Dubai HFV (Mini) Meet & Marantz CD 6003 vs. Emotiva ERC-1 CD Player Shootout

if this wasn't the case, why would all of us ask for rest of the system when someone asks for a cdp recommendation? Synergy of components must have some value.

Venkat,

You are almost right in your statement. Given all things equal, if one player is better than the next then it could also be a function of how well the other components pair with it. So you cannot simply write off one just because it sounded bad, it may have a second life in another system.

I have seen Cambrdige audio players sound better/ really worse than some of the more expense Marantz or tube based players purely based on what its hooked upto. Yet it is one of the players I recommend for auditioning for potential buyers if such an option exists.
 
good points ANM & Marsilians.

Also to quote a part of one of this post here;

AVRs today are much better in sound reproduction than before.

I doubt this, I find todays AVR rather depressing when it comes to power. Most of the AVR out today are heavily decontentised when it comes to power.These exceprts from Steve Guttenberg rather well describe it.

Today's receivers are jam-packed with features, but the one thing they lack is power.

In fact, most $500 receivers never come close to delivering their rated power into all channels.

Some can barely manage a third of their claimed wattage. Right now, your 100 watt per channel receiver might be pumping out only 30 something watts.

People ask me about this stuff all the time--"Steve, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, Sony and Yamaha receivers all boast up to the nanosecond surround processing modes, connectivity options up the whazoo, and fancy shamncy remotes--so what exactly would a brawny multichannel amplifier get me?" My answer to these queries is always the same: "Just two things, the power and the glory."

The problem: Receivers, even big ticket, $2,000+ models can't spare enough internal real estate to house humongous transformers and hefty power supply capacitors--the compromises inevitably start there. Separate power amplifiers have room for all of that good stuff.
 
Mr. Dhilip,
For listening to music, please connect an integrated amplifier to your system and then give your views.

I did when I was in the auditioning phase. I liked the 876 better than Marantz PM 6003 & 8003. I think I have mentioned it in this very same thread.
 
good points ANM & Marsilians.

Also to quote a part of one of this post here;

AVRs today are much better in sound reproduction than before.

I doubt this, I find todays AVR rather depressing when it comes to power. Most of the AVR out today are heavily decontentised when it comes to power.These exceprts from Steve Guttenberg rather well describe it.

Today's receivers are jam-packed with features, but the one thing they lack is power.

In fact, most $500 receivers never come close to delivering their rated power into all channels.

Some can barely manage a third of their claimed wattage. Right now, your 100 watt per channel receiver might be pumping out only 30 something watts.

People ask me about this stuff all the time--"Steve, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, Sony and Yamaha receivers all boast up to the nanosecond surround processing modes, connectivity options up the whazoo, and fancy shamncy remotes--so what exactly would a brawny multichannel amplifier get me?" My answer to these queries is always the same: "Just two things, the power and the glory."

The problem: Receivers, even big ticket, $2,000+ models can't spare enough internal real estate to house humongous transformers and hefty power supply capacitors--the compromises inevitably start there. Separate power amplifiers have room for all of that good stuff.


Absolutely True
 
Arguments are good. But it is not possible to implement all the engineering and design parameters that are required to make amplifier make accurate "music" in an AVR.

There is not enough space nor does it make business sense to adhere to "accurate music creation associated design and engineering decisions while assembling and selling an AVR.

These drawbacks in an AVR are immediately audible to someone who moves from separates or decent integrated amps to an AVR. Is almost like the difference a cd listener hears when he is suddenly forced to listen to MP3s.

A simple experiment:
Connect a very resolving loudspeaker to an AVR and decent integrated. Please note that branded loudspeakers which are resolving enough to show differences in tone, rise and decay, natural timbre etc cost upwards of 2000$. Now play some well recorded music (music with natural instruments and non-synthesized voice only need to apply here). One easy way to check if the amplifier is resolving enough is to see how close the sound is to the real thing ! There are of course other aspects which can be tested but this is a decent enough test.

You can do this with umpteen number of test cds from renowned labels like chesky, opus etcEven a well recorded Hindustani classical will do.
Never test the resolving capabilities of an amp with cooked recordings. This is big mistake most people do. The recording is already cooked (synthesized using the computer) hence there is no reference to the real thing. Therefore your inference will be wrong. 99 percent of all current filimi music is cooked. The older ones are better because the engineers did not have the equipment to cook them ( thank god ! ).
 
