As mentioned in previous posts, I now have a whole list of things to try in my seemingly never efforts to optimise my system. First to say it is just that now, optimising. This time last year I was not happy with certain aspects of how the system sounded, now I am, so from here it is the simple but seemingly never ending quest to find just that little bit more performance.
Anyway, in previous posts I had mentioned that the Arcam Blu-ray player actually outperformed the SOtM kit when performing the relatively simple task of playing music from a USB drive. In my rack I still have my old Musical Fidelity CD player, and it would help if this was now removed from the system. I think lowing the height of this rack and hence the height of my turntable would have a small benefit to room acoustics, with the rack and TT being to one side of the listening position. However, I still occasionally use the Musical Fidelity CD player, maybe playing a borrowed CD or a quick play of a new CD before it has been ripped, this kind of thing. It is a secondary use of the system, but it gave rise to the question of how would a relatively new Arcam Blu-ray player perform in comparison to a now almost 20 years old dedicated CD player? Although I had got good results with the Arcam from a USB drive, I had never tried it in an A/B test as a disc spinner. I knew I would have a couple of quiet hours this morning, so I thought I would give this a try. In preparation, I had made a short playlist, which I had burnt to two identical CD-R discs. Both players were powered up and left running for a couple of hours to ensure any clocks etc. were warmed up and stable. I wanted to compare both as devices to feed the MC3+USB/REF10, so I could not do direct A/B swaps via input. This was a case of setting up both players so I had easy access to the back of the units, running the same music on both, and simply swapping the S/PDIF cable to make the switch. Not ideal, but doable.
The conclusion was that even as a disc spinner, the Arcam was the better sounding of the two. Not a massive difference, my ancient Musical Fidelity player could still hold it's own, but the Arcam was the better of the two. A simple test with a clear conclusion.
With this done, I tried the Arcam via USB again, and I would say this remains the best of the lot. So although the Arcam can beat an old Musical Fidelity as a disc spinner, the Arcam cannot beat itself running from a USB drive.
I think I was in the right kind of mood for experimenting this morning, so I then tried the Arcam direct to the Devialet, rather than through the MC3+USB/REF10. It still sounded pretty decent, but it was pretty clear that the Arcam playing via USB / Mutec MC3+USB / REF10 remains the best of the lot.
So that's one thing crossed of the audio "to do" list, many more to go. Back to the music now.....
Anyway, in previous posts I had mentioned that the Arcam Blu-ray player actually outperformed the SOtM kit when performing the relatively simple task of playing music from a USB drive. In my rack I still have my old Musical Fidelity CD player, and it would help if this was now removed from the system. I think lowing the height of this rack and hence the height of my turntable would have a small benefit to room acoustics, with the rack and TT being to one side of the listening position. However, I still occasionally use the Musical Fidelity CD player, maybe playing a borrowed CD or a quick play of a new CD before it has been ripped, this kind of thing. It is a secondary use of the system, but it gave rise to the question of how would a relatively new Arcam Blu-ray player perform in comparison to a now almost 20 years old dedicated CD player? Although I had got good results with the Arcam from a USB drive, I had never tried it in an A/B test as a disc spinner. I knew I would have a couple of quiet hours this morning, so I thought I would give this a try. In preparation, I had made a short playlist, which I had burnt to two identical CD-R discs. Both players were powered up and left running for a couple of hours to ensure any clocks etc. were warmed up and stable. I wanted to compare both as devices to feed the MC3+USB/REF10, so I could not do direct A/B swaps via input. This was a case of setting up both players so I had easy access to the back of the units, running the same music on both, and simply swapping the S/PDIF cable to make the switch. Not ideal, but doable.
The conclusion was that even as a disc spinner, the Arcam was the better sounding of the two. Not a massive difference, my ancient Musical Fidelity player could still hold it's own, but the Arcam was the better of the two. A simple test with a clear conclusion.
With this done, I tried the Arcam via USB again, and I would say this remains the best of the lot. So although the Arcam can beat an old Musical Fidelity as a disc spinner, the Arcam cannot beat itself running from a USB drive.
I think I was in the right kind of mood for experimenting this morning, so I then tried the Arcam direct to the Devialet, rather than through the MC3+USB/REF10. It still sounded pretty decent, but it was pretty clear that the Arcam playing via USB / Mutec MC3+USB / REF10 remains the best of the lot.
So that's one thing crossed of the audio "to do" list, many more to go. Back to the music now.....
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
