Sound stage

[Berkel]

I'm asking for ideas / opinions on the following scenario please :

 

I have 2 CD players : Denon DCD 800 NE ( excellent and bought from fellow SNA member )

                                    : Rotel RCD 965 BX  ( purchased on ebay, since I was intrigued about its' good reputation ).

The Rotel sounds very nice and smooth, without any " digititis " and has a great soundstage in both width and depth.

However, the Denon is able to reproduce the " timbre " of instruments more realistically, and with more detail.

 

I compared them for a while yesterday, and what struck me the most was that music played through the Denon, seemed more " concentrated " in the centre and right of soundstage, whereas via the Rotel, there was a more even spread, with better depth. I'm used to attending live symphony orchestra concerts ( although not for a couple of years due to Covid ! ) and the latter is a more accurate presentation. However, as stated, I prefer the sound " signature " of the Denon.

 

Could some wise & experienced fellow enthusiast please give some ideas how to achieve both characteristics ?

 

Thanks,

Dennis

 

[thimmy118]

Personally, I would go for the timbre/tone aspect rather than the sound stage. At least you will know what instrument is being played and not an approximation of the sound of that instrument. Sound stage is important but from my experience with listening to live orchestra, it is often difficult to get a sense of the stage even if you are on a seat in the front middle of the stage. I often try to visualise the placement of instruments but when every instrument is played at one go, it is almost like a wall of sound. The only instruments that might give you a sense of depth perspective is the drum which are generally located at the back of the orchestra. I am not sure if you can do anything to get what you want other than trying out different interconnects from the CD to the amp. 

[stereo coffee]

I have taken time to review the schematic for the Denon,, so my advice is going to be different to what you might expect. The Denon has set out to achieve too much with too little in its analog output stage. ... ie much cost cutting, and probably I think the manufacturer, not listening to their product. If we review the schematic, its plain to see the output devices sharing voltage with digital sections and very cheap regulators being used. Denon also strangely choosing to power the output devices at absolute minimum voltage, indicating they planned for providing the bare minimum for the CD player to work

 

Of that same era a marantz CD52SE is pretty good sounding,  Notably the SE model was one exhaustively listened to in its design and implementation.  The Marantz CD drawer is its only failing, so be prepared to have to change its front plastic cog at some stage.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[audiofeline]

Is it time that you start to explore DAC's?

 

[buddyev]

When using  the denon maybe try reducing the speaker toe-in and  have them firing straight into the room . It might open the stage a little while retaining the timbre you like.

[Berkel]

Thanks gents for the replies. I appreciate your time to respond, especially Chris from Wellington for going to the effort of reviewing the Denon schematics. This was a real eye opener for me, even though I really don't understand much about electronics. I found it very interesting. I'm surprised that you compared the Denon to

" same era "  Marantz CD 52 SE. I thought that was a much older model and that the Denon DCD800NE is a current model ? Perhaps I'm misinformed.

I listened to another CD yesterday arvo, which was

" Organ Encores " played by the late Jean Guiliou. It's a terrific quality recording played on a small organ he designed. Denon playback gave all details,  especially higher pitched and " mutation " ranks, at the expense of sounding a bit hard, whereas the Rotel sounded beautiful, easier to listen to and much better depth of image.

 

If an external DAC could be a solution, are there any recommendations please ? I have a limited budget.

 

Cheers,

Dennis

[Berkel]

Just saw your response Russ ...... thanks.

I'll try your suggestion of toe in.

 

Dennis

[rockpig]

On 22/11/2021 at 9:58 AM, Berkel said:

Just saw your response Russ ...... thanks.

I'll try your suggestion of toe in.

 

Dennis

 

I can endorse getting the toe-in correct.
If you have your speakers facing dead straight, trust me they will not sound good.

 

I had lived with my system for quite awhile and thought I had it all tweaked just right and it sounded pretty sweet.

Then a buddy came over for a listen. He has a very good ear, well two in fact and his job is designing and installing commercial sound systems. I worked with him years ago.

 

Anyway after listening for awhile he starts moving his head closer in and then back out several times and says, "vocals are a bit hot in the centre so I suggest you reduce the toe-in".
So we do that and immediately I can hear the improvement in the sound stage.
 

Not enough toe-in and the sound stage will seem thin in the centre, too much toe-in and centre will sound too fat.

 

If your room permits, try varying the distance between your speakers, this may help, or make it worse.

Edited November 24, 2021 by rockpig
derp

[Steffen]

5 minutes ago, rockpig said:

 

I can endorse getting the toe-in correct.
If you have your speakers facing dead straight, trust me they will not sound good.

 

 

The toe-in is definitely an important aspect that needs to be determined through experimentation. However this does not mean that dead straight couldn’t be the optimal setup. It depends on the speakers and the room.

 

I’d recommend using the LEDR test for fine-tuning toe-in and speaker distance.

[Bcdesign]

For me, the speakers have the biggest impact on soundstage. 

So without buying new ones I would agree with all above recomending speaker placement, toe in, distance from walls etc. 

Having just treated early reflection points, I can say that has improved soundstage (among other things) quite a bit also.