Ayre C-5xeMP

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by markc2

What was different, I heard the DV-60, but not the X03-se and both Ayre's the 7e and the 5e to me were smoother and yet more dynamic. I'm still trying to figure out how they can have something smooth and dynamic at the same time.

Mark

Mark
It is possible that for you smoother is a good thing. You may like tubes, whereas I am not into tubes because the do "smooth" the sound. IMO it takes the life out of the music. I also thought the original Ayre had less in the low end than the Esoteric unit. These were small differences and I can see why different people would pick one over the other.
Jim

[PHC1]

Based on my listening, the new MP filter does smooth out the sound but not to the detriment of dynamics. It takes the unnatural "edge" off and makes the sound more relaxed and organic sounding. No, the bass doesn't quite match the Krell 505 CDP I have right now as well but then again, the Krell's bass seems a little too artificially tight sounding. It's all preference, overall the Ayre 5xeMP is a less impressive sounding unit but more musical overall. In the context of some systems or personal listening preference the Krell may very well be the CDP of choice.

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Based on my listening, the new MP filter does smooth out the sound but not to the detriment of dynamics. It takes the unnatural "edge" off and makes the sound more relaxed and organic sounding.

Serge

Your comment addresses a key point in audio for me. I look for products that takes that slight "unnatural" edge off digital while retaining the dynamic benefits of SS and digital.

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by Stillone

Serge

Your comment addresses a key point in audio for me. I look for products that takes that slight "unnatural" edge off digital while retaining the dynamic benefits of SS and digital.

The new MP filter definitely addresses that issue of digital edge. It has to do with the "pre-echo" and "post ringing" associated with the digital process which does not happen with live musical instruments. It is an artifact that is inherent to digital process and has only now been started to be addressed. The Meridian CDP is using something similar to Ayre MP except based on what I read in stereophile's review of it, they have not eliminated post ringing and Ayre did.
In any case, the Ayre does take the edge off while still sounding dynamic and many recordings will sound more natural and smoother on the ear. I like it!

You can read about the MP filter here. http://www.ayre.com/pdf/Ayre_MP_White_Paper.pdf

[salmtpa]

It will be interesting to hear how PS Audio's filters sound in the PWD. According to the web page for the PWD the unit has 5 separate filter settings and has both linear and MP filters.

[salmtpa]

Serge,

I had a chance to hear the C5xeMP on Saturday. System was comprised of C1000T, MC402, Wilson WP8 and all Transparent cabling. Also in the system was the Audio Research REF CD7 player, the store doesn’t have a CD8 in stock yet. I listened to the Ref7 first and used Sarah McLachlan’s live CD Mirrorball as material, it was an impromptu stop and I just grabbed whatever I had in the car. I’m pretty familiar with this recording and wanted to hear the intro to Sweet Surrender and the piano on Angel.

Through the Ref7 things sounded good, very smooth, nice and relaxed. Overall, it was a sound that would be very easy to listen to for extended periods without fatigue setting in. When we switched over the C5 I immediately noticed some changes. Drum hits were far more pronounced on Sweet Surrender, especially the kick drum. Those dynamics were deeper and more naturally sustained. Same thing on Angel, through the Ayre the piano was far richer, as in natural sounding, with much better articulation of hammer on cord. Same for imaging, the Ayre was better focused and localization of instruments better presented. But what really struck me was PRAT. The Ayre just nailed all the timing cues far more naturally, providing a much more cohesive presentation. I think even a novice listener would be able to discern the difference in that regard between these two players, especially using something like the intro to Sweet Surrender where there is a lot going on with multiple instruments. Another area that stood out was it seemed the ARC player extended some tube smoothness in the mid range. A lot of people may like that, but in this case I think it detracted from the recording a bit. Sarah Mac has a very smooth and polished voice, but she can snarl at times and the ARC smoothed that out while the Ayre let it shine through. While this was only a brief sit down with the C5 I’d have to say it’s more neutral based on what I heard. It’s also kind of confusing to me, I have the ARC LS26 pre which uses the same tubes as the Ref7 and the LS26 is certainly not tube euphoric, much more to the neutral side of things.

