yes that's what I did

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:
we preferred the SN/FC2x over the SN/HC (I used my own HC not an HC2x). While the HC made the music brighter we both felt that it was a little much, by that I mean, and we really noticed this with jazz vocals that it put the voice too much in front of the stage and seemed to hide the great playing that was accompanying the singing. I guess I'm saying a little of the balance was lost.

I experienced this when adding a 555PS to a CDX2. Some here dislike the balance of a CD5x/HC. It would appear that one has to be careful with matching a "better" PS with a more mundane component.

regards

peter

Whilst I will obviously need to judge the FC2x/SN combination with my own ears, does anyone have a view as to whether as a technical matter the SN's own power supply is as highly specified as the FC2x? If there is a benefit from using the FC2x over the interal supply does this really come from the tecnical specs or simply the fact that the FC2x is physically separate from the SN?

Michael.

Michael, I had the further opportunity to demo the CD5i-2 and the CD5x/FC2x along with the SN the other day. Speakers as I mentioned earlier. In my opinion from what I heard while the CD5i-2 was a very nice CDP, the CD5x/FC2x was a huge improvement. Based on the kit I would say, and I think I read on another thread, that for the SN that the CD5x/FC2x is the minimum CDP to realy bring out the potential of the SN.