|
|
STEREOPHILE MAGAZINE: STARDATE FEBRUARY 2010! The unusually digiphobic Michael Fremer gives a yeoman's heads-up to the Playback Designs MPS-5 SACD/CD PLAYER. At $15,000 a very serious contender to the $80,000 DCS Scarlatti....and, additionally it has the ability with the addition of some internal dacs to play multi-channel (only the stereo version was reviewed). And most enticing, RBCDs are upsampled to DSD, reminiscient to the dCS Scarlatti set to upsample to 24/176 PCM: very clean, tightly focused, three~dimensional (for CD) rhythmically taut, and fast, reminiscient of what the $28,150 Naim CD555 can do." And it's also capable of playing hi-rez PCM files. "If you have a large collection of SACDS, you'll find the MPS-5 among the best sounding players available today, combining great transparency, impressive delicacy and resolution of low~level detail, and, when called for authoritative dynamic slam and depth~charge~like bass."
AND MICHAEL'S CLOSING ARGUMENT: So Analog~like was the MPS-5's decoding of SACDs and hi~rez files that it has joined the short list of players that make me want to sit down, undistracted by other activities, and actually listen to digital recordings~as long as I don't go back to the turntable!"
Can Analogue~MIKE be truly forgiven for that last statement or is he as wildly addicted to the turntable the way an addict is hooked on crack~cocaine?
STAY TUNED!
[And perhaps KAL can review the multi-channel version through his new Meridian V6 processor replete with analogue inputs]
But folks, we seem to have a winner here in the MPS-5.
FINALLY, SOMETHING TO LIVE FOR!
|
|
|
Post by Mondie January 17, 2010 (2 of 83)
|
|
l will be looking forward to that review. As an owner of a PBD l am amazed this player is not more heavily reviewed. It was a revelation to me in my system.
Cheers, mondie
|
|
|
Post by Beagle January 17, 2010 (3 of 83)
|
|
RE Up-sampling
My first Shanling up-sampled CDS, and I now more or less agree with Zeus that up-sampling is not an improvement. In my opinion, the only palliative one can bestow on brittle CD sound is pumping it through the smoothing of tube-amplification (that doesn't make the sound better but it removes the worst aspects...).
|
|
|
|
|
Mondie said:
l will be looking forward to that review. As an owner of a PBD l am amazed this player is not more heavily reviewed. It was a revelation to me in my system.
Cheers, mondie
You've spent some serious coin on your system (at least $60,000 USD) from what I can see.
|
|
|
Post by krisjan January 17, 2010 (5 of 83)
|
|
Fremer's subjective review of the player was quite positive. Atkinson's technical analysis, however, showed some significant problems/issues.
|
|
|
Post by Karlosak January 17, 2010 (6 of 83)
|
|
I'm not surprised. If a digital source sounds "vinyl" or "analogue" like, then it cannot measure flat.
|
|
|
Post by krisjan January 17, 2010 (7 of 83)
|
|
Karlosak said:
If a digital source sounds "vinyl" or "analogue" like, then it cannot measure flat.
I completely disagree with that statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
$15,000 / $30 = 500 SACDs or 500 grams gold
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Clark: All that glitters isn't gold! As the late Truman Capote said: More Tears are shed over ANSWERED prayers than Unanswered prayers.....but I'm willing to shed some tears over this baby! THE IRONY: When this player was introduced by Acoustic Sounds (the ONLY digital component they carry) the introductory price was $10,000.00!
|
|
|
Post by jdaniel January 17, 2010 (10 of 83)
|
|
Oh, for goodness sakes! Let's enjoy our SACDs but put that $15K away, pick up a $1000 turntable and a .49 cent London (orange-label) Treasury Lp record of Kertesz' Dvorak 9th and be done with it! (Beware though, the Lp is better than the SACD....
|
|