Superb sound quality

High price - everybody should have one. Some may want a digital output, which this does not have.

This CD player blows every thing else away, with the possible exception of the Linn CD12. The CD12 is clearer but has a leaner bass and is possibly "slower" in the rhythm department.

For me the CDS2 has a perfect soundstage, in a duet for example, the singers are placed next to each other in the middle- rather than being "on top" of each other. It really makes you thing the artists are playing together and that they are enjoying it too. No emotional detachment here.

It is a revealing design, in Moby's "Play" CD you can hear distortion in the mixing of samples.

In comparison: the CDX/XPS seemed to overdo the pace, rhythm and timing of the music; the CDX was too forward, the Ikemi less detailed, flat soundstage and less rhythm; Karik/Numerik (a distant last).

I have a Naim based system: NAC82, HiCap x 2 (preamp and power supplies); NAP250 x 2 (power amps); Ruark Equinox (speakers, biamped)

Similar Products Used:

Linn Karik/Numerik; Linn Ikemi; Naim CDX; Naim CDX/XPS; Linn CD12

Being an owner of a late CDS1, and having heard CDX's with XPS' extensively, I was a little smug in the knowledge that while the newer CDX/XPS came broadly similar to the CDS1, the CDS1 was still king. So I was completely unprepared when we substituted Singapore's first CDS2 the CDX/XPS system, which is incidentally a 52/supercap/passive 250s tri-amped fully MANAed, separate spurred thingy. The CDS2 was sincerely, from THE FIRST NOTE, majestic. Hearing it now, fully run in, is still stupefying. So what, is the 44.1khz format actually adequate? :)
A fitting successor. For those who feel that live music is about electrifying excitement, this Naim will give ANALOGUE a run for the money, even more so than the CDS1, which is more software dependant. Meaning that it's not everyday you see a (properly set up) CDS1 trounce an (equally well set up) Armageddonized/AROed/Prefixed/Supercapped Linn LP12. With the CDS2, you can really see how side-by-side the format has become.

It is simply superb - substantially better than the CDX which is a great CD player.

Completely sublates vinyl. Purity of emotion and presentation that is staggering. Like a live broadcast on a NAT 01.

None. Absolutely none.

The CDS 2 is simply the best source (of any kind) I have ever heard. It is only two days old and I am already utterly intoxicated by its charms. I have a 52/250 with Royd Albions and a NAT 03 tuner all on Wilson Benesch stands.

Out of the box what strikes you first is the two sets of independant suspension for the mother board and the transport. Any slight motion and you can here the insides rocking back and forth. The top loading tray is also stunning as in the Mercedes Benz-like Flash Remote. You can already feel that there is something special about this product that not even the very excellent CDX/XPS can match.

When I first plugged it in I was imediately shocked by the size of the soundstage and the subtlety of presentation, easilly differentiating itself from the CDX/XPS in this way. Music flowed naturally and there was no sense of strain. Since naim equipment normally takes 1-4 weeks to reach a performance maximum I knew that this was a good sign. The bass wasn't there yet but it was already vastly superior to the CDX/XPS, which sounded a bit fake and overblown in comparisson.

As the hours passed it just got better and better. Voices had a sense of detail, delicacy and presence that was truly remarkable. All the power and strength with all the softness and nuances. Reminding me of the opera house in Budapest, a building with a bold and assertive presence, but also one elegantly carved with the finest attention to detail and beauty in its marvelous inscriptions.

Here is a summary of what else I noticed:

a) Command of the subtle ebb and flow of volume in a singers voice giving more emotion and drama.

b) drums sound like instruments, not just globes of detached bass.

c) brass instruments seem to have a new sense of complexity to their notes. I got the feeling there was a real metal object vibrating in the room. You get the full envelope in space and time of all notes.

d) quicker than a CDX/XPS. Illuminating soft inflections in string music not heard in the CDX/XPS.

e) A sense of soul that can only be compared to the finest turntables - but vinyl sounds compressed and dull in comparisson.

For those of you who thought the CDX/XPS was good enough, you will be surprised how much better that CDS 2 is. The former still sounds digital. It has the weight and roundness of vinyl, but the lack of subtlty and forcefulness of digital. It also has no soul. It tries and sometimes even fools you, but it just doesn't cut it. I was never entirely happy with the CDX/XPS and in a few ways liked the stand alone better. The XPS added a few things, but brought along a sometimes unpleasant forcefulness that the CDX lacked.

Also, for those of you who are waiting for the NEW FORMAT, I have heard SACD and DVD and whatever improvements over CD are incremental and bound to be compromised by the inferior electronics of most systems. While you await your sacd releases I will happilly be buying up every CD I can find.

For devoted naimees this step (from CDX/XPS to CDS2) is so far at least as big as the 102/supercap to 52 (in my system at that particular point in time. For example I now have a 52 and much better stands, so it is tough to compare one upgrade to another when the components are not all the same) Time will tell how far it can really go.

I have one message to the digital world on introduction of the CDS 2 into my system:

Let there be life!

PS: I'm glad they have an overal rating and a value rating now. Some vastly inferior products deserve marks for value but should never be confused with products of an entirely different class.

Similar Products Used:

CDX, CDX/XPS