greggf
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2006
- Posts
- 1,311
- Likes
- 249
I briefly have two nice source components in the house - I have to pick one to stay - and, in case anyone is interested, want to get a few stray thoughts and impressions out.
These are both great cd/sacd players. Both cost about $3600. They're almost the same size and weight: substantial. As far as appearance goes, that's about the most that they have in common.
The Esoteric presents a stark, minimal look, with a "rain gutter" band near its top that includes the disc drawer and controls. Its remote is nice, but is actually too heavy - like a brick. The Marantz, on the other hand, is much more baroque, like an older Pontiac or Subaru Outback, with all that cladding cluttering up its bodywork. Still, it's a good look, more golden than silver, and its remote, while still heavy, is much nicer.
The SA-10 is the least expensive Esoteric sold in the U.S. The Marantz is their next-to-top cd/sacd player.
They really sound quite different from each other. The Esoteric presents a colder, more analytic sound, with more up-top air, which can come off as either an extra dollop of space, detail, and refinement, or else as a glassy skating pond, depending upon the recording. On Roy Orbison's "Black & White Night" sacd, there's no glass; on more prosaic cds, the Esoteric can sound appropriately thin and even wheezy. I think that this is actually the SA-10 being truer to the recording.
The Marantz is much smoother, totally (and eerily) grain-free, has a wider dynamic swing (which sneaks up on you), is never glassy or thin, and shows as much detail.
In fact, the Marantz is continually surprising: details I never knew were on recordings suddenly pop into view; layers of instruments are sorted out; multi-track recordings become rainbows of sound instead of congealed burger grease. It's really quite amazing, and has to be heard to be appreciated. This "multi-track sorting" was especially evident on a bad greatest hits cd of the Mamas & the Papas. I have no idea how the Marantz pulls this off without getting harsh.
I have some other truly atrocious cds, including some from Windham Hill, of the fusion/world music/jazz/New Age/who-knows-what/The Weather Channel background music group Shadowfax from the early/mid 1980's. There are tiny pits falling out of the aluminum of these cds. And still, the Marantz separates layers on these recordings that I've never heard before. Are there such things as electric violins? I've heard them for the first time, last night, deep-deep-deep in the mix, after owning the cds for over 20 years.
I must stress that I wasn't looking for this kind of thing. (I was relaxing with a Tonkinese cat on my lap, who was chewing on my HD600 cord [stock!!].)
I'd like to talk about the various maddening filter etc. settings available on these machines, but I haven't figured them out yet. "Filter 2" seems my favorite on the SA-11S2, for both sacd and cd. God, these filters and phase inverters and so on really open up cans of worms. Some of you would love playing with them; others would need Valium to cope with them. I'm closer to the latter camp.
One really, really interesting thing about both the Esoteric and the Marantz: I went into these two players favoring the Sennheiser HD600 for its more neutral sound with my previous Onkyo DX-7555 cd player and CIAudio VHP-2/VAC-1 headphone amp. These higher-level players seem to make me reach more often for the HD650, which now sounds more like an improved 600 rather than gassy and bloated.
This means, unfortunately, that those senior Head-Fiers who insist that "the HD650 scale like a son of a bitch" are probably correct. Which, of course, opens up even more cans of worms (and more wallets).
Speaking of the $600 Onkyo, it's still here. It's a super cdp for the money. But it doesn't compete with the Marantz or the Esoteric. It's much less refined. The word "grain" comes to mind, or perhaps sand. It has a sound that is more rambunctious - which some may prefer, and some may actually think of, at least at first, as "better" - but which really, really wears on you after awhile.
In fact, if I have to name the biggest advantage of more highly-evolved machines, it would be the fact that you can listen to them for much, much longer without getting tired or edgy.
The Marantz SA-11S2 and the Esoteric SA-10 are both rather advanced and exciting pieces of gear. The Marantz, in particular, may be in the sweet spot in the manufacturer's lineup. Some would prefer the cleaner, crisper, more metallic-sounding Esoteric; some would prefer the sweeter, more honeyed champagne-colored Marantz.
I probably am falling in love with the Marantz. Which is a shame, since I prefer the classy, minimal architecture of the solid-as-a-brick-****house Eso.
Despite intellectually favoring more analytic (and less expensive) gear, the Marantz tugs at my emotions, while doing the detail thing just as well if not better.
