Introduction of the Reference CD9 CD-DAC

[stollen]

I had a really brief chance to do an a/b comparison of the DAC functionality of the new CD9 and the DAC8 at my local dealer today. They had both running into a Krell Phantom preamp do easily switch back and forth. The differences were actually quite great. The CD9 was much more laid back (perhaps too much) but had a deeper soundstage and slightly more texture to the instruments. The DAC8 seemed to have quite a bit more detail in the upper frequencies and slightly more weight in the bass. The CD9 did need a lot more burn in time though, which could help level the playing field.

Overall, I would have a very hard time deciding which I prefer as far as DAC functionality, especially if the CD9 improves with age, like most ARC tube components do.

[uwbadger]

Tube vs no tube? Your description seems to follow the stereotypes of both methods of amplification.

[MPS]

Originally Posted by stollen

I had a really brief chance to do an a/b comparison of the DAC functionality of the new CD9 and the DAC8 at my local dealer today. They had both running into a Krell Phantom preamp do easily switch back and forth. The differences were actually quite great. The CD9 was much more laid back (perhaps too much) but had a deeper soundstage and slightly more texture to the instruments. The DAC8 seemed to have quite a bit more detail in the upper frequencies and slightly more weight in the bass. The CD9 did need a lot more burn in time though, which could help level the playing field.

Overall, I would have a very hard time deciding which I prefer as far as DAC functionality, especially if the CD9 improves with age, like most ARC tube components do.

Sound a lot like differences described between CD7 and CD8. Is ARC going back to similar smoother relaxed sound profile as CD7?

[microstrip]

Originally Posted by MPS

Sound a lot like differences described between CD7 and CD8. Is ARC going back to similar smoother relaxed sound profile as CD7?

I hope not ... I have owned the CD7 and now own the CD8 and there was a large improvement when going to the CD8. Bass was much better defined and treble became more airy and extended, but very smooth. Compared with the CD8 the CD7 could sound "coarse". The DAC8 is hyper detailed and does not have the bloom of the tubed units. I preferred its sound using a high quality CD transport - CEC TL1 - using AES/EBU than USB.

IMHO the CD8 connected to the REF40 is really a great front-end - I tried some very expensive players, but stayed with the CD8. I will surely listen to the CD9 when it becomes available.

[MPS]

^ I didn't mean CD9 to sound exactly as CD7 but as "stollen" mentioned, overall tone of sound being more laid back as in CD7 versus CD8, sound quality itself maybe improved from both previous models.
I have not heard CD8 but what I have read it is generally considered more upfront and detailed than CD7.

[Marck1973]

Originally Posted by microstrip

I hope not ... I have owned the CD7 and now own the CD8 and there was a large improvement when going to the CD8. Bass was much better defined and treble became more airy and extended, but very smooth. Compared with the CD8 the CD7 could sound "coarse". The DAC8 is hyper detailed and does not have the bloom of the tubed units. I preferred its sound using a high quality CD transport - CEC TL1 - using AES/EBU than USB.

IMHO the CD8 connected to the REF40 is really a great front-end - I tried some very expensive players, but stayed with the CD8. I will surely listen to the CD9 when it becomes available.

Out of interest what other players did you try? I have the cd8 into Ref 40 and am trying some other players /options. Next week I should be trying the Metronome. I tried the Ref Dac but didn't find it made much improvement over the cd8.

Thanks
Marc.

[microstrip]

Originally Posted by Marck1973

Out of interest what other players did you try? I have the cd8 into Ref 40 and am trying some other players /options. Next week I should be trying the Metronome. I tried the Ref Dac but didn't find it made much improvement over the cd8.

Thanks
Marc.

I had the Kalista, the EMM Labs and the Playback. Although all of them could have single aspects that sounded better than the CD8 (like bass definition, detail - the Kalista with the C2A seems have much more information than any other) to I preferred the CD8 overall in my system.

The amplifier was a REF150 or the VTLs MB750

[Ritmo]

Originally Posted by Marck1973

Out of interest what other players did you try? I have the cd8 into Ref 40 and am trying some other players /options. Next week I should be trying the Metronome. I tried the Ref Dac but didn't find it made much improvement over the cd8.

Thanks
Marc.

Marc - Don't know what's your price point but I would definitely recommend you listen to the Esoteric line. I just purchased several weeks ago a K-05 and it is besting the ARC DAC 8 I also have. I can't imagine how good the k-01 and 03 could be in a nice system like yours.

[Marck1973]

Thank you for your comments.

I am trying the Metronome T5 with the better C8 Dac, so fairly high level.

I will also look into the Esoteric line. I have heard the Metronome previously and thought it bettered the cd8 considerably, however that was not in my system.

Rgds
M.

[BillK]

Anyone familiar with the sound of a Wadia S7i listened to the CD9 yet?

I spent a fair amount of time and effort deciding on the S7i as my "last CD player," and aside from the fact it will only do 24/96, I have no problems whatsoever with it and still love the sound, but have always enjoyed ARC's CD players (but wasn't willing to buy two pieces to have a CD player and a DAC.)

I don't need DSD capability.