Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site olivee.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!olivee!greg
From: greg@olivee.UUCP (Greg Paley)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: CD player differences
Message-ID: <456@olivee.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 13:36:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: olivee.456
Posted: Wed Aug 14 13:36:23 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Aug-85 16:15:18 EDT
References: <4934@allegra.UUCP>
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 121

> 
> I would love to do a test of the Meridan/Mission/Magnovox/Whatever
> to see if I can spot a difference.  Anyone game that has them?
> If someone has a Magnovox, I suppose we could try to set up a
> comparison test at the snobshop in Milburn (challenge them to
> show that Meridian/Mission is actually better?).
> 
> Dewayne Perry

Finding an audio dealer that will let you do this comparison can
be difficult - it's rare that one dealer will carry Meridian, Mission
and Magnavox (although Meridian and Mission might reside together in
one "high end" spot).

I was able to make this comparison before buying my CD player, but
it was through the courtesy of a local hifi shop (Elite Electronics
in Cupertino, Ca.) who had absolutely nothing to gain from the 
comparison since he didn't sell any of these three (he carried
NAD and NEC players only), but who had the other equipment I wanted
to use for comparison.  He was willing to do this because I had bought
other equipment from him (and would be likely to do so in the future).
He was able to borrow a Meridian player from another dealer, and I was
able to borrow a Mission and Magnavox 1040 from two different friends
who were also interested in the direct comparison.

I have to, quite frankly, dismiss the need for laboratory-perfect
volume matching, at least for the type of listening comparison I find
meaningful.  If you were doing random A/B/C switching from moment to
moment and using that as a basis of judgement, you might need this.
However, I find that to really judge equipment I have to listen to
fairly long stretches (at least 20 minutes) at a time to each of the
"candidates".  Quick comparisons would reveal obvious frequency
irregularities or distortions, but such aspects as the perceived 
depth of the "soundstage" (the publicity people at English Decca 
seem to have struck a winner with that term over 20 years ago),
and the relative placement of individual instrumental and vocal
groupings, as well as timbral definition take some time to perceive.
Also, I find that frequently equipment which sounds good in short
bursts reveals characteristics in longer listening which become
fatiguing or annoying.

We compared these players in a session that lasted over 2 1/2 hours
using equipment that I had at home (Hafler 110/220, Vandersteen IIC)
as well as better equipment (Threshold preamp/Threshold Stasis amp/
Infinity RS-1B speakers).  I was interested in hearing the players 
on the better equipment, since I wanted to be sure that the player I
bought now wouldn't reveal any nasty surprises if and when I were to
upgrade the rest of my system.

First off, I have to say that, contrary to the results of a previous
CD comparison mentioned on the net, the results were NOT unanimous.
We all heard definite differences between the three players, but
came to radically different preferences based on what we heard.

I was very surprised to find myself preferring the unmodified Magnavox
over the Mission.  Generally I hear definite improvements in "high
end" mods that some other net writers sneer at as being esoteric.
In this case, I heard what I perceived as a deterioration in the
quality of the sound.  The most obvious problem with the Mission was
that it seemed noticeably restricted in the deep bass compared with
the Magnavox.  This was particularly noticeable on the Infinity/Threshold
system.  Incidentally, I found that in each case my feelings about a
particular player on the Hafler/Vandersteen system were confirmed and
made stronger by the Threshold/Infinity system.

I also felt that the Mission was lacking something in the extreme
high frequencies.  At least I'm guessing that this was what I heard -
I perceived it as a greater freedom and "openness" on soprano high
notes and high string passages on the Magnavox as well as a greater
sense of spaciousness and ability to distinguish between the different
hall acoustics on the recordings used.

I realize that this directly contradicts several reviews, including
one in "Absolute Sound" which found the Mission to be in a separate
and higher class from all other CD players.  As I said, I was surprised
myself at what I heard, but found that, when switching back again to
recheck my findings that they were confirmed.

I should mention here that one of my friends (ironically, the one
who owns the Magnavox 1040) disagreed with me, at least to the extent
that he regarded the differences as putting the Mission in a more
positive light.  He felt a greater sense of presence and more of a
"lifelike" quality in the Mission.

The Meridian was a different case.  I found it quite different from
the Mission and closer to the Magnavox.  This is interesting, because
we didn't have one hand the actual Magnavox model (FD-1000) which serves
as a basis for the Meridian, whereas we were listening to the one on
which the Mission is based (actually Philips 104).  The Meridian seemed
to slightly "sweeten" the sound, by which I mean that recordings which
displayed a trace of harshness on the Magnavox seemed less so on the
Meridian, particularly the Prokofiev (I'll mention recordings separately).
I felt that the Meridian also had a slightly greater clarity in the
lower treble as well as allowing one to hear the individual lines in
complex orchestral passages more clearly.  I liked this, but another
friend (the one who owns the Mission) found it a little sterile and
analytical (I didn't).  I must emphasize, however, that the differences
(between the Meridian and the Magnavox) were extremely subtle and took 
some time and careful attention to perceive, whereas the differences 
between either the Magnavox or Meridian and the Mission were fairly obvious.

This led me to choose the Magnavox (actually I bought the 3040 rather than
the 1040) because I really didn't feel the differences in sound between
it and the Meridian were significant enough to match the cost difference.
Going to the 3040, the cost difference was still strongly in favor of the
Magnavox since that could be found with a much hefter discount than the
Meridian, and offered an abundance of features that the Meridian didn't.
As far as I was concerned, the Mission wasn't in the running.

These are, of course, only my own personal findings and represent my
biases and the frequency irregularities of my ears.  It may, in fact,
be that the Mission that I didn't like as well was actually the more
"accurate" player - since we didn't have a master tape on hand, I couldn't
say for sure.

I will post the recordings used for comparison, along with a brief
description of why I found each of them valuable for this purpose,
in a separate article since there may be some who would find that of
interest but who wouldn't care to meander through this long article.

	- Greg Paley