Quote:
Thanks for your insights Smeckles. I'm considering the CD-77.1 and the DAC2X (among a few others) and would like to hear more about your impressions of these two units: the CD-77 & DAC2X in particular.
Which sounds more "analog"? I think I know the answer to this already, but I'd like your take on it.
How about musicality?
Any thoughts on 3 dimensionality and soundstage between the two?
How about detail retrieval? I suspect they're both highly resolving with the nod possibly going to EMM, but I'd like your take on it.
Were your comparisons based on redbook vs redbook or redbook vs DSD? In your opinion does it matter? I'm of the opinion at this time that well recorded redbook can rival or well recorded DSD provided they are played back on equally well implemented systems using the same mastering. Further, I think the general consensus is that Redbook performs best on TDA1541A implementations, while there are many more opinions for playback of high res material.
When you were comparing them, were you using tube or ss amplification?
Thanks again, and I apologize for barraging you with questions (feel free to pass on any of them if you feel your recollection too vague, any insight you can provide would be helpful).
I have a chance to listen to these two units, but only in very different systems.
Hi.
Many apologies for the wall o'text here, but to answer your questions with the seriousness that a multi-kilo $ purchase (or even audition) requires, I should get into what my own thoughts were when I had to choose between one or the other.
First of all, with either unit, I would think anyone can be happy, so it's not a case of "one is materially better than the other". At this level, parts quality and overall Redbook CD performance is to be assumed as state-of-the-art. It's the details of implementation and your personal listening preferences that will decide for you one over the other. I really, really liked the CD-77 and replacing it was neither easy nor a reflection of anything the AMR did "wrong".
For test purposes, my system was the same for both units down to the cables, so I got a good feel for both under constant conditions.
Easy questions first:
* Amplification for the 2 channel is/was always SS. The SR-009s are tubed, so it's mixed. However, my opinion is that neither amp drifts into the "worst ills" of either category.
* I have not used DSD files with either. Not sure if the CD-77 can accept the bit stream. Only recently did they even allow for the option of a digital output; I don't recall it being an available option when I bought mine.
* Soundstage: both DACs created a similarly sized projection across the recording space. I've had DACs project smaller or bigger stages, but these two were similar. My reference albums for this (Beck's "Mutations" and Gomez's "In Our Gun" for studio recordings and Dead Can Dance's "Toward the Within" for a live recording) had musicians clearly taking up space across the stage with both DACs.
The EMM gear produces a deeper stage and more individual space around musicians. Language fails me in how to explain this better, but if you hear it, I think you'll know what I'm referring to.
* Resolving low-level details: both get high marks for digging out the minute details and the whole "Wow, how many times have I heard this recording and never heard that before?" factor. The EMM is slightly better at threading these details into the context of the music, rather than "here's where Ringo rides the hi-hat a beat early" type of resolution.
Now the tougher ones:
* Which was more analog sounding?
Tough question, since I've been purely digital for two decades now, so my biases really don't work this way. I would say that the CD-77 recreates a more faithful interpretation of what's on the files, for good or bad, so if you are a listener who wants "music the way it was recorded", the CD-77 does not editorialize the way I feel the EMM stuff does. If you're running tubed amps already and love the sound, this may be a significant advantage for the CD-77.
The clear advantage of the EMM gear for me is the creation of a 3D presence of instruments within the soundstage. Well recorded music has players with not only position in the soundstage, but depth. Drums come from a space behind the singer. Acoustic guitars resonate not just like the plucked string but like real wood does, with a certain depth of the guitar body itself. It creates more of a "you are there in the room with them" experience (or is it "they are here in my room with me"?).
I had to listen to many different DACs in order to realize that I am "you are there" type of listener, rather than the "faithful to the master tape" style which I had originally thought I was. This is probably the hardest part of the decision any buyer would have to make: "Am I
really that type of listener?"
* Musicality?
The toe-tapping factor? You must understand that the CD-77 was my first high-end source, and it set an extremely high standard. I spent weeks with it going through my entire collection with a huge smile on my face. Since I replaced the CD-77 with the CDSA and then the DAC2-X, I did choose one over the other, but again, it took months of listening to several high-performance DAC units and then a fundamental change in my own understanding what type of listener I am to reach this point. Had I heard the DAC2-X sooner, I may have missed some of the aspects of its presentation that I appreciate differently (better?) now.
As I noted, the EMM may soften aggressively compressed or peak-y tracks, not really in a tubed way by rolling off the top end, but a way I feel is more natural sounding. This is likely because of the insane upsampling it does (5.6 MHz, or 2x regular SACD sample rates). If you had never heard a terrible original compressed recording and how bad it sounded through such a clearly resolving system, but only heard it through the DAC2-X, you may never realize what it did. The CD-77 wasn't nearly as forgiving.
Along those lines, the DAC2-X is better in my opinion in the (hugely subjective) aspect of creating a coherent context of rhythm and pace within certain tracks. I've had several experiences of not only hearing the previously unheard details in a song, but sensing an underlying, almost subliminal, thread or theme in the some songs that really struck me. I just "never got it" before.
Other factors which may be important only to me:
USB implementation on both units was not plug and play, on either Mac or Windows OS. Both EMM and AMR require driver installs for Windows (or did when I installed them) and Mac USB set up was not difficult, but not as easy as the true p-n-p of the Weiss or Aesthetix Romulus (which I would recommend very enthusiastically if you have the opportunity to audition one; it is
the soundstage champ of any source I've ever heard. It pulled a ridiculous magic trick when it made the side and rear walls of my room disappear.)
Both EMM and AMR occasionally have issues locking onto a USB bitstream and may need to be reset (powered on/off) a few times to get a lock. First-world problem if ever there was one.
I did need to have the USB interface on the CD-77 serviced, including sending it back to the AMR factory after something failed: I never knew what the exact cause was. It just stopped playing lossless files. My Mac didn't even see the USB was connected. CDs played fine throughout, though. In fact, the disc-reading of the CD-77 was excellent; it was able to clearly play a few old, beaten-up CDs which were scuffed and unplayable on other players. EMM CDSA is a bit more picky with physical disc condition.
Build quality for the CD-77 is like a tank. The chassis is huge and you will need a very study rack to hold its close-to 40 kg weight. I thought it was beautiful though, and worthy of top-shelf on the equipment stand to show off its bling. The blue LEDs visible through the top always gets positive attention. The EMM Labs is sturdy and well built, but AMR goes above and beyond.
CD-77 does not play SACDs, in case that is an issue (it plays dual-layer SACDs at Redbook with no problems).
Ugh, that's a lot of words words words. But good luck with your own choices. You should be happy with your selection, regardless of brand you choose.
