Hey,

I'm tryng to get some info regarding a CDP...

I know run an Arcam cd93 on a 202/200/NAPSC combo with totem model 1s...

I think that the sound is good but sometimes harsh... Some of you will say that the CD5x/hc would be the way to go since the CDX2 is to "Digital" and "foregoing" I'd like some more opinions on this matter since for some of you think the cd5s/hc sounds better or more natural... Thanks for
the advice.

Cheers,

Vince

quote:

CDX2 is to "Digital" and "foregoing"

The CDX2 like any CDP uses digital to analogue converter, it makes music sound alive and engaging and easily justified its premium over the CD5X to me. You can also enhance it when you're ready with a 555PS that makes it a very fine CD player indeed. The CDX2 tells it like it is and gives a very natural sounding presentation; it would be the ideal player for your combination of 202/200/NAPSC.

I'm surprised to hear an Arcam player described as harsh, I've never got on with the Arcam sound because I have found it too smooth and a bit unrealistic, even dull, but not harsh (I've exaggerated to make a point). Some CDs are harsh sounding - it is the way the engineer has put them together - a dreadful offender is Mary Chapin Carpenter's The Calling - the engineer should never go near a studio again because to ruin a MCC recording is unforgivable.

I've heard a CD5X/FC2 and CD5X/Hi-Cap and they are both very fine players, but the CDX2 is more musically engaging in my view. I found the CD5X to be a more musical player than its predecessor the CD5, which in itself was a good player. I prefer the latest CD5i to the old CD5 too.

I have heard a CDS3 and that is even better and the CD555 is the best CD player I've ever heard. I judge a player by the way it draws me in to the music and makes me enjoy my CDs. I think Naim has hierarchy correct, every time you go up the ladder it gets better.

However, you need to audition to hear if you agree with me. After all you want what you find to be the best sounding CDP, not necessarily what I think is the best vfm CDP, which, for me, is the CDX2.

ATB Rotf

Blakey,

my advice would be to think and audition carefully before going for a CDX2 as you could end up spending a lot more money to get an acceptable sound.

I started with CDX2/202/200 and was very unhappy with the harsh, grainy sound. It wasn't until I had added HICAP2, NAPSC, Fraim, HiLine, XPS2 and then finally replaced the 202 with a 282 that the sound became acceptable.

You will see that the other components in ROTF's system are also rather higher up the range.

Despite Naim's system recommemdation I wouldn't consider a bare CDX2 to be a good match for a 202 unless you have less-revealing speakers. I also would never describe the bare CDX2 as 'natural sounding'

Regards

Very well-thought out post, Denman. It's amazing to read the comments of members who have actually owned and tried the equipment in their own systems as opposed to the jerks who dispense globs of hi-fi wisdom on products they have never owned, based on reading product literature combined with their own vivid imaginations.

It's nice to read an informed post based on actual experience and experimentation. They have become all too rare.

quote:

I started with CDX2/202/200 and was very unhappy with the harsh, grainy sound. It wasn't until I had added HICAP2, NAPSC, Fraim, HiLine, XPS2 and then finally replaced the 202 with a 282 that the sound became acceptable.

informed but baffling,you bought all the above kit which comes to a few grand just to achieve acceptable.

quote:

Originally posted by Chayro:
Very well-thought out post, Denman. It's amazing to read the comments of members who have actually owned and tried the equipment in their own systems as opposed to the jerks who dispense globs of hi-fi wisdom on products they have never owned, based on reading product literature combined with their own vivid imaginations.

It's nice to read an informed post based on actual experience and experimentation. They have become all too rare.

i dont know where you get that from,it is so far of the mark,very,very few people on this forum give the kind of advice that you suggest,

quote:

Some of you will say that the CD5x/hc would be the way to go since the CDX2 is to "Digital" and "foregoing"

I certainly would not suggest a CD5x with hicap, as the latter makes for a very over the top presentation.

I have owned the 202/200 and would not want it without a napsc and hicap - it doesn't sound right without them, to me anyway.

With napsc and hicap in place on the 202, the CDX2 works very well and certainly does not sound harsh in any way. The best option would be to try both a CDX2 and a CD5x/flatcap2x back to back and see which is preferable. Some prefer one, others prefer the other.

Nigel