[sygnus21]

How is it compared to the (dac) ud503?

Night and day. I always felt like the 503 (with its AKM "velvet sound" chips) was a tad on the bright side and light sounding. The 701 with its Delta-Sigma DAC sounds much better (slightly warmer) with more weight, especially the bottom. And the built-in headphone amp is also much better for the same reasons.

 

[gonzalo05]

Night and day. I always felt like the 503 (with its AKM "velvet sound" chips) was a tad on the bright side and light sounding. The 701 with its Delta-Sigma DAC sounds much better (slightly warmer) with more weight, especially the bottom. And the built-in headphone amp is also much better for the same reasons.

Sounds very promising. Congratulations

 

[sygnus21]

I was aware this player supported MQA, though I didn't realize there are MQA encoded CDs. I know about HDCDs as I've a few of those, and my old Rotel decoded HDCDs.

Anyway, wanting to see what the fuss was about I sought out an encoded MQA CD and bought this Fourplay CD. I have the original CD release but wanted to see what the difference is.

Comparing the original CD release to the MQA version reveals the MQA CD has far more detail (resolution). Notes just have more detail and distinctiveness. The sound is also more spacious. The original CD has more umph overall (the notes are bassier), but it doesn’t have the resolution or spaciousness as the MQA version. I might characterize the original as slightly warmer - here I really liked Li’l Darlin’, it just had more soul. On Chant, I much preferred the MQA version as it simply had more space. But that's just a comparison between the standard CD and the MQA encoded CD (also playable on all players).

Regarding this VRDS 701, the more I hear it, the more I'm impressed with its sound. Here, I'm running the player through my Pontus DAC (bypassing the Teac's on-board DAC) via S/PDIF coaxial cable, with the Pontus going directly into my Denafrips Artemis headphone amp (HPA) via XLR cables. There my listening is through the Sennheiser HD800S phones. It's more detailed than the Rotel RCD-1072 connected the same way, but I think the Rotel has maybe a tad more staging.

BTW, I did small test where I intentionally bumped the player while in use, and it never skipped a beat. My old Rotel CD player could not/would not pass this test. Kudos to the Vibration-free Rigid Disc-clamping System.

The player also had zero issues playing back my CD-R recorded CDs back from 1999. That's right, CDs I recorded in 1999 played perfectly without issue. Don't have any CD-RW's with music, but they are also supported. In fact, I just listened to this compilation of trance and techno songs I recorded in 99....

These are the ripped to PC files, and the 701, performed playback from my PC going through its internal DAC also without issues. And there wasn't a night and day difference between CD playback and files from PC playback. Here the 701 is feed from my Denafrips Iris DDC via optical input. Zero noise, zero distortion. Media Player is JRiver Media Center 32.

Comparing the CD player to the Rotel CD player sound wise, this one is very revealing and detailed, but the Rotel was perhaps a tad more dimensional. But then again, I've only had this player for 3 days thus far.

Really happy with this unit and glad I ended up with the it given its capabilities as both a pre-amp/DAC, but also first and foremost a CD player.

It's an expensive piece of gear so it's definitely not for everyone, and especially if you only occasionally play CDs. But if you're a CD collector as I am, and want a solid CD player, this is up there. If you can find a good deal as I did, grab it.

One thing I forgot to add, and only because apparently, it's such an issue for some that the vendor felt a need to inform me, that though Teac is a Japanese company, the unit is made in China. Not an issue for me, as the core of my system is made by a Chinese company - Denafrips, but for the "Chi-Fi" haters, perhaps.

I might have been that guy back in the day, but today the world is much more sophisticated and competitive.

 

[gonzalo05]

I was aware this player supported MQA, though I didn't realize there are MQA encoded CDs. I know about HDCDs as I've a few of those, and my old Rotel decoded HDCDs.

Anyway, wanting to see what the fuss was about I sought out an encoded MQA CD and bought this Fourplay CD. I have the original CD release but wanted to see what the difference is.

Comparing the original CD release to the MQA version reveals the MQA CD has far more detail (resolution). Notes just have more detail and distinctiveness. The sound is also more spacious. The original CD has more umph overall (the notes are bassier), but it doesn’t have the resolution or spaciousness as the MQA version. I might characterize the original as slightly warmer - here I really liked Li’l Darlin’, it just had more soul. On Chant, I much preferred the MQA version as it simply had more space. But that's just a comparison between the standard CD and the MQA encoded CD (also playable on all players).

Regarding this VRDS 701, the more I hear it, the more I'm impressed with its sound. Here, I'm running the player through my Pontus DAC (bypassing the Teac's on-board DAC) via S/PDIF coaxial cable, with the Pontus going directly into my Denafrips Artemis headphone amp (HPA) via XLR cables. There my listening is through the Sennheiser HD800S phones. It's more detailed than the Rotel RCD-1072 connected the same way, but I think the Rotel has maybe a tad more staging.

BTW, I did small test where I intentionally bumped the player while in use, and it never skipped a beat. My old Rotel CD player could not/would not pass this test. Kudos to the Vibration-free Rigid Disc-clamping System.

The player also had zero issues playing back my CD-R recorded CDs back from 1999. That's right, CDs I recorded in 1999 played perfectly without issue. Don't have any CD-RW's with music, but they are also supported. In fact, I just listened to this compilation of trance and techno songs I recorded in 99....



These are the ripped to PC files, and the 701, performed playback from my PC going through its internal DAC also without issues. And there wasn't a night and day difference between CD playback and files from PC playback. Here the 701 is feed from my Denafrips Iris DDC via optical input. Zero noise, zero distortion. Media Player is JRiver Media Center 32.

Comparing the CD player to the Rotel CD player sound wise, this one is very revealing and detailed, but the Rotel was perhaps a tad more dimensional. But then again, I've only had this player for 3 days thus far.

Really happy with this unit and glad I ended up with the it given its capabilities as both a pre-amp/DAC, but also first and foremost a CD player.

It's an expensive piece of gear so it's definitely not for everyone, and especially if you only occasionally play CDs. But if you're a CD collector as I am, and want a solid CD player, this is up there. If you can find a good deal as I did, grab it.

One thing I forgot to add, and only because apparently, it's such an issue for some that the vendor felt a need to inform me, that though Teac is a Japanese company, the unit is made in China. Not an issue for me, as the core of my system is made by a Chinese company - Denafrips, but for the "Chi-Fi" haters, perhaps.

I might have been that guy back in the day, but today the world is much more sophisticated and competitive.

Is the Pontus dac that much beetthan the built in one?

 

[sygnus21]

Is the Pontus dac that much beetthan the built in one?

How do you want me to quantify that?