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