I got my MCD1000 yesterday, I let it burn in for about 20hrs on repeat mode and started doing some serious listening this afternoon. Having compared it to the 201 used as a transport and 201 used as a CDP/pre vs MCD/MDA these are my conclusions:
1. Starting with the build quality: Obviously the MCD1000 is in a league of its own as compared to the 201. Starting from the gorgeous gold "McIntosh" engravings, the glass covered schematic diagram on top, the thick metal chassis and the solid metal CD tray that slides in and out in complete silence and precision, it just screams "quality" and superb workmanship. When paired with the MDA, the matching looks compliment one another and they look great together.:thmbsp:
2. Load time is much quicker with the MCD1000 as compared to MCD201, where using the MCD201 meant loading the CD, walking back to the couch and waiting another few more seconds, the MCD1000 is ready to go by the time I get back to the listening position. The MCD transport is completely silent, no audible noises can be heard when the CD is spinning. Switching tracks is also a little quicker now. No skipping, freezing or any other anomalies has been discovered yet, not that I ever had any problems with the MCD201 either.
3. On to the sonics: I used the same Guerrilla Audio copper 75 ohm digital cable as I previously used on the MCD201 as well as a fairly expensive ($800 retail) Nordost Silver Shadow AES/EBU 110 ohm cable for comparison. The MDA makes it very easy to compare different cables by the way with its instant switching inputs with no delays or sound dropouts. The first thing that strikes you right away is the difference you hear in bass, the MCD is able to extract more of it from the CDs and it has more "weight" and "slam" factor. This is especially more noticeable with the AES/EBU connection. The Nordost cable may be the difference or maybe the AES/EBU connection itself over the coax? The bass by the way, is often the defining difference between an awesome and mediocre transports from my previous experiences, not sure of the mechanics involved but it could be the way the laser reads the CD pits and the vibration levels of a well damped, solid chassis vs one of lesser build quality. The MCD had "the bass thing" going on!
On further listening, the more subtle but audible differences were the attack and decay of the instrument transients, the MCD just sounds more "HI-FI" in this area, depending on the type of music playing at the time, the MCD just makes the music more involving. This was actually a very interesting finding, every time the MCD was in use, the music was just more complete, wholesome and involving. Yeah, the MCD got the "PRAT" going on too. I found myself constantly being drawn deeper into the music whether it was high energy multi-instrument recording or simply a solo violin, the MCD presented the recording with more emotion, communicating the message of music clearer thus I couldn't help myself but to be totally absorbed by the music. Where I often lost focus and would start daydreaming or thinking about something else while the 201 was playing the MCD kept my attention the whole time. This is often the effect of a great sounding system, when everything sounds just right, the music is just that much more fun to listen to and will constantly invite your attention to it, allowing you to relax and be drawn into music. The MCD communicated the emotion of music to a higher degree, where the 201 just simply sounds great but ultimately is just not quite as involving as it turns out.
One other finding from the few hours I spent comparing them is that on some CDs, the soundstage has a more holographic presentation to it, the layering of instruments front to back is a little better defined with a sense of more believable depth and space between the instruments, not so much side to side as the 201 is also great at this but specifically front to back where the 201 bunches up the instruments and flattens the soundstage out a little more, the MCD gives them a more proper placement, this is also a more of a "HI-FI" presentation that makes music reproduction more fun and real.
In summary, there are a few things that MCD does better than the 201 strictly transport vs transport speaking, as the 201 used as a CDP/pre falls way short of the MCD/MDA combo if one is into extracting all there is to have from a recording, although the 201 is a fantastic piece all by itself in a context of a less expensive, less perfectionist/enthusiastic system.
