Marantz cd 5001 or 6000 ose?

Taz,theres not the shadow of question of me not beleiving you. I am just a little concerned about rorys experience; it maybe an isolated incident........but it doesn't help if you have modded the amchine....and even gurentees don't last for ever.

Unfortunately there are insufficient reviews on audioreview to be a guide - 3 (positive). Do you know how long the 5001 has been in production? Presumably if it is a year or two a major issue with the lazor would have been documented.

What do you think of the build quality?

You have the ose model I think...I have been offered a good deal on a standard 5001. Do you think that could be made to work well too?

Anyone else with a 5 series Marantz like to comment?





regs,


David

 

The build of the 5001 is much the same as you would expect of a player priced as it is ......flimsy

But having heard taz's modded player its can certainly sing when a few tweaks are done.....

By the way the deq is very good to ! and the behringer src2496 upsampler [£99 !] ....I've modded this and I've now got room resonance problems with the bass extension ...but thats another story !

the entech dac may be the problem .....does it have a wall wart psu ?

But as you say tight budgets can be very restrictive.......

As you know I have the schematics to both the 5000 and 6000 so if you need help ......its not a problem.

 

Hi Tenson -

many thanks for your ideas re the behringer. Have run with the 5001 for now. As I say the behringer does interest me - though its a bit beyond my knowledge of physics at the moment! When ive caught up a bit £ wise that definitely sounds an avenue worth investigating. Probable next step

As Zanash says the marantz is its not going to be the last word in build quality (at the price) but I think it should be, at the very least an interesting experiment. . I know Zanash has experience of tweaking these and I'm keen to see what can be acheived.

I beleive we can overcome most potential problems reasonably easily.

Zanash - the entech uses a (USA) 240 to 115v transformer (is that what you meant?) iinto which the units mains socket (240v british transformer) is plugged in. in fairness when I first used it it seemed to make a considerable difference. That said, I recently compared my system with my parents (basic midi system with I think KEF coda speakers BUT.......new Leowe cd/DVD player) and whislt mine probably has more base/treble extention, there was far too narrow a gap between the two. This is especially so as I think I have gone to a littlemore effort to set mine up sonically.




cheers all for your ideas,



David

 

random play

taz,

do 5001s have a random play facility?

forgot to check, not that it matters too much.




regs,


David

 

I realise it is a bit late now but when Rob says the Meridian compares to his turntable that is not to say it has a mellow sound. His TT is very bight, quick and fresh sounding. The Meridian is not a dull sounding player, it is very 'fun'. More 'Naim' than Naim IMO!

Don't worry about your cables if you get a DEQ, the whole point of the DEQ is you can tailor the sound to suit you Cables should all sound the same anyway in an ideal world (and as far as I can tell most of them do!). So, sell your cables and buy some cheap ones that sound just as good anyway then use the DEQ to tame any brightness, midrange bloom or whatever.

anyway, enjoy your 5001 I have not heard it so it may be a very good player. Let us know how it sounds next to your DAD5 setup.

 

Hi Tenson,

No, its no too late for anything.

I remember my thorens (haven't played it for yonks, though I should) for having a very individual sound, not necessarily mellow, or bright. Thats what I thought Rob meant.

In my experience cables make a considerable difference. If the DEQ is totally impervious to cable quality it is indeed impressive. I
looking forward to trying it.





regs,


David

 

Hi,

I was not saying the DEQ is impervious to cable changes, just that it is pointless using cables to change the tonality of the sound when you can twiddle a few setting on the DEQ and change it any way you like. Also if you think cables changes make a 'considerable difference' wait until you hear the absolutely massive difference room correction can make.

 

Sorry, Tenson, i think maybe we have got at cross purposes. When i set up the naim 72/140 combo a few months ago I idid so with the best cables I could afford not affect the tonality but to increase the system resolution, which they did very effectively.

That why I was sceptical when I saw (I think) the DEQ has XLR (is that right?) sockets.

I think the DEQ uses an external microphone, if i've gothe picture? It does sound interesting from what I could gather last night. Most reviews were pretty positive.




regs,


D.

 

Hi,

I see your point... this is my take -

The only differences I have heard from cables have been tonal, not actual signal loss, unless the parameters of the cable are so unsuitable that the source can not drive it without distortion.