Last edited:
good points ANM & Marsilians.

Also to quote a part of one of this post here;

AVRs today are much better in sound reproduction than before.

I doubt this, I find todays AVR rather depressing when it comes to power. Most of the AVR out today are heavily decontentised when it comes to power.These exceprts from Steve Guttenberg rather well describe it.

Today's receivers are jam-packed with features, but the one thing they lack is power.

In fact, most $500 receivers never come close to delivering their rated power into all channels.

Some can barely manage a third of their claimed wattage. Right now, your 100 watt per channel receiver might be pumping out only 30 something watts.

People ask me about this stuff all the time--"Steve, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, Sony and Yamaha receivers all boast up to the nanosecond surround processing modes, connectivity options up the whazoo, and fancy shamncy remotes--so what exactly would a brawny multichannel amplifier get me?" My answer to these queries is always the same: "Just two things, the power and the glory."

The problem: Receivers, even big ticket, $2,000+ models can't spare enough internal real estate to house humongous transformers and hefty power supply capacitors--the compromises inevitably start there. Separate power amplifiers have room for all of that good stuff.

Completely agree with you here.

Power and glory which you can achieve with a well designed power supply system with gobs of reserve is something that can be achieved only in a power amplifier. But this is only part of the problem. There are other design parameters and choice of components, noise, isolation etc...which adds to the problem.
 
Last edited:
just as an academic point. music these days is almost entirely 'cooked'. Almost Everyone, including the jazz and classical guys record (and mix, and even sometimes master) on pro tools (or nuendo or reason), and the idea of recorded sound being a document of a 'real thing' has almost faded into obscurity. These days there are only a few 'audiophile targetted' recordings that adhere to this philosophy and the vast majority of the music available is 'cooked' (to use your phrase). So shouldn't the ability of a sound reproduction system to do justice to this kind of music also be relevant, especially for those who are listening to the music for the sake of the music and not for the sound quality?
 
just as an academic point. music these days is almost entirely 'cooked'. Almost Everyone, including the jazz and classical guys record (and mix, and even sometimes master) on pro tools (or nuendo or reason), and the idea of recorded sound being a document of a 'real thing' has almost faded into obscurity. These days there are only a few 'audiophile targetted' recordings that adhere to this philosophy and the vast majority of the music available is 'cooked' (to use your phrase). So shouldn't the ability of a sound reproduction system to do justice to this kind of music also be relevant, especially for those who are listening to the music for the sake of the music and not for the sound quality?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with listening to anything or enjoying it. People assemble systems that do justice to the kind of music they like to listen to :)

The discussion here is about measuring quality and how one can reduce errors while at it.

There are thousands of albums out there which have none or minimal cooking done to it.
 
exactly, so my question is.....what is "quality" ? what is this elusive reality that all of us audio enthusiasts are seeking......when what goes into the recording has ditched the idea of 'reality' 9 times out of 10?

again, i am not saying this to argue, i am just thinking aloud. reproduction (what we so painstakingly fret over) is only one side of the coin.....recording, the other equally important side of the coin has in many cases decided to do away with 'reality' ....progressively....from the very early days of multi-tracking through synthesisers and samplers, through digital recording, mixing and mastering, compression, filtering and all of those nasty things....the concept of recorded sound has undergone such a profound transformation!

Therefore, isn't this 'reality' that we're all striving to reproduce within our living rooms, something of a chimera?

PS. yes i do know there are a few records that still try and 'keep it real' but the vast majority certainly cleaves to a different philosophy. And even something like say the Steely Dan sound (which many audiophiles love), which is pretty uncooked, faced a lot of flak for being 'dry' and lacking 'presence' and therefore not being 'real' enough.
 
Hi,

Just a genuine doubt! I dont have any doubt, at least right now, that an integrated amp easily beats an AVR in sound reproduction!

But in this case, the music out of the CD players tested here are "just" amplified out of the AVR using the pure audio out, which is supposed to do nothing but the amplification.

As per the suggestions, the marantz will perform great in good chain of components.

