WOW just got back last night, spent about 1 hr on this thread, great testing and review Dan. :thumbsup:

No stone left un-turned. I am sure you had a lot of fun and I really enjoyed your review too.

I know it is in the ear of the listener, but I guess for me is the 03's compared to the 1100:

"Once again selecting the McIntosh MCD1100 the three dimensional aura slipped to a shallower depth, the glistening cymbal vibrations softened, seeming slightly muted, with the lower frequencies gaining weight, presenting the bass as marginally inflated compared to the K-03."

realness of the recording or not? I know for most of us sometimes more bass and more brightness seems better, and in this case it may be more accurate than the 1100.

But it makes me wonder still if that is the case. Maybe it would take a 3rd machine in the mix to verify?

All in all seems like a fantastic unit, and makes me think that the next model will have more inputs.

Great write Dan thank you:)
Ivan thank you too:)

I will include my $.02 Canadian and thank you for your detailed review. It was informative, well written, well presented, well advertised and just plain fun.

I will be looking for some new music to add to my collection, which has actually always been my favorite part of reading hifi rags.

Dave.......Thank you. Your input is interesting. A point I hope everyone gets is that no part of the MCD1100's playback sounds the slightest bit unnatural. The differences I heard between the McIntosh MCD1100 and the Esoteric K-03 are more accurately described as slightly different hues of the same colors. Both players offer an infinite color spectrum where most of the shades are nearly identical.

yep that is how I took it Dan.

White Gold
Yellow Gold

both GOLD :)

Dan, I guess I'm getting too old because I can't distinguish the sound from my MCD500 and my ARC Reference CD7. I know my 500 sounds better in my Mac system and the CD7 sounds better in my ARC system. Both are excellent players.

JBT.......I'd be willing to bet you could hear the difference if you put either of those players up against the McIntosh MCD1100 or the Esoteric K-03. :yes:

Dan, late to the party here, but great review. Thank you.

Not sure I am in the market for either of these beauties yet, but look forward to auditioning units, like these, that are a big step up from where I am today.

One thing that strikes me, realism and sound quality aside, is that the Esoteric digital products appear to be an order of magnitude better made/assembled - they exude high-end physical quality, materials, design and and workmanship.

Considering a K-03 is the price of an MCD1100, I know I would prefer the build quality of the Esoteric. Big bucks either way. But a whole lot more defensible with the K-03 I think.

Best,

Matt

Matt.......In defense of the McIntosh MCD1100, I was impressed with the build quality inside when I saw it open on the tech's work bench during the USB update. McIntosh's circuit topology and construction techniques are different than Esoteric's approach, but the circuit boards and power supply are well laid out. There is a big R-core transformer tucked in a isolated compartment visible when the bottom cover is removed.

I understand your point, the beefy nature of the Esoteric's build seems to enlist greater confidence that you are receiving your money's worth. Frankly, I don't care if an audio component weighs ten pounds or a hundred pounds. I am buying sound quality. I am not nearly as concerned about how a manufacturer arrives at delivering premium sound quality, only that audio components of interest delivers what I am seeking.

Dan I assume the beefy enclosure is to minimize transport and parts vibrations.
Angel

The Esoteric transport really is head & shoulders above the MCD1100. I'm looking forward to the K01's with it's clamp & shutter.