AC1
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Posts
- 795
- Likes
- 11
This is my first (well technically second, the Bel Canto 1.1 being the other, but not competitive at all versus the modded DI/O) experiment into different sources ever since getting the DI/O quite awhile back. The reason for this is that there are some characteristics of the DI/O that have bothered me and with the OmegaIIs, has exaggerated the problem, though I am sure using a T1 amp for the OmegaIIs has really a lot to blame as well.
One of the things about the DI/O (no matter the mods on it) is the amount of lower-mids it produces, which seemingly attaches itself to almost every instrument. Now that is not necessarily a bad thing since it gives everything a warmer, richer feel. The problem is that it lacks weight and transient response, which, because it is so prevalent, exaggerates the problems. With this issue, and an overall light-weight, soft sound, it makes for a less involving, boring sound, loosing some the emotional attachment to the music. It is also sensitive to transports, where some transports I can't stand the sound of with the DI/O. For comparison purpose, the Prima was used with the DI/O (which is is Bolder Mensa+ but with some some added mods to the power supply and ERS treatment bringing it to a, sonically, more magnafied level than a Mensa).
So to test something new, I decided to try a player that has a “musical” reputation and one of the things that came up the most was the Audio Aero players, mostly the Capitoles, but their affordable Prima player was said to be pretty good as well, giving me an opportunity to try out the “sound” of the Aeros.
Now that I’ve had the Prima 24/192 player for a few days (used previously), I can say that it is thoroughly seductive and reading about it as such was not an exaggeration. Does it “solve” the problem I’ve had with the modded DI/O? Yes, it has a much more focused mid, low-mid but still rich sounding, giving a less thick feeling of the DI/O. It also has far better attack in the low-mids where with the DI/O it was almost non-existent. But really that’s not what makes it stand out. What makes the Prima interesting is the well defined nature of the sound, where instruments don’t seem to blur into each other as the DI/O. The DI/O is actually a bit more detailed overall, which is great for single instruments, but when things get complicated, instruments start stepping over each other causing congestion. The Prima is far more “clean” sounding giving instruments a better defined boundary without sounding like they have a hard edge. The Prima also stands out in terms of the body and fullness it creates. Such a well defined image really help it place the image and give it a three dimensional rounded feeling, not that the DI/O sounds flat, but the Prima generates a far more generous and dimensional image. Because of the larger image, it gives a more forward presentation, though I would say in relative size the soundstage is very similar. The DI/O does just place instruments a bit wider, but it's very close.
For a tube player, I was expecting a certain sound, like warm, thick, maybe a bit slow, but the Prima, is fast, way faster than the DI/O, along with better transients, this gives the sound more of a “snap”. But it still gives qualities associated with tubes, like a very smooth, continuous and expressive presentation. The DI/O was kind of a laid-back, but also not very expressive, where the contrasts and swing of instruments are not as apparent, giving for a less musical, less involving sound. The Prima is pretty good with being expressive where there is a greater sense of dynamic contrast in notes, bigger swing in loud to soft and also very continuous sounding making the flow of the music shine through.
Tonal wise, the Prima was actually less “tube” sounding than the DI/O. It actually gave greater high frequency information, being smooth and not pronounced or edgy, making it sound "airy" which could be something that people do not want, but is not so bad for the darker sounding OmegaIIs. The bass on the DI/O was better, being more exteneded and a bit more impactful, the Prima is better focused, rounder, and full. The DI/O in a way sounds warmer due to the low-mid presence, thickness it produces, which may contribute to its slowness.
Here is the real kicker about the Prima. I do listen to a lot of electronic music, and dance music: trance, house, etc. Some of these cds, especially some of the trance ones, are not the greatest sounding of cds being sometimes thin, congested, muddy, mechanical, and downright irritating. Well, for whatever reason, maybe it’s the upsampling, but they make those not so good sounding cds, sound full, organic, and smoother than any right they have to sound like that. Wow, it gives these cds an almost audiophile kind of appeal, sure you can still tell they aren’t pristine, but the fullness, pace, and smoothness it gives to trance cds makes it the best I’ve personally ever heard them rendered. Is this a really realistic view of what is on those cds? Probably not. Does it make them more enjoyable? By a wide margin, yes. So here is the thing, the Prima does have a somewhat “sound”, and if you enjoy it and what it does, that’s great. But if you do not, it does seem to affect a wide range of cds.
I am pretty impressed with the Prima considering it is somewhat modestly priced ($1700) and what it can do for bad sounding cds is, in my view, worth it in itself. It gives a very clean, well defined, smooth sound. It probably doesn’t have the best resolution, definition, bass, dynamics, etc, but is very involving and gets a lot of things right. But this only one of the little experiments I am trying, next I am hoping to try something maybe more analytical to see what that could bring, and if it’s enjoyable.
