"Here are my impressions of both players.
SACD Listening
When we first listened to the Meitner combo on an SACD classical piece, my
initial impression was that it sounded very, very good. world-class, in
fact. The soundstage was wide, the instruments were well articulated, the
sense of presence was excellent, dynamics were very good, top end extension
was good and bass was good. There was no smearing to the sound and it had
great PRAT. Overall I felt the Meitner was an excellent sounding digital
player. In fact if I hadn't heard the APL Denon, I would have left the
listening session feeling that the Meitner was one of - if not "THE" - very
best digital players I'd ever head. Interestingly, as I reflect on the
listening session, when I heard the Meitner, my focus of attention was on
"the Meitner" and how well it conveyed the music being played. Almost like
walking through a mall and window shopping at a jewelry store, but focusing
on how nicely the display was decorated and how well it presented the items
being offered (instead of the jewelry itself).
On to the APL Denon. When we played the same classical track on the APL
Denon, it was a completely different experience compared to what I heard on
the Meitner. The best way to describe my reaction was "jaw dropping".
My reaction was that what I was hearing was NOT digital music reproduction
at all. Let me repeat, what I heard through the APL Denon did NOT sound
digital at all! Call it analog sounding, or whatever you want, but it was
without a doubt, very, very different than ANY other digital player I've
EVER heard. Specifically, the dynamics had much more impact and were much
more realistic compared to the Meitner, the bass extension was much greater
and deeper, the individual instruments were much more palpable and
articulate. Another thing that stood out for me was the dimensionality on
the APL Denon. The music seemed to have much more depth, giving me a greater
sense of being in the presence of the performance. Also, the ambient
retrieval of information in the recording venue was vastly superior on the
Denon. For example, I could hear the bass reverberate off the walls of the
venue much more realistically compared to what I heard with the Meitner. The
layering of instruments on the Denon far surpassed the Meitner. While
listening to music through the Denon, there was a far greater sense of being
in the presence of the orchestra.
Back to the window shopping analogy, I felt like instead of focusing on "how
good this machine plays music" (focus on the player) I found myself
forgetting about the player and focusing, listening, enjoying - evening
seeing - the actual musical performance. Once again, I found that listening
to music through the APL Denon is so far from listening to "digital" that
it's almost hard to call the APL Denon a digital player. In my experience,
the APL Denon lets a listener experience as close to a live musical
performance as possible from a medium that happens to be digital.
Red Book
On the Red Book track we listened to, my initial reaction was mixed when
comparing the Meitner to the APL Denon. The second time we listened to the
track, we raised the volume on both players to a more comfortable listening
level. a level that more easily revealed the differences between the two
players. While one of the members seemed to prefer the tonality of the
instruments through the Meitner, I felt that what the APL Denon was
revealing was much more true-to-life compared to the Meitner. So far, on Red
Book, my impressions mirrored those while listening to SACD, but to a lesser
degree. When we switched the APL Denon to the slow-rolloff mode, my initial
reaction was that the instruments sounded different tonally and the highs
were not quite as extended compared to the fast rolloff setting. However, in
comparing the APL Denon in slow rolloff to the Meitner, I still felt the APL
Denon revealed greater dimensionality and layering of instruments, greater
dynamics and much better bass compared to the Meitner. After listening with
the slow rolloff setting on the APL Denon, I felt that further listening was
needed to draw any final conclusions (between the fast and slow rolloff
settings).
In this context, I would summarize my impressions comparing the Meitner
DCC2 to the APL Denon 3910:
Meitner DCC2 playing SACD
--comparative strengths - None
--comparative weaknesses - Compared to the APL Denon, the dynamics, bass
extension, the soundstage depth and layering of information, and the ambient
retrieval of information was not as true-to-life on the Meitner compared to
the APL Denon.
APL Denon playing SACD
--comparative strengths - Dynamics were far better on the APL Denon compared
to the Meitner, bass extension was much better on the APL Denon,
dimensionality was much more realistic sounding on the APL Denon, ambient
retrieval of information of the recording venue was "scary realistic" on the
APL player compared to the Meitner, individual instruments were much more
palpable sounding on the APL compared to the Meitner.
--comparative weaknesses - None
Meitner DCC2 playing Red Book
--comparative strengths - None
--comparative weaknesses - Similar weaknesses as on SACD including, dynamics
not as good compared to the APL Denon, the soundstage depth and layering of
instruments were not as good compared to the APL Denon, and the ambience was
not as realistic as compared to the APL Denon.
APL Denon playing Red Book
--comparative strengths - Similar strengths as on SACDs, but to a lesser
degree compared to SACD (at least on track we listened to during the
listening session) --comparative weaknesses - None
APL Denon playing Red Book with slow rolloff --comparative strengths - Once
again, seemed to convey the music in a more realistic manner, including
dynamics, bass, highs, soundstage depth, layering and dimensionality.
--comparative weaknesses - None.
One final comment I'd like to make is that in my experience (as demonstrated
toward the end of the listening session), cabling and isolation control are
important elements in tuning a system. And during the listening session, we
attempted to isolate all variables except the players so we could attempt an
"apples to apples" comparison. But we did this by using the cabling and
isolation that were available by one of our members (thanks Tim!). But I
think all members would agree, the cabling and isolation on both systems
were far from optimal. So the last thing I'd like to say is that what we
heard during the listening session is just a taste of what both of these
machines are capable of. With the right cables, isolation control and
"tuning" I'm quite certain both of these players can produce even more
"magic" that what we heard.
Gary G"
Og dette er om den mindre strålende APL 3910 ;D