So Does All The Hype On That Other Site Add Up - Esoteric K03

MrAcoustat said:
Yes Bryan as you say, it's a question of matching like anything else, i own a Chord One cdp and lots of people also find that unit BRIGHT well i am more of a smooth sound kind of guy and all i can say is both my Chord units sound transparent with my Acoustat's BUT nothing bright about any of the two units BUT there is NO silver wire anywhere in my system because i prefer COPPER.
Click to expand...

The quality of the music recordings have a lot do do with it too. And no two people listen to the same music recordings.
 
I had a chance to listen to a broken in K-03 last month and have to say in my opinion it is a truly impressive machine. Either as a DAC or for SACD it is a serious performer.
 
radioactive said:
Title says it all. Everyone was herded like cattle towards a group buy for Esoteric K03's and were buying. I'm just curious what the real, unfiltered, opinions are about the K03 here.

Personally, I went and listened and here's my take:

I found it bright -- just like Wireworld Silver cables. Perhaps both are a great match for McIntosh gear, but I found it not a good match for what I heard it on (Magico Q5 on VTL). Everything is about harmony and I preferred a different source than the K03. It could have been a lot of things and I have no doubt that it can sound very good on specific rigs. Curious to hear everyone's thoughts -- and preferences for digital sources.

Bryan
Click to expand...
Not at all suprised by these comments, never found Esoteric worth listening too, far too clinical. However I would not waste my time listening to a Stereo only player. SACD only really comes to life in surround sound. IMO this a over engineered over priced obese player for folks with more dough than commonsense. The reviewers are only concerned with pushing their publications Always listen for yourself and take no notice of any reviewer.
 
When a unit takes 500 hours to break in, it means you need to get used to how it sounds.

Once a unit is fully warmed up, all the components are fully charged, and I'll give a few hours for that, what you hear is what you've got. After 500 hours--that's three full weeks, 24 hours a day of listening, or three hours a day listening for four months, you get used to what you spent your money on.
 
I've had my K03 since before the hype started on AA...

I think the beauty of the machine is it fits any situation pretty well, it is a great stand alone CD/SACD spinner (yes only in 2 channel, god forbid!), yet allows my Olive to sound incredible as well with the digital in acting as a DAC. I don't find it bright at all, just detailed and, obviously depending on your system, less forgiving of poorly recorded music. I haven't had the pleasure of trying out DBS or MSB etc. in my system, our dealers are pretty few and far between around here, but for the price I paid I actually think it was great value, and I won't be looking to replace it anytime soon.
 
GaryProtein said:
When a unit takes 500 hours to break in, it means you need to get used to how it sounds.

Once a unit is fully warmed up, all the components are fully charged, and I'll give a few hours for that, what you hear is what you've got. After 500 hours--that's three full weeks, 24 hours a day of listening, or three hours a day listening for four months, you get used to what you spent your money on.
Click to expand...


I burned in a Marantz SA7-S1 sacd player for 750 hours with virtually no change in the
sound which I found unsatisfactory despite rave reviews. I then sold it on. One month later the purchaser also put it back on the market. Long burn in is no guarantee of satisfactory performance
 
Disbeliever said:
. . . . Long burn in is no guarantee of satisfactory performance
Click to expand...

That's right. Nelson Pass says his electronics burns in is 24 hours. That's reasonable. Extended burn in times for components and especially wires (I have heard over 800 hours for some wires) is just ridiculous. You either like the unit SOON after you start using it or you have to convince yourself that it needs to burn in before it sounds right. When you can't convince yourself that it will sound better after it burns in for months of listening, you sell the piece, realizing the unit wasn't all it was cracked up to be. The only exception is probably for woofers where the components physically have to get used to moving. How many cycles does it take for a woofer to break in? If you say a MILLION, even at a low 20 Hz, that happens in only 13.88 hours. At 50 Hz, it takes only 5.55 hours. Just put your volume up to flex the surrounds. With a break in of five million cycles, the amount of time is still reasonable, but much longer listening times for break-in don't make any sense at all. It becomes the component trying to convince you that you DIDN'T make a mistake in your purchase.

My flame proof suit is donned, and I don't care if anyone mocks me on this point.
 
GaryProtein said:
That's right. Nelson Pass says his electronics burns in is 24 hours.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think that is more for warming up for the best sonics. Breakin time is more open ended.

"Do the amps need to break in?


Yes. Most improvement comes in the first 24-36 hours, after which the amps will continue to improve as long as they are left on."

https://passlabs.com/technology/questions#q253
 
Regardless of the exact quote, my point is, if you don't like the way it sounds in the first several hours after it has reached normal operating temperature, you selected the wrong piece.