One of the things about the DI/O (no matter the mods on it) is the amount of lower-mids it produces, which seemingly attaches itself to almost every instrument. Now that is not necessarily a bad thing since it gives everything a warmer, richer feel. The problem is that it lacks weight and transient response, which, because it is so prevalent, exaggerates the problems. With this issue, and an overall light-weight, soft sound, it makes for a less involving, boring sound, loosing some the emotional attachment to the music. It is also sensitive to transports, where some transports I can't stand the sound of with the DI/O. For comparison purpose, the Prima was used with the DI/O (which is is Bolder Mensa+ but with some some added mods to the power supply and ERS treatment bringing it to a, sonically, more magnafied level than a Mensa).
So to test something new, I decided to try a player that has a “musical” reputation and one of the things that came up the most was the Audio Aero players, mostly the Capitoles, but their affordable Prima player was said to be pretty good as well, giving me an opportunity to try out the “sound” of the Aeros.
Now that I’ve had the Prima 24/192 player for a few days (used previously), I can say that it is thoroughly seductive and reading about it as such was not an exaggeration. Does it “solve” the problem I’ve had with the modded DI/O? Yes, it has a much more focused mid, low-mid but still rich sounding, giving a less thick feeling of the DI/O. It also has far better attack in the low-mids where with the DI/O it was almost non-existent. But really that’s not what makes it stand out. What makes the Prima interesting is the well defined nature of the sound, where instruments don’t seem to blur into each other as the DI/O. The DI/O is actually a bit more detailed overall, which is great for single instruments, but when things get complicated, instruments start stepping over each other causing congestion. The Prima is far more “clean” sounding giving instruments a better defined boundary without sounding like they have a hard edge. The Prima also stands out in terms of the body and fullness it creates. Such a well defined image really help it place the image and give it a three dimensional rounded feeling, not that the DI/O sounds flat, but the Prima generates a far more generous and dimensional image. Because of the larger image, it gives a more forward presentation, though I would say in relative size the soundstage is very similar. The DI/O does just place instruments a bit wider, but it's very close.
For a tube player, I was expecting a certain sound, like warm, thick, maybe a bit slow, but the Prima, is fast, way faster than the DI/O, along with better transients, this gives the sound more of a “snap”. But it still gives qualities associated with tubes, like a very smooth, continuous and expressive presentation. The DI/O was kind of a laid-back, but also not very expressive, where the contrasts and swing of instruments are not as apparent, giving for a less musical, less involving sound. The Prima is pretty good with being expressive where there is a greater sense of dynamic contrast in notes, bigger swing in loud to soft and also very continuous sounding making the flow of the music shine through.
Tonal wise, the Prima was actually less “tube” sounding than the DI/O. It actually gave greater high frequency information, being smooth and not pronounced or edgy, making it sound "airy" which could be something that people do not want, but is not so bad for the darker sounding OmegaIIs. The bass on the DI/O was better, being more exteneded and a bit more impactful, the Prima is better focused, rounder, and full. The DI/O in a way sounds warmer due to the low-mid presence, thickness it produces, which may contribute to its slowness.
Here is the real kicker about the Prima. I do listen to a lot of electronic music, and dance music: trance, house, etc. Some of these cds, especially some of the trance ones, are not the greatest sounding of cds being sometimes thin, congested, muddy, mechanical, and downright irritating. Well, for whatever reason, maybe it’s the upsampling, but they make those not so good sounding cds, sound full, organic, and smoother than any right they have to sound like that. Wow, it gives these cds an almost audiophile kind of appeal, sure you can still tell they aren’t pristine, but the fullness, pace, and smoothness it gives to trance cds makes it the best I’ve personally ever heard them rendered. Is this a really realistic view of what is on those cds? Probably not. Does it make them more enjoyable? By a wide margin, yes. So here is the thing, the Prima does have a somewhat “sound”, and if you enjoy it and what it does, that’s great. But if you do not, it does seem to affect a wide range of cds.
I am pretty impressed with the Prima considering it is somewhat modestly priced ($1700) and what it can do for bad sounding cds is, in my view, worth it in itself. It gives a very clean, well defined, smooth sound. It probably doesn’t have the best resolution, definition, bass, dynamics, etc, but is very involving and gets a lot of things right. But this only one of the little experiments I am trying, next I am hoping to try something maybe more analytical to see what that could bring, and if it’s enjoyable.
