Here are some thoughts and observations on some of the top digital made today - Playback Designs MPS 5, dCS Scarlatti, and Boulder 1021.
SACD
I have heard the dCS Scarlatti player many times. If you don't compare it any top digital product, it's pretty amazing. However once you compare it to the top competition, it's weaknesses are glaring. It's kind of like a top college draft pick who has been devouring the weak competition at the lower levels and looks physically bigger and stronger than anyone else on any college field. But once this person gets drafted in the first round and faces some real competition, he stinks up the joint and the bloom quickly comes off the rose.
The dCS player has an amazing ability to pick information off the disk, sounds smooth/ polished and presents the instruments in a very 3-dimensional manner. But it sounds really thick, dense, slow, plodding, and "too smooth". It's kind of like watching honey roll down. It doesn't get your foot tapping, which is the purpose of our hobby! In comparison on SACD, the Playback Designs player sounds much more open, dynamic, nimble, engaging, and alive. Boulder does not do SACD, so PD MPS 5 is the clear winner for SACD. For $65K less than the dCS player, owners of a lot of SACDs will be very satisfied with Playback Designs.
Redbook CD
The dCS sonic signature remains the same for SACD and red book - which is detailed but DULL. In comparison, the Playback designs player has much more pace and rhythm. But PD sounds flat and smooshed. For very old or badly recorded CDs, the dCS is definitely preferable to PD. Between dcS and PD for better recorded CDs, one has to decide if he prefers a more analytic, thicker, and slower player that has better space around the instruments (dCS) vs. a more nimble player that sounds very flat and doesn't have the musical detail of the best digital (PD).
Neither is ideal, IMO, so bring in Boulder 1021. In comparison, the Boulder has much better bass that makes music sound real. The Boulder also sounds more transparent - one can hear "right through" the stage, and hear the hiss as well a lot of tiny details. PD and Scarlatti get rid of the hiss and don't have the "open window" transparency. Boulder also does a good job with having 3 dimensional space around the instruments, but lacks the smooth highs of Playback Designs MPS 5. Despite the lack of highs, the Boulder is the best redbook player of the 3 due to its more real foundation it sets for all music with its exceptional bass dynamics. If Playback Designs could just get rid of the flatness and "smooshness" of the instruments, it would easily be top choice.
Too bad you could not get this information from reading the reviews. Both Fremer and Valin said dCS was the "best". Valin listens primarily to vinyl, so he probably doesn't know what good digital sounds like, and probably doesn't really care. And has he ever given a bad review to an expensive product? Why couldn't he pass this player on to Harley or Cordesman or Heilbrunn?
Fremer, on the other hand, bought the Playback designs review sample after he said the PD SACD was just like dCS. He lied - PD is better!! I could see him being "diplomatic" and not trying to ruin the Stereophile relationship with dCS. But he was completely wrong about the Playback Designs on CD. It was hard, flat, and smooshed. Yet this was left out of the review. Makes you wonder whose side the reviewers are on.
SACD
I have heard the dCS Scarlatti player many times. If you don't compare it any top digital product, it's pretty amazing. However once you compare it to the top competition, it's weaknesses are glaring. It's kind of like a top college draft pick who has been devouring the weak competition at the lower levels and looks physically bigger and stronger than anyone else on any college field. But once this person gets drafted in the first round and faces some real competition, he stinks up the joint and the bloom quickly comes off the rose.
The dCS player has an amazing ability to pick information off the disk, sounds smooth/ polished and presents the instruments in a very 3-dimensional manner. But it sounds really thick, dense, slow, plodding, and "too smooth". It's kind of like watching honey roll down. It doesn't get your foot tapping, which is the purpose of our hobby! In comparison on SACD, the Playback Designs player sounds much more open, dynamic, nimble, engaging, and alive. Boulder does not do SACD, so PD MPS 5 is the clear winner for SACD. For $65K less than the dCS player, owners of a lot of SACDs will be very satisfied with Playback Designs.
Redbook CD
The dCS sonic signature remains the same for SACD and red book - which is detailed but DULL. In comparison, the Playback designs player has much more pace and rhythm. But PD sounds flat and smooshed. For very old or badly recorded CDs, the dCS is definitely preferable to PD. Between dcS and PD for better recorded CDs, one has to decide if he prefers a more analytic, thicker, and slower player that has better space around the instruments (dCS) vs. a more nimble player that sounds very flat and doesn't have the musical detail of the best digital (PD).
Neither is ideal, IMO, so bring in Boulder 1021. In comparison, the Boulder has much better bass that makes music sound real. The Boulder also sounds more transparent - one can hear "right through" the stage, and hear the hiss as well a lot of tiny details. PD and Scarlatti get rid of the hiss and don't have the "open window" transparency. Boulder also does a good job with having 3 dimensional space around the instruments, but lacks the smooth highs of Playback Designs MPS 5. Despite the lack of highs, the Boulder is the best redbook player of the 3 due to its more real foundation it sets for all music with its exceptional bass dynamics. If Playback Designs could just get rid of the flatness and "smooshness" of the instruments, it would easily be top choice.
Too bad you could not get this information from reading the reviews. Both Fremer and Valin said dCS was the "best". Valin listens primarily to vinyl, so he probably doesn't know what good digital sounds like, and probably doesn't really care. And has he ever given a bad review to an expensive product? Why couldn't he pass this player on to Harley or Cordesman or Heilbrunn?
Fremer, on the other hand, bought the Playback designs review sample after he said the PD SACD was just like dCS. He lied - PD is better!! I could see him being "diplomatic" and not trying to ruin the Stereophile relationship with dCS. But he was completely wrong about the Playback Designs on CD. It was hard, flat, and smooshed. Yet this was left out of the review. Makes you wonder whose side the reviewers are on.