They do not improve indefinitely being left on. If all the tweaks did all people say, your system would surpass the "real thing."
 
GaryProtein said:
That's right. Nelson Pass says his electronics burns in is 24 hours. That's reasonable.
Extended burn in times for components and especially wires (I have heard over 800 hours for some wires) is just ridiculous. You either like the unit SOON after you start using it or you have to convince yourself that it needs to burn in before it sounds right. When you can't convince yourself that it will sound better after it burns in for months of listening, you sell the piece, realizing the unit wasn't all it was cracked up to be. The only exception is probably for woofers where the components physically have to get used to moving. How many cycles does it take for a woofer to break in? If you say a MILLION, even at a low 20 Hz, that happens in only 13.88 hours. At 50 Hz, it takes only 5.55 hours. Just put your volume up to flex the surrounds. With a break in of five million cycles, the amount of time is still reasonable, but much longer listening times for break-in don't make any sense at all. It becomes the component trying to convince you that you DIDN'T make a mistake in your purchase.

My flame proof suit is donned, and I don't care if anyone mocks me on this point.
Click to expand...

Gary, I'm with you; there is a goddamn limit in this audio business! ...It's getting ridiculous at times.

Merry Christmas! :)

P.S. Besides, some members here don't have time with all that Mickey Mouse burning time; they change audio components faster than their underwear. :D
- Methinks that "cooking" wires and "burning" audio electronics pizzaz is for 'slow' people; the ones who cannot afford to switch cables and components and who need to be convinced that in the long run their audio investment will sound better. ...Sounds like brain washing to me. ...And the more you believe the more you are convinced, and convinced is what sells.
And even if it's true (and I believe it is), it is also true with any other cable and audio component.
- The stuff you buy and that you can afford; it will sound much better in a week or two. It's similar to the woman you just married. ...And then, 40 years from now ... :D

Anyway, enjoy the music in the now, and don't waste your precious time waiting for this or that.
Get your room in order first (smart priorities).
 
NorthStar said:
Gary, I'm with you; there is a goddamn limit in this audio business! ...It's getting ridiculous at times.

Merry Christmas! :)

P.S. Besides, some members here don't have time with all that Mickey Mouse burning time; they change audio components faster than their underwear. :D
- Methinks that "cooking" wires and "burning" audio electronics pizzaz is for 'slow' people; the ones who cannot afford to switch cables and components and who need to be convinced that in the long run their audio investment will sound better. ...Sounds like brain washing to me. ...And the more you believe the more you are convinced, and convinced is what sells.
And even if it's true (and I believe it is), it is also true with any other cable and audio component.
- The stuff you buy and that you can afford; it will sound much better in a week or two! It's similar to the woman you just married. ...And then, 40 years from now ... :D

Anyway, enjoy the music in the now, and don't waste your precious time waiting for this or that.
Get your room in order first (smart priorities).
Click to expand...

And you've tried it I expect before proffering an opinion? (Not to mention that caps in equipment and speakers also take a long time to break in.) Otherwise you know what they say about opinions.

I have and have also done blind comparisons with other reviewers comparing treated and untreated yet broken-in cables. The differences are not subtle.

BTW Bob, could you please enlighten us to what you're currently using in your system?
 
GaryProtein said:
Regardless of the exact quote, my point is, if you don't like the way it sounds in the first several hours after it has reached normal operating temperature, you selected the wrong piece.

They do not improve indefinitely being left on. If all the tweaks did all people say, your system would surpass the "real thing."
Click to expand...

Absolutely
 
Isn't part of what separates high-end audio from the rest about coaxing, cajoling and eking that last 10-20 pct of performance out of the equipment? It has nothing to do with surpassing the real thing. It's all about getting as close as possible.
 
In my experience I have found that the difference between a well regarded $1500 DAC/CD player and a $10,000 DAC/Cd player is one more of flavor rather than a huge jump in performance. Sure, there may be a smidge more detail, more naturaleness, more expansiveness, etc. But overall the differences aren't readily apparent unless you are doing an A-B side by side compare. In other words, it's getting that last 2%.

So, the Esoteric is the new hot player on the block. How does it compare against one of the old hot players on the block that have actually stood up over time, like the Ayre? It is degrees of subtle difference, or truly an eye opening improvement, or really not much different at all?

Thanks
 
Myles B. Astor said:
And you've tried it I expect before proffering an opinion? (Not to mention that caps in equipment and speakers also take a long time to break in.) Otherwise you know what they say about opinions.

I have and have also done blind comparisons with other reviewers comparing treated and untreated yet broken-in cables. The differences are not subtle.

BTW Bob, could you please enlighten us to what you're currently using in your system?
Click to expand...

Merry Christmas to you too Myles!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top