Preliminary Impressions of the Emm Labs XDS1
We spent some time comparing the Emm Labs XDS1 single-box player to the older Emm Labs two-box CDSD transport DCC2 DAC combo. From this comparison we can deduce some differences between the XDS1 and the two-box Emm Labs TSD1 transport and DAC2 DAC (which we spent quite a bit of time with previously and with which we did this comparison with the older pair many times).
Whew!
The one sentence conclusion is that the XDS1 is a evolutionary improvement ‘in kind’ with the improvements the TSD1/DAC2 brought us compared to the CDSD/DCC2 – taking it another step in the direction of blacker backgrounds, control and separation – with unexpectedly, a few additional evolutionary improvements in the bass and dynamics areas.
By evolutionary, I mean you don’t immediately wince when you go from the XDS1 to the CDSD/DCC2 [it is not like going from an ODIN power cord to a ordinary top-of-the-line power cord]. You won’t immediately wince – but you will eventually.
Going from the CDSD/DCC2 to the XDS1 it is much more apparent. There is a greater ease to the presentation: dynamically, details, harmonics – it all makes the other player seem like it is ‘trying hard’ whereas the TSD1 it just happens effortlessly.
Personally, I think these are all related. The greater control over each note of the XDS1 lends itself to having greater ‘slam’, along with the blacker background to be able to pick out individual violins instead of it sounding like just one with a lot of ‘noise that could be other violins’.
We could play the XDS1 louder than the other pair – it had greater resolving capability and whereas the older pair as not able to disambiguate the individual sounds, making it kind of bloby and overwhelming at certain frequencies, the TSD1 sounded just fine. All the instruments could be heard correctly so at the higher volume, it just sounded louder [i.e. the slightly confused rendering of the notes was always there in the older pair, they just didn’t overwhelm us with their unpleasantness until the volume was turned way up].
The UNconfused rendering of the notes of the XDS1, the significantly enhanced control over the notes, the deeper, more round and 3-dimensional bass, the blacker background, made a more immediate and significant impact than the TSD1/DAC2 did over the older CDSD/DCC2 – lending us to conclude that the XDS1 is at least one-step-beyond the TSD1/DAC2 pair.
And now I want to talk about the more psychological aspects of the sound of the XDS1. This is the most fun part for me – both to experience (!) and to write about. But it is also sad because it takes a $25K player [as well as a decent system. This system is quite good – but its optimization is still an in-progress thing] to get to this state-of-mind I am going to TRY to describe.
When you first get the XDS1, it takes some amount of time of concentrated listening [for me] but eventually I got to this space where it I was feeling so much joy listening to one track after the next, one CD after the next. I think a lot of it was because I could just relax ‘in-between the notes’. The awesomely deep black background [without attenuating detail. This is important. This is different than most other ‘blacker backgrounds’ and seems most similar to the Walker Turntable black. But it is even blacker.] combined with resolving capability that we really do not associate with digital players, combined with the control to make the notes do what they the music says they should do and the dynamic capability to make it all seem easy resulted in….
.. an ability to relax and ‘Trust the Music’.
.. to let the music wrap all these strands of melodies around and around you as you listen…
.. picking this melody or that instrument to follow or focus on … but the others are still there(!), doing their thing, not competing with each other, but complementing each other
.. to marvel at the wonderfully rich complexity and beauty of the notes down to the smallest aspect of each note and how it fits into its strand of the melody
.. how it becomes an almost tactile thing – an almost physical experience… ‘touching the music and being touched by it’
Anyway, I had these experiences with the TSD1/DAC2 on a almost perfectly optimized system [Coltrane/Ongaku/ODIN and sometimes some PRIME (which additionally allowed us to experience decays of amazing beauty)]. Now the XDS1 is allowing me to have them on a less optimized system [Audio Note speakers|Kegon Balanced|DAC2 Preamp|ODIN|Valhalla|AcroLink].
Already I am an addict. Pursuing these experiences is about half of what I devote my personal system ‘I Really Want That’ energies to.
[The other half is more amorphous right now – in the direction of a purer Audio Note approach combined with big open well-designed horn speakers. Yeah, amorphous because we don’t got no horn speakers here (and the ones that we did are moving in a direction untenable to us).]
Ergo, almost all my personal audio desire/passion/addiction is for these systems fronted by the newest Emm Labs gear and the high quality systems that are able to do what I want them to do – to provide these kinds of experiences.
Jeez, and I told Neli this was going to be a short write up. 🙂
Mike,
Thanks for providing your preliminary impression on the XDS1. In regard to XDS1’s performance vis-a-vis the TSD1/DAC2 combo, I wonder what is the incremental benefit provided by the new Esoteric VRDS transport mechanism. Of course, I’m assuming the software versions of these units are similar — could be wrong here.
Ken
Hi Ken, Neli here …
Off the bat, what I will say about that (awesome) transport … is that it’s FAST. Freaking instantaneously responsive. This is addictive.
There is also a major reworking of the power supply and the DAC is related but an evolutionary step better. There are a *lot* of hardware changes, not sure what more I can say right now about them.