It’s funny though, on its own I liked the ARC player; it was only on direct comparison that the Ayre exhibited its own virtues. How much of that is due to the new MP filter I don’t know. It would be certainly educational to be able to directly compare a legacy Ayre to one with the MP filter. But I can certainly see, or hear, why you chose the Ayre!

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by salmtpa

Serge,

I had a chance to hear the C5xeMP on Saturday. System was comprised of C1000T, MC402, Wilson WP8 and all Transparent cabling. Also in the system was the Audio Research REF CD7 player, the store doesn’t have a CD8 in stock yet. I listened to the Ref7 first and used Sarah McLachlan’s live CD Mirrorball as material, it was an impromptu stop and I just grabbed whatever I had in the car. I’m pretty familiar with this recording and wanted to hear the intro to Sweet Surrender and the piano on Angel.

Through the Ref7 things sounded good, very smooth, nice and relaxed. Overall, it was a sound that would be very easy to listen to for extended periods without fatigue setting in. When we switched over the C5 I immediately noticed some changes. Drum hits were far more pronounced on Sweet Surrender, especially the kick drum. Those dynamics were deeper and more naturally sustained. Same thing on Angel, through the Ayre the piano was far richer, as in natural sounding, with much better articulation of hammer on cord. Same for imaging, the Ayre was better focused and localization of instruments better presented. But what really struck me was PRAT. The Ayre just nailed all the timing cues far more naturally, providing a much more cohesive presentation. I think even a novice listener would be able to discern the difference in that regard between these two players, especially using something like the intro to Sweet Surrender where there is a lot going on with multiple instruments. Another area that stood out was it seemed the ARC player extended some tube smoothness in the mid range. A lot of people may like that, but in this case I think it detracted from the recording a bit. Sarah Mac has a very smooth and polished voice, but she can snarl at times and the ARC smoothed that out while the Ayre let it shine through. While this was only a brief sit down with the C5 I’d have to say it’s more neutral based on what I heard. It’s also kind of confusing to me, I have the ARC LS26 pre which uses the same tubes as the Ref7 and the LS26 is certainly not tube euphoric, much more to the neutral side of things.

It’s funny though, on its own I liked the ARC player; it was only on direct comparison that the Ayre exhibited its own virtues. How much of that is due to the new MP filter I don’t know. It would be certainly educational to be able to directly compare a legacy Ayre to one with the MP filter. But I can certainly see, or hear, why you chose the Ayre!

Sal, the Ayre C5xeMP does tend to nail the dynamics and PRAT very well. It also sounds very natural and non-fatiguing while presenting much of the details buried in the recording. Great CDP for a neutral sounding system. The MP filter does wonders.

I've also been listening to the Krell Evo 505 CDP over the past week. This one will smoke all the CDPs I've had so far with eye blinking dynamics and detail but overall one needs a forgiving system unless your library consists of audiophile grade recordings as it is not a very forgiving CDP, all the flaws in the recordings will be revealed. To hear it with well recorded material is a treat though! I can get away with a CDP like this with my Sonus Faber speakers but not sure if it would work for me with Wilson speakers long term.

Thanks for sharing your findings and opinion on the Ayre CDP.

[salmtpa]

So when do we get to hear what you think of the Sophia 2s? It's funny, it seems every time I go to my dealer I end up spending time in front of the Sophias. I'll have to see if I can get him to set up a Krell stack in CAST with the 505, and the Sophias of course!

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by salmtpa

So when do we get to hear what you think of the Sophia 2s? It's funny, it seems every time I go to my dealer I end up spending time in front of the Sophias. I'll have to see if I can get him to set up a Krell stack in CAST with the 505, and the Sophias of course!

The Sophia 2s should be in my system by the end of the week. Of course I'll give them some time to break in and report back. I've heard various variations of Wilson from Sophia to Alexandria driven by Krell stereo and mono from the 402 stereo amp to the 900 mono's and I am not a big fan of that pairing. The Krell did pair up really nicely with SF Elipsa. I can live with that pairing for sure. We'll see what the Sophia/Lamm pairing brings to the table.

[salmtpa]

I'll be looking forward to your impressions.