that Naim amps are not able to deliver it. Specifically, what is it that the DNM amps do for you?
First off, much of my own decision was formed by comparisons at set price-points. In other words, I didn't bother auditioning a 52 as it was outside what I was prepared to pay. In fact, comparing the DNM to the 82/SC was also unfair, as the Naim combo was much more expensive, but it was convenient to hear and therefore I heard it.
For me, much of the difference lies in the way that the music is presented to me. Naim has a very solid, steady and bold sound. It's exciting, but to my mind there was always something 'not quite my cup of tea' but I couldn't put my finger on it. Hearing DNM was a chance encounter - I had previously almost laughed at the dealer when he told me how much it cost - I mean, aesthetically it wins no prizes, and its material value seems low. For that reason I was reluctant to even consider it, but for the dealer insisting that I suspend prejudice and give it a chance.
What the DNM revealed to me was an insight into the layers that make up music. The musical whole, the message if you will, is as prominent as with the 82/SC, perhaps more so. However, unlike the Naim, I felt that the DNM didn't present a portrayal of solid sound, but a musical texture and tactile nature that Naim just didn't really give me. To date, I've not heard it from Naim - not a criticism, as there are things Naim does that I prefer to my DNM amp (and vice versa), but a comparative difference.
DNM brings me into the music, casting notes with both precision (it is every bit as fast as anything I've ever heard, although it doesn't sound 'accelerated' like a Nait-2), integrity and texture. Drums sound like drums, without the compressed sound that I've heard in other amps (e.g. with my Nait and my older Arcam). I own two drumkits, have played for over half my life and know exactly how drums sound. I can cite the DNM as more realistic in its portrayal of note shape and 'finish' (i.e. decay and timbre) than any other amp I have yet heard - remember, perhaps the 52 adds this but the 82/SC certainly doesn't square up to my ears.
What the DNM doesn't do is present artifice - it is a far more honest sound, and a bit disconcerting. It is a sound that, whilst everyone will appreciate it, not everyone will take to. It's like the first time you try a malt whisky. You might not like it, but it is a taste which is unique, and one which cannot be denied or devalued.
Naim presents to my ear a complete musical package, but one which reminds me of oil paintings - bold, brash, colourful and vibrant. DNM is more like a watercolour - concentrating on the quality of the light and the interplay of colour. I paint with oil, but not watercolours. I listen to DNM in preference to Naim.
It's a difficult thing to get across, because both systems are at the top of their respective trees. The problem with both is that setup is imperative, and bad setup (as I've heard with either system) can lead to false conclusions.
quote:
I rate DNM amps highly myself but, in my experience, found them to be less involving and exciting than equivalently priced Naim combos - they didn't 'boogie' the same.
Exactly the opposite of my findings. The similarly priced combo would have been 112/150 or something like that, and it was utterly outclassed in most ways. Boogiewise, I've never heard anything further up the Naim ladder to touch the DNM. However, the Nait-2, by omitting some of the refinement of the 82/SC (say), emphasises the boogie and so I'd argue that the Nait-2 is (pound for pound) the biggest boogier around...
Of course, all these comparisons are fairly moot unless we take into account cabling (DNM responds exceptionally well to a decent bit of wire, Naim seems relatively unfussed), supports (non-ferrous for DNM, of course, and Mana or Fraim for Naim), speakers, and so many other things that we could argue about this all day and all night.
The thing to really keep in mind is that, had a Naim offered me a more boogiesome package at the same price (or even up to £1000 more), I'd have bitten the salesman's arm off, as Naim for me would have been easier to accommodate (in my Mana rack which I had at the time), better looking, easier to live with (no dual volume pots and plastic construction) and I'd have been able to wear my "flossy" T-shirt with pride!
Of course, this was not to be. As I said, the ears win over the wallet most of the time. This was one occasion where the wallet agreed.
Would I move to Naim? Perhaps, if a 52 lived up to the hype in the way that the CDS-II didn't (for me), although the 3D Six will surely increase what I believe the performance gulf between the DNM preamps and the Naim ones to be. In my opinion.
What are we arguing about anyway, they're all great for music. Pity the poor buggers who went the MF route.... 
quote:
It'd be good to know your thoughts on this matter.
Of course. If we all agreed it would be a boring place to be...
TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."