Will not the CD player, e.g., Emotiva, which performed well in the "compromised" testing done here when compared to Marantz CD6003 would perform much better than the Marantz when you change the chain of components, like CD player -> Integrated Amp or Pre or power -> Speakers?????

So, ultimately, again, the emotiva will outperform Marantz, right?

Cheers!
 
Don't "fight" over it. Sponsor me a CD6003, ERC-1, Pre, Power & room treatment. I will also invite at least 2-3 HFV members at a time (= room capacity) and conduct the shootout for 15 days in a row. We can settle this easily ;)

Or wait for psychotropic to get his ERC-1, capt has CD6003, arrange that long due Chennai HFV meet and decide - whichever is easier :)
 
Last edited:
Hi,

Just a genuine doubt! I dont have any doubt, at least right now, that an integrated amp easily beats an AVR in sound reproduction!

But in this case, the music out of the CD players tested here are "just" amplified out of the AVR using the pure audio out, which is supposed to do nothing but the amplification.

As per the suggestions, the marantz will perform great in good chain of components.

Will not the CD player, e.g., Emotiva, which performed well in the "compromised" testing done here when compared to Marantz CD6003 would perform much better than the Marantz when you change the chain of components, like CD player -> Integrated Amp or Pre or power -> Speakers?????

So, ultimately, again, the emotiva will outperform Marantz, right?

Cheers!

definetly for sure
 
Hi,

Will not the CD player, e.g., Emotiva, which performed well in the "compromised" testing done here when compared to Marantz CD6003 would perform much better than the Marantz when you change the chain of components, like CD player -> Integrated Amp or Pre or power -> Speakers?????

So, ultimately, again, the emotiva will outperform Marantz, right?

Cheers!

I think in an ideal amp circuit yes. But there are many factors, like the emotiva in conversion, transmission, passes certain frequencies better than others, which if the AVR was a 100% accurate amp then putting in better stages would add no difference. But typically, the AVR would still add certain inaccuracies which then make the pairing important.

I think in any such shootout, there will be biases based on the listeners (as they have listened to certain material in their own environment), as well as equipment based. I dont think all can be eliminated, but the chances of the emotiva beating the marantz should be high as it was heard by two diff ppl who have possibly heard a lot of different setups.

I think its practically impossible to try all combination of amp/speakers/interconnects to decide and one has to pick and choose the ones that are available.
 
Hi,

Just a genuine doubt! I dont have any doubt, at least right now, that an integrated amp easily beats an AVR in sound reproduction!

But in this case, the music out of the CD players tested here are "just" amplified out of the AVR using the pure audio out, which is supposed to do nothing but the amplification.

As per the suggestions, the marantz will perform great in good chain of components.

Will not the CD player, e.g., Emotiva, which performed well in the "compromised" testing done here when compared to Marantz CD6003 would perform much better than the Marantz when you change the chain of components, like CD player -> Integrated Amp or Pre or power -> Speakers?????

So, ultimately, again, the emotiva will outperform Marantz, right?

Cheers!

Welcome to the nit-picker club! Yes you argument sounds good, but it may also be that an audiophile grade setup may be transparent and revealing to the point that it exposes some flaws in the EMC so far hidden by the AVR.

This needs to be evaluated by CNC (Chennai Nit-Picker Club) followed by a 2nd opinion from BNC or a national committee of experts consisting of members from CNC, BNC, DNC and MNC...


Sent from my iPod touch
 
exactly, so my question is.....what is "quality" ? what is this elusive reality that all of us audio enthusiasts are seeking......when what goes into the recording has ditched the idea of 'reality' 9 times out of 10?

again, i am not saying this to argue, i am just thinking aloud. reproduction (what we so painstakingly fret over) is only one side of the coin.....recording, the other equally important side of the coin has in many cases decided to do away with 'reality' ....progressively....from the very early days of multi-tracking through synthesisers and samplers, through digital recording, mixing and mastering, compression, filtering and all of those nasty things....the concept of recorded sound has undergone such a profound transformation!

Therefore, isn't this 'reality' that we're all striving to reproduce within our living rooms, something of a chimera?

PS. yes i do know there are a few records that still try and 'keep it real' but the vast majority certainly cleaves to a different philosophy. And even something like say the Steely Dan sound (which many audiophiles love), which is pretty uncooked, faced a lot of flak for being 'dry' and lacking 'presence' and therefore not being 'real' enough.

