Hi All,
So I had the pleasure of attending the capetown SQ workshop again, great to see all the fellow
crazies again :lol: a laugh a minute
Firstly, I think I speak on behalf of everyone in attendance, thanks goes out to Shafick of Car Hi-Fi Centre
for being a excellent host once again
As always, theres always a interesting activity at these workshops (other than the braai's,laughs,great sounding cars) , This time round it was a very rare collection of audiophile grade sound quality headunits,
Most of these models have been used by some of the greatest sounding sound quality cars planet earth has ever seen
These units came from far and wide (all over the country) thanks to all involved in gathering, and also to Shafick for the time spent building "the rig" where they were all very professionally presented.
The units were:
Alpine 7909J
Alpine 7990 (F1 Status)
Alpine CDA-7998
Clarion HXD2
Carrozzeria (Pioneer) DEX-P01II
Denon Z1
Mcintosh MX4000 + MDA4000
Nakamichi CD500
Pioneer DEX-M88
Pioneer DEX-P90
Pioneer DEX-P99
Forgive me for the length of this post, im out of ideas at how to be brief on this subject
Firstly, lets just get out of the way, This test was not done scientifically.
I dont think this was ever the intention, I think (correct me if im wrong) the idea here was to find general concensus as to how different the units sound "right off the bat".
We would play a track (Hotel California - Eagles (live version off the "hell freezes over" album) on one
headunit, then on the next, occasionally we would skip back to identify if what we heard or thought we heard was correct and agreed on by the majority.
Some units were described as "laid back", some were described as being more "detailed", others were remarked on pertainting to their tonality. some units were "warmer" sounding, as in slightly "hot" on the bottom end.
The pioneer carozerria p01ii unit which is the japanese domestic market (jdm) version of the pioneer
p90 has got some differences, different rca leads, and has changed internals. Listening to it
vs. the vanilla pioneer p90, there are audible differences,You can still hear its the "same unit" but
there are some subtleties ...
Just a remark about both the pioneer p90 and the p01ii, ive for 2 yrs been driving a vehicle withthe p90 source and deq-p90 processor(the processor for the p90),
these units, although they CAN run seperate and standalone, imho they were never intended to run this way, the outboard dac within the p90 processor unit is a superior unit with seriously high grade internals,that would simply not fit inside a single din chassis. being very familiar with the p90 combo (headunit and processor) i can most definitely say that i felt something was missing when i heard them both, theres a tonal character/signature sound of that external processor that just wasnt there.
However, in the context of this test, it was strictly a source unit test, so it would not have been fair to compare the p90 with its processor while leaving the other units without. the processor of the p90's strength is not perhaps only the processing but its DAC that gets used, it gets fully engaged via optical cable and the headunits internal dac gets disabled.
I made mention of the above for those that if they can get there hands on such units, get the headunit WITH the processor/dac box. seperate its still good. but it only really shines with the processor!
Back on topic,
Alot of what was heard, well I suppose everthing, was subjective. A headunit that on first listen
"sounds more detailed" than a previous unit, firstly brings the thought of being better as it comes accross more detailed,but in reality "more detailed" could be over-emphasis of certain frequencies, or some might say perhaps lack of control of these.
The "laid back" / "dry" units, the Denon Z1 comes to mind was not perhaps considered by many as overally "Detailed" but personally imho I felt it was a fairly neutral headunit, infact very "nakamichi-ish" if I dare.
What version of "better" or "more detailed" is more correct? at the end of the day your design goals will determine this, As to if you are out and out after accuracy, or after musical enjoyment, in which case only your ears will verify. no one elses.
A special mention would go to the alpine 7909j which im told is 23yrs old, All i can say
is it definitely does not sound 23yrs old! as far as im concerned, sonically very ahead of its time if it can
still play in the same ballpark as units that are decades newer.
I would also mention the pioneer p99 in that pioneer took as much as they could (argueably everything?)
of the previous pioneer p90 processor box and built it right into a single DIN chassis and then added all kinds of ipod support etc etc, for this, its probably the best all-in-one proposition available on the market. and in that light the word "available" means alot as many of these units are simply unobtainable and mostly only found with collectors.
the pioneer M88 (also very old) suffered from a laser malfunction so wasnt in the running...
The alpine f1 status definitely gets the respect it does what its said to do and rumoured to do and
does so well, ticks all the boxes pretty much.
At the end of the day, all these headunits are VERY comfortable in each others company, I seriously cannot say that there was 1 headunit here that hands down "wiped the floor/owned" one of the other units..
I sat there and tried to identify one i could say was HANDS DOWN better, then objectivity kicked in and i was able to "fault" the unit only to better this fault with a trait from what was so called inferiour rival unit.
just as an example of what typically happened :
One headunit suggested it had more detail vs. the previous, flip back and forth, now the previous unit has better bass control or more bass in general, could the 2nd unit be lacking in bass? and therefore sounding more detailed due to pronounced midrange and high frequency..
One can for example have a cymbal which is now more pronounced, perhaps has more "ring" to it, at first listen this may sound like an improvement, however, the recording engineer may have toned this down in the mastering process, a headunit lacking high freq "control/composure" would now over-pronounce this...Its for reasons like this why I would prefer to err on the side of caution in too loosely marking something as "more detailed"..
I suppose the only REAL way to find the winner amoungst these units would be to
level match ALL of them, then via cable (i.e using signal cable) connect up to a proper high res rta
and see which one has the best response etc.. even then, theres no telling if the "best measured"
unit will sound the best to your ears. Most of our ears do infact, not measure up perfectly.
Bottom line, these are all great headunits, take your pick!
Regards,
Anton