And, in the process, I am being re-introduced to the Sennheiser HD650. In a big, unexpected way.
These are both great cd/sacd players. Both cost about $3600. They're almost the same size and weight: substantial. As far as appearance goes, that's about the most that they have in common.
The Esoteric presents a stark, minimal look, with a "rain gutter" band near its top that includes the disc drawer and controls. Its remote is nice, but is actually too heavy - like a brick. The Marantz, on the other hand, is much more baroque, like an older Pontiac or Subaru Outback, with all that cladding cluttering up its bodywork. Still, it's a good look, more golden than silver, and its remote, while still heavy, is much nicer.
The SA-10 is the least expensive Esoteric sold in the U.S. The Marantz is their next-to-top cd/sacd player.
They really sound quite different from each other. The Esoteric presents a colder, more analytic sound, with more up-top air, which can come off as either an extra dollop of space, detail, and refinement, or else as a glassy skating pond, depending upon the recording. On Roy Orbison's "Black & White Night" sacd, there's no glass; on more prosaic cds, the Esoteric can sound appropriately thin and even wheezy. I think that this is actually the SA-10 being truer to the recording.
The Marantz is much smoother, totally (and eerily) grain-free, has a wider dynamic swing (which sneaks up on you), is never glassy or thin, and shows as much detail.
In fact, the Marantz is continually surprising: details I never knew were on recordings suddenly pop into view; layers of instruments are sorted out; multi-track recordings become rainbows of sound instead of congealed burger grease. It's really quite amazing, and has to be heard to be appreciated. This "multi-track sorting" was especially evident on a bad greatest hits cd of the Mamas & the Papas. I have no idea how the Marantz pulls this off without getting harsh.
I have some other truly atrocious cds, including some from Windham Hill, of the fusion/world music/jazz/New Age/who-knows-what/The Weather Channel background music group Shadowfax from the early/mid 1980's. There are tiny pits falling out of the aluminum of these cds. And still, the Marantz separates layers on these recordings that I've never heard before. Are there such things as electric violins? I've heard them for the first time, last night, deep-deep-deep in the mix, after owning the cds for over 20 years.
I must stress that I wasn't looking for this kind of thing. (I was relaxing with a Tonkinese cat on my lap, who was chewing on my HD600 cord [stock!!].)
I'd like to talk about the various maddening filter etc. settings available on these machines, but I haven't figured them out yet. "Filter 2" seems my favorite on the SA-11S2, for both sacd and cd. God, these filters and phase inverters and so on really open up cans of worms. Some of you would love playing with them; others would need Valium to cope with them. I'm closer to the latter camp.
One really, really interesting thing about both the Esoteric and the Marantz: I went into these two players favoring the Sennheiser HD600 for its more neutral sound with my previous Onkyo DX-7555 cd player and CIAudio VHP-2/VAC-1 headphone amp. These higher-level players seem to make me reach more often for the HD650, which now sounds more like an improved 600 rather than gassy and bloated.
This means, unfortunately, that those senior Head-Fiers who insist that "the HD650 scale like a son of a bitch" are probably correct. Which, of course, opens up even more cans of worms (and more wallets).
Speaking of the $600 Onkyo, it's still here. It's a super cdp for the money. But it doesn't compete with the Marantz or the Esoteric. It's much less refined. The word "grain" comes to mind, or perhaps sand. It has a sound that is more rambunctious - which some may prefer, and some may actually think of, at least at first, as "better" - but which really, really wears on you after awhile.
In fact, if I have to name the biggest advantage of more highly-evolved machines, it would be the fact that you can listen to them for much, much longer without getting tired or edgy.
The Marantz SA-11S2 and the Esoteric SA-10 are both rather advanced and exciting pieces of gear. The Marantz, in particular, may be in the sweet spot in the manufacturer's lineup. Some would prefer the cleaner, crisper, more metallic-sounding Esoteric; some would prefer the sweeter, more honeyed champagne-colored Marantz.
I probably am falling in love with the Marantz. Which is a shame, since I prefer the classy, minimal architecture of the solid-as-a-brick-****house Eso.
Despite intellectually favoring more analytic (and less expensive) gear, the Marantz tugs at my emotions, while doing the detail thing just as well if not better.
And, in the process, I am being re-introduced to the Sennheiser HD650. In a big, unexpected way.