The purity of the emmLabs sound prevails … the XDS1 is just more and more emm-ish — again, in ways that we had not ever thought would be problems with the previous generation.
Kind regards,
-neli
Thanks, Neli. This is the Ken from Texas — we had a conversation regarding Audio Note speakers. I will be attending RMAF and look forward to meeting you and Mike.
Ken
I’m a little confused… When you said, “The UNconfused rendering of the notes of the TSD1, the significantly enhanced control over the notes, the deeper, more round and 3-dimensional bass, the blacker background, made a more immediate and significant impact than the TSD1/DAC2 did over the older CDSD/DCC2 – lending us to conclude that the XDS1 is at least one-step-beyond the TSD1/DAC2 pair,” did you mean the unconfused rendering of the XDS1? I think I understand that you think the CDSD/DCC2 is bettered by the TSD1/DAC2 combo, but I couldn’t tell from the wording if you felt the XDS1 had now bettered the TSD1/DAC2 combo.?? It all gets tangled with acronym & number combinations.
For a single player that competes with emm labs own single CDSA player, there is a huge price difference. How much of the Esoteric’s transport use in the XDS1 accounts for such a difference? I had read elsewhere that an Esoteric player hooked up to the DAC2 was inferior in every way to the TSD1’s own DAISy/StreamUnlimited metal transport. What are your thoughts? And what performance differences might there be between the two single players?
Thanks,
Phil
I think what also contributed to my confusion about whether you were talking about the XDS1 or not was, “And now I want to talk about the more psychological aspects of the sound of the TSD1. This is the most fun part for me – both to experience (!) and to write about. But it is also sad because it takes a $25K player [as well as a decent system…” and “When you first get the TSD1, it takes some amount of time of concentrated listening [for me] but eventually I got to this space where it I was feeling so much joy listening to one track after the next….”
XDS1 or TSD1?
Thanks,
Phil
Hi Phil,
Oh man – that WAS confusing. I think I have cleared it up some. The acronym and number combinations are hard for me to get from brain to fingers, apparently. One wrong letter or dyslexic swap and it is a different player! Reminds me of the LAMM acronyms. And Acura.
Thanks SO MUCH for pointing those out. I had Neli read it earlier, and even she, she of the eagle eye, missed those.
To be kind of blunt – or straight to the point, and kind of ignoring a lot of subtle associated details, the single-box CDSA singlebox player made a bit hit when it came out. Its immediacy was very nice and, although it did not have the resolution or transparency of the 2-box, twice as expensive CDSD/DCC2 – it did some things that people really liked.
So the TSD1/DAC2 came out, and it was the child of both parents – the CDSA and the CDSD/DCC2. It bested both in what they were good at: immediacy and resolution [and a whole lot more, but we are simplifying here]. It also added some things: a really black background for one that goes beyond what I had previously thought of as black [and lets just assume this blackness results in otherwordly separation and note control etc.].
The XDS1 continues in this direction – we both here think taking another step beyond the TSD1/DAC2 [yes, I am trying hard to keep the acronyms correct]. But it also may have added more organic [hate that word in this context – let’s call it more 3D] bass and slam [which the TSD1/DAC2 also had – but it was not so apparent so we just ascribed it to the notes coming out of a blacker background – lending a sense of increased dynamics].
To answer a previous question – it is this bass and slam that I, personally, think the new Esoteric transport has added to the sound.
As I understand it the Esoteric transport hooked up to the DAC2 would not be taking advantage of the new packet based protocol that is native to the DAC2 – so this may account for the reduction in performance – it having to go through an additional translation layer.
Also, as I understand it – and I have not talked to the factory, Neli has, and as she alluded to in her comments to this post – the Esoteric transport was only one of many improvements they have introduced in the XDS1.
If I my be so bold again, and since I started I might was well keep going – its not quite midnight YET – the DAC2 is great for people with music servers/PCs/or other sources who need the best DAC available. The TSD1 is a transport for these people who need the DAC2 who want to play CDs on the best transport available for the DAC2. The XDS1 is the best player available for people who do not care about USB etc. and plugging lots of stuff into it [although it does have a couple of inputs that a decent PC sound card can mate with]. So although the XDS1 can do most of the jobs the DAC2 does, the DAC2 is less than half the price and is great for those people who want a DAC now, and maybe a transport later.
I hope this that paragraph was not too confused. The problem is that the number of use cases in the digital arena is growing quite rapidly. The XDS1 also supports 24×96 downloads and we think that maybe by the end of the year 24×192 downloads as well. There are just a heckuva lot of ways people are using digital these days.
Now, if I were even more bold, I would speculate on the direction Ed Meitner is going with respect to the sound… but maybe I’ll wait for a time when I am more awake.
If you are going to RMAF you can hear the player as well as talk to Shahin and perhaps one or more of the Meitners in our room to find out more about what they have done [or you can call Neli, she knows a lot more than me about the technical details and she hasn’t got a chance to do a brain dump to me yet].
Hope this all helps!
Take care,
Mike.