Comparing them transport vs transport, the difference is there, some things that I mentioned above are very clear and audible, some are too close to call. Both exhibit the smooth yet detailed overall presentation with virtually no trace of digital harshness, edginess or aggression, both are musical and enjoyable to the highest degree, the MCD being better at giving you a HI-FI presentation with proper soundstage width and depth, slightly better transients and being a good amount more involving overall. I have to say I am pleasantly surprised and impressed with the overall improvement the MCD is able to create. I certainly did not expect there to be much of a difference and I wanted to buy the MCD more for the purpose of having the 201 matched up with the 275 in a different system all together and MCD being paired up with the MDA. I would strongly say that the MCD is definitely worth the price difference over the 201 and anyone with an MDA should consider getting the MCD as a transport for the ultimate redbook CD playback system!:thmbsp:
1. Starting with the build quality: Obviously the MCD1000 is in a league of its own as compared to the 201. Starting from the gorgeous gold "McIntosh" engravings, the glass covered schematic diagram on top, the thick metal chassis and the solid metal CD tray that slides in and out in complete silence and precision, it just screams "quality" and superb workmanship. When paired with the MDA, the matching looks compliment one another and they look great together.:thmbsp:
2. Load time is much quicker with the MCD1000 as compared to MCD201, where using the MCD201 meant loading the CD, walking back to the couch and waiting another few more seconds, the MCD1000 is ready to go by the time I get back to the listening position. The MCD transport is completely silent, no audible noises can be heard when the CD is spinning. Switching tracks is also a little quicker now. No skipping, freezing or any other anomalies has been discovered yet, not that I ever had any problems with the MCD201 either.
3. On to the sonics: I used the same Guerrilla Audio copper 75 ohm digital cable as I previously used on the MCD201 as well as a fairly expensive ($800 retail) Nordost Silver Shadow AES/EBU 110 ohm cable for comparison. The MDA makes it very easy to compare different cables by the way with its instant switching inputs with no delays or sound dropouts. The first thing that strikes you right away is the difference you hear in bass, the MCD is able to extract more of it from the CDs and it has more "weight" and "slam" factor. This is especially more noticeable with the AES/EBU connection. The Nordost cable may be the difference or maybe the AES/EBU connection itself over the coax? The bass by the way, is often the defining difference between an awesome and mediocre transports from my previous experiences, not sure of the mechanics involved but it could be the way the laser reads the CD pits and the vibration levels of a well damped, solid chassis vs one of lesser build quality. The MCD had "the bass thing" going on!
On further listening, the more subtle but audible differences were the attack and decay of the instrument transients, the MCD just sounds more "HI-FI" in this area, depending on the type of music playing at the time, the MCD just makes the music more involving. This was actually a very interesting finding, every time the MCD was in use, the music was just more complete, wholesome and involving. Yeah, the MCD got the "PRAT" going on too. I found myself constantly being drawn deeper into the music whether it was high energy multi-instrument recording or simply a solo violin, the MCD presented the recording with more emotion, communicating the message of music clearer thus I couldn't help myself but to be totally absorbed by the music. Where I often lost focus and would start daydreaming or thinking about something else while the 201 was playing the MCD kept my attention the whole time. This is often the effect of a great sounding system, when everything sounds just right, the music is just that much more fun to listen to and will constantly invite your attention to it, allowing you to relax and be drawn into music. The MCD communicated the emotion of music to a higher degree, where the 201 just simply sounds great but ultimately is just not quite as involving as it turns out.
One other finding from the few hours I spent comparing them is that on some CDs, the soundstage has a more holographic presentation to it, the layering of instruments front to back is a little better defined with a sense of more believable depth and space between the instruments, not so much side to side as the 201 is also great at this but specifically front to back where the 201 bunches up the instruments and flattens the soundstage out a little more, the MCD gives them a more proper placement, this is also a more of a "HI-FI" presentation that makes music reproduction more fun and real.
In summary, there are a few things that MCD does better than the 201 strictly transport vs transport speaking, as the 201 used as a CDP/pre falls way short of the MCD/MDA combo if one is into extracting all there is to have from a recording, although the 201 is a fantastic piece all by itself in a context of a less expensive, less perfectionist/enthusiastic system.
Comparing them transport vs transport, the difference is there, some things that I mentioned above are very clear and audible, some are too close to call. Both exhibit the smooth yet detailed overall presentation with virtually no trace of digital harshness, edginess or aggression, both are musical and enjoyable to the highest degree, the MCD being better at giving you a HI-FI presentation with proper soundstage width and depth, slightly better transients and being a good amount more involving overall. I have to say I am pleasantly surprised and impressed with the overall improvement the MCD is able to create. I certainly did not expect there to be much of a difference and I wanted to buy the MCD more for the purpose of having the 201 matched up with the 275 in a different system all together and MCD being paired up with the MDA. I would strongly say that the MCD is definitely worth the price difference over the 201 and anyone with an MDA should consider getting the MCD as a transport for the ultimate redbook CD playback system!:thmbsp:
Finally, you had them paired.:thmbsp: Like I said before, the MCD1000 & MDA1000 are the best redbook CD player there is.:yes: And noticed you also got your 2nd system now in place.
