I must be deaf (home vs dealer audition)

Anyway, I was auditioning CD players at my local dealer on the day and tested various incarnations of Linn, Meridian, Musical Fidelity and Marantz through a MF A308CR and B&W 804s.

At the end, I settled for the Meridian 507, simply because it was far more musical than the others. The differences with the other gear was basically night & day!

So, I take the beast home on loan and A/B compare it with my Arcam Alpha 9, and the differences were so small I couldn't justify parting with my Arcam.

The 507 had a SLIGHT edge in bass weight, drive and timing. The 9CD came out better in spatial resolution and detail. But nothing that would make part with the 9CD. And in isolation, I'm hardly going to notice it.

Is there something wrong here? Is the Alpha 9CD basically still a competitive player? Are there limitations to my ancillary gear? Or do I need to spend double that of the Meridian to really notice much of a difference?

 

The Alpha 9 is regarded by many as a bit of a classic. It uses a simplified version of DCS' fabled RingDAC, for one. I own the 507 and know it's fantastic, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Arcam performed similarly.

Dunc

 

Technobear is going to love this one


Yes, the Alpha9 is a good player, but I would expect the meridian to be better (although differences between CD players are not alwasys huge). What is the rest of your system? maybe the rest of the system is not allowing the meridian to shine.

Cheers, Robbo

 

The rest of my system is in my signature below.

When I put in Audusa Eupens on my CDP and Bullets on my i/cs, the Alpha 9CD responded pretty well.

The first auditions were with the Meridian 507 with unbulleted i/cs and normal IECs vs the Alpha 9 with the works (cone isolation, power cables, bullets).

When I put the bulleted ICs, and Audusa IECs and cone isolation on the Meridian, there wasn't any difference than if it were there.

So maybe it's b/c the Alpha 9 just responded pretty well to the tweaks, but had no effect on the Meridian.

I'm going to take home an Arcam FMJ33 to see how that goes.

 

:ffrc:

Interesting thread as the Meridian gear would definitely be on the radar if I were looking to replace the Alpha 9.

Firstly, yes the Alpha 9 is streets ahead of most of the competition. No question. It is musical and detailed but without the in-your-face harshness that afflicts so many others.

Interesting about the tweaks. Yes, the Alpha 9 is not the best built player in terms of solid casework and isolation. (The CD23 is a better bet as it's basically the same player in a much better case).
The Alpha 9 therefore responds well to tweaks that address the weaknesses of the casework. I have added vibration damping mat all over the inside of the casework and mine now sits on a Townsend Siesmic Sink. It also appreciates the Eupen power cable. Given all these extras, the Alpha 9 punches well above its weight (but then to my ears it always did).

The Meridian is a different beast in this respect. It is very well built to begin with so the gains to be had by adding isolation will be smaller. I don't know about the efficacy of its power supply rejection but from what you say it sounds as though it must be pretty good.

So there you have it. Anyone who currently has one of the shrill harsh CD players that are so prevalent in the sub-£1000 market can go buy a Meridian (or an end-of-line CD23 ). But if you already have the foresight to have bought an Alpha 9 you may as well keep it and tweak it because you'll struggle to better it without spending a small fortune.

I look forward to reading your views on the CD33.

 

Hey Technobear,

I take it you have not personally listened to the Arcam Alpha 9 vs the Meridian 507 and that you just arrived at your conclusions above based on Yogus' experiences and opinions. Am I right or am I right? As we commonly say in the investment world, past results are no guarantee of future performance. So, it is likely that the Meridian 507 is the better performer of the two but that Yogus' amplifier and speakers are not capable of revealing the differences sufficiently whereas your amplifier and speakers might just reveal sufficient differences in sound.

Basically, what I am getting at is that it is good to note others' experiences with bits of audio gear but those experiences should not be used as a yardstick to measure the performance of audio components in other system set-ups e.g. as in this case, the Meridian 507 and Arcam Alpha 9 in your system set-up. If Meridian CDP is on your party guest list, then I would suggest that you listen to it in your own system to determine it's performance against your Arcam Alpha 9. Anyway, I didn't mean to pull you up on this but it just seems to be a common occurence on ZeroGain.




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie

 

What makes you say that Lawrie? Have you heard yogus' system? Are you assuming that the 507 is better because it cost more and is slightly newer? Shame on you there sir!

The Arcam 9 is a fine player and I would have to say that even the 588 offers only a different perspective on things rather than a substantial improvement. I'd take a 9 over a 507 anyday, but I would tweak it as TB says with posh kettle leads and dishcloths.

If you want to get substantial gains over and above what the Alpha9 offers, you need to be prepared to spend £2K or more

No..Yes...No...Yes.

 

Merlin,

Shame on me indeed for challenging Technobear's assumptions although I was not assuming that the 507 is better than the Alpha 9 as you seem to imply. The Alpha 9 is a damn fine player as I had it at home on weekend dem but could not live with that nasty plasticky box it came in. The 507 I have heard several times and is also a fine player (I used to own a 506.24). The point is that apart from Yogus himself, none of us have heard his system therefore Technobear should note Yogus' comments but still go ahead and do the audition himself. Well, that's what I'd do anyway as I am not one for theorizing when it comes to the sound of audio components. Technobear's comments seemed to suggest otherwise.