As the main differences in cables are tonal (frequency response altered due to the difference in resistance, capacitance and inductance), as long as you have 'decent' (like cost £10 from Maplin) interconnects and a DEQ to alter the tonality to taste, then you are sorted.

As for the external microphone the cable quality really doesn't matter, the difference even in tonality in cables will be so small compared to that of your room it won't make any difference to the measurement.

You can get XLR leads from www.studiospares.com for under £10 each and are 5m long. They are excellent cables with quality plugs too.

By the way, whats wrong with XLR's? Was it just the idea of having to get new cables? There is nothing wrong with the plug type itself, it is usually considered better than RCA sockets.

 

which entech have you got? I had the 205.2 at one stage and it certainly didnt' lack any bass. Turned a £460 Pioneer Precision into a bit of a giant slayer actually imo with standard wallwart psu

 

LOL - Simon, walk this way......the flat earth beckons

 

quote
IAs the main differences in cables are tonal (frequency response altered due to the difference in resistance, capacitance and inductance), as long as you have 'decent' (like cost £10 from Maplin) interconnects and a DEQ to alter the tonality to taste, then you are sorted.

£10 cables from maplins?

........I say again, I probably shouyld take a closer look at the DEQ

.
By the way, whats wrong with XLR's? Was it just the idea of having to get new cables? There is nothing wrong with the plug type itself, it is usually considered better than RCA sockets.[/QUOTE]

Nothing at all! I gather theres a lot right with them! I was just concerned about the expense of replacing my current RCAs!

rory(or rob?....sorry)

no my entech is the 203........had QUITE enough trouble getting that, beleive me.




regs,


David

 

By '£10 cables from Maplin' I mean you can buy the wire and the plugs and have your own cables for under £10 that are perfectly fine. If you want to spend a little more they sell pure silver cable too

 

what do YOU use ,Simon?

 

sorry all maplins cable are Cr*p bar one [thats not the silver one either] at any price ! So that could even be ten pounds badly spent !

four small neutrik rca plugs at £1 each 2m of 0.5mm 4n silver and some sleeve should not set you back much more than a tenner twist them tightly and you'll have a cable that will see off all sub £100 commercial stuff.. a fancy jacket will add a bit more.

oh and the maplin cable thats ok is the ofc pearlescent jacketed coax with the foamed insulation by shark.

 

I use whatever cable I have with the right plugs on the end.

For XLR's thats the 'economy' XLR leads from studiospares, they have a nice nylon outer sheath, copper twisted screen and OFC conductors with Nutrix plugs, all for about a tenner. As far as I can tell they have no odd resistance, capacitance or inductance characteristics so they do fine.

Zanash, I'm sorry but there are hardly any cables that are 'crap', certainly none of the ones from Maplin that are specified for audio use specifically.

I do agree that pure silver twisted makes pretty good cables but it is a lot more effort to work with than something like the shark cable from maplin and it isn't screened!

 

The last time Simon was at my place he brought a pair of S&B transformers over and we hooked them into my system in place of the usual active pre. I'd been pretty lukewarm on the TVC until then but that day put aside any real concerns. The transformers were bare, sitting on the floor, and connected with a lash-up of meter test cables with crock clips - a total mess in other words of cheap test instrument cable and less than great connectors.

It sounded superb.

Go figure.

 

Im glad were all agreed on this now.

 

Well it is only my opinion ...I use the term Cr*p to encompass both there cost and performance and suitability to do the job......

Why would you want a cable that affect detrimentally your precious signal ?

I have at one time or another used/heard everyone they offer.....only the one mentioned provided a performance that was in any way close to my home made cables. I would happily use in my own system as a stop gap [in fact that's how I use the one I have]. Do remember that these are my own opinions .....people are free to try and make up there own minds.

as to xlr's .....the sound is often more dependant on the balanced implimentation rather than the cable ...but a 3 core plaited design gives reasonable results.

The tvc is probabley the way to go as far as volume controls are concerned......

 

I use a 5m 'molded plug' style of interconnect from maplins, of the cheapest variety. My entire signal goes through it.

It sounds absolutely fine to me.