Quality of reproduced sound ?

If the system is "neutral and resolving" then the following can be expected.

1. High quality and reasonably good quality recordings will sound "magical". There are a lot of such old and new recordings available. You just need to think beyond language and genres to find such gems. Recently a music lover told me that even if he does not buy even a single cd which is released from today onwards, I have enough music to draw upon for another 50 years !

2. Older recordings where there hardly any scope to screw up the recording quality will sound very nice.

3. Bad recordings will sound bad. The system is neutral so you will hear all the faults in the mix.

I agree with your view that all recordings need to go through a pipeline/process before the master is done.

Good recordists painstakingly make sure the final mix is as neutral and clean as possible. When you say 9 out of 10, it depends on what you listen to. For me it is the other way around. 8 out of 10 is a good recording.

Almost all recordists in film and pop music tailor the final mix to sound good on mediocre sound systems. The recording level is also kept high to take gain mileage in the loudness war. This is a commercial necessity and not something that the recordist would like to do. It is determined by a calculation of the total number of potential customers for a particular album/genre and the kind of systems they own and their sensibility. Then the producer/recordist derive a formula for the final mix which will sound the best for that particular group.

Ever wondered why hip hop recordings have a 10db hump at 60hz ? Think about the kind of systems owned by the hip hop crowd and their sensibility. You will get the answer !
 
Welcome to the nit-picker club! Yes you argument sounds good, but it may also be that an audiophile grade setup may be transparent and revealing to the point that it exposes some flaws in the EMC so far hidden by the AVR.

This needs to be evaluated by CNC (Chennai Nit-Picker Club) followed by a 2nd opinion from BNC or a national committee of experts consisting of members from CNC, BNC, DNC and MNC...


Sent from my iPod touch
Gobble, Forgot KNC?
 
srinisundar,

The dimensions of the Emotiva ERC-1 package is as follows:

Height - 8 inches
Width - 22.5 inches
Depth - 19 inches

The CD player is packed well by Emotiva using two boxes - an inner white box which is lined with thick Poly foam that wraps around the player so well that the player cannot move at all. Then the white box is put inside a traditional cardboard box.

Edit: The dimensions above are for the full packaging (i.e., the external cardboard box)
 
Last edited:
Gentlemen, it seems a majority of the members do not want to agree that a Marantz CD Player could be beaten.

Though I have said it before, let me qualify the audition done by TheKinge and me. In the given environment of amp, speakers, cables, and ICs, the Emotiva performed better than the Marantz. It is as simple as that.

Actually my argument goes a little further, as postulated by VenkateshSmart. IF the Emotiva can beat the Marantz is a 'questionable' setup as mentioned by many of you, I am sure it will perform equally well in a 'better' set up. After all the CDP is not intelligent enough to change the way it sings by sensing what is down the line in terms of electronics and speakers. It sends the same output always.

The Emotiva will be available to me in about 2 months. I will be testing it with some of the best high end 2 channel system available. I will try to compare it with a Maratnz 6003 again then.

Till then or another comparison doe by someone else, can we just rest this case?

Cheers
 
Gentlemen, it seems a majority of the members do not want to agree that a Marantz CD Player could be beaten.

Though I have said it before, let me qualify the audition done by TheKinge and me. In the given environment of amp, speakers, cables, and ICs, the Emotiva performed better than the Marantz. It is as simple as that.

Actually my argument goes a little further, as postulated by VenkateshSmart. IF the Emotiva can beat the Marantz is a 'questionable' setup as mentioned by many of you, I am sure it will perform equally well in a 'better' set up. After all the CDP is not intelligent enough to change the way it sings by sensing what is down the line in terms of electronics and speakers. It sends the same output always.

The Emotiva will be available to me in about 2 months. I will be testing it with some of the best high end 2 channel system available. I will try to compare it with a Maratnz 6003 again then.

Till then or another comparison doe by someone else, can we just rest this case?

Cheers

Squeak!
<Scamper> <Scamper> !
 

Attachments

  • Mouse-Scared.jpg
    Mouse-Scared.jpg
    4.8 KB · Views: 168
Follow HiFiMART on Instagram for offers, deals and FREE giveaways!
Back
Top