So my comments are not about whether the Alpha 9 is better than the Meridian 507 or vice-versa. It is about people testing equipment in their own system and arriving at a conclusion rather than base assumptions on someone else's experiences. If the Alpha 9 trounced the Meridian 507, then great because the Alpha 9 does have a superb DAC in that plasticky box. Contrary to your comments, I don't necessarily believe that new is better for if that were the case, then I can assure you that there'd be a modern upsampling wonder box on my rack but there isn't. I am not a follower of fashion.




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.

 

Now Lawrie, I'm buzzing in here due to contradiction! Come on admit it, you are a box tart arn't you!

I think TB's point is that if it doesn't absolutely slaughter the Alpha 9 then there really isn't much point. By slaughter i mean it would even be obvious to a WHF forum member. I agree, what's the point in spending hundreds of pounds every year shifting your system sideways?

 

What one can learn here, if he doesnt already know , is that the main differences to more expensive players can be almost fixed with a few tweaks on reasonable cheaper ones... :JPS:

Even from DVD to CD players, as we found out comparing my FMJ DV27 with Michael's TEAC...

 

Correct. In fact I have not knowingly listened to a 507 at all, although I have heard what I believed to be a 588.

Correct. Yogus and others. But then, in relation to the 507, I was only talking about build quality and tweakability, and on this score I know enough about the Arcam and the Meridian to make the above statement about likely tweakability.

As to whether Alpha 9 owners should upgrade to a CD23 or a Meridian 507, I would expect the answer to be no, not unless you have money to burn, because the gains would not be worth the expense.

As Merlin correctly points out (IMHO), you would need to be spending £2000 to get a worthwhile improvement that didn't leave you thinking you had wasted your money. I have heard a few £2000 players now and although they all sound different and are very good, thus far they have not persuaded me to change the Alpha 9. They simply don't make a night & day difference. My amp upgrade made a much bigger difference.

If my Alpha 9 bit the dust, I would certainly demo a few likely candidates before choosing and a home demo would be essential. My biggest hifi bugbears are harshness and lack of musicality. If a player offends my ears by being shrill or harsh or 'digital', then it is out. If a player doesn't make music that pulls me in and keeps my interest, then it is out. If the player is smooth and interesting and also has stage and image and depth and all those nice attributes that add to the sense of the recorded acoustic (even if it's an artificial one) then so much the better.

That's quite alright. Your point is a valid one. No offence taken.

 

To a large degree I would have to agree. The only thing you can't fix is the look of the thing and it's true that the Alpha 9 doesn't have the greatest kit rack presence. It looked OK in a rack full of Alphas but since I got the ATC, it does look a little tacky by comparison. It is this and not sound quality that keeps tickling my upgrade buds

Perhaps I could do some DIY and transplant it into one of the new generation of smart aluminium home theatre PC cases that are coming onto the market now

 

Hey Technobear

Thanks for that detailed explanation. Your opinions have been well noted. I agree that sideways moves are only good for the dealers but I would expect Arcam Alpha 9 owners interested in the CD23 and 507 to perform their own tests to arrive at their own conclusions as Yogus rightly did. Would you not agree? That's all I'm saying. No more, no less.

Merlin - still buzzin' from contradiction? A box tart - moi?




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.

 

So would I All I'm saying is that they shouldn't expect to be necessarily blown away compared to what they already get from an Alpha 9

 

Half the reason I'm looking for a new player is that the wife is getting sick of the ugly looking Alpha 9. She's letting me spend about 2000pds anyway (well, up to about 5000 aussie $).

Mind you she took one look at the 507 and refused as it was almost as ugly as the 9.

And I definitely wasn't going to spend the equivalent of 1100pds on something that doesn't make a huge diff. It had to be night and day for me to part the $.

BTW, I auditioned 9 vs CD23 a few years back, and wasn't that impressed back then either. I don't think my hearing has changed since then???

Wish I had enough to go to the Simaudio Nova , I heard that a few months ago....

 

Ah now you're talking

If you could raise the game a bit, I am sadly getting shot of my three month old Eclipse 11, one of the finest CD players on the market, and with mega WAF

Both the Nova and the Eclipse are exceptional players and really do improve on the mid market kit. Indeed I reckon they take on all comers, certainly I have yet to hear a more musically rewarding player than the Eclipse below 10K. Some forum members have had the pleasure of listening to the Moon kit and I believe share these views.

Why not save up a bit and make the change really worth while?

 

My wife just got a new job, so maybe I'll coax her out of her hard earned.. after all, she's the one prompting the change..

 

I just showed my g/f a picture of the eclipse player and she thinks it looks terrible:cry:

 

I assume this is different to the Eclipse kit (a sub devision of Marantz IIRC???) that RS were shifting a while back. Sort of chrome UFO shaped.

Or surely not THIS

Or am I missing a joke here?

 

Mo,

Its the player in merlins Avatar.

www.simaudio.com