（已出）上海出95新英国之宝588 24bit CDP（一楼附NB测评）

prince99 · 发表于 2009-8-3 17:44:04

感谢关注耳机俱乐部网站，注册后有更多权限。

您需要登录才可以下载或查看，没有账号？注册

x

已出

入手010B，588作为音源出现瓶颈，升级音源，故出此机。

无修无摩，成色95新以上，购入后就用薄膜包括整个机身，机身镜面无任何划痕，箱说全，原装遥控（塑料薄膜包括使用）。

状态良好。

优先出上海本地，保留选择买家的权利。

价格：16000

PS:俱乐部小白、渔歌、haiyi、蜜蜂、老林等均在聚会中多次使用过。

联系方式：13901664848 施先生

转贴：［憩云评测］优雅的音乐的王者－MERIDIAN（英国之宝）588

优雅的音乐的王者－－MERIDIAN（英国之宝）588

在台机的世界里，有一款CD曾经令那么多人为之倾倒，以她那迷人的音色、高贵典雅的外貌、和独特的转盘结构---她就是英国之宝588，三万元以下台机中的王者。初闻英国之宝大名是看吴童先生的《2千至10万元CD机选购之我见》。其中在2万元至3万元档中，有一句“Meridian 508.24，此机为506.24的平衡线路版本，一言以蔽之，如果要我选择，限定三万元之内，我会毫不犹豫地选它。”不过那时上万元的CD对我来说，犹如一个高不可攀的仙女，也只能在梦里想想。

第二次是在别超的网站上。看到如下一段：

自1984年以来,Meridian就在High-End 级的CD重播领域享有着盛誉。在过去的16年多里,我们先后推出了20款CD播放机,而它们的音质也是一个比一个好。在我们对CD的还原音效进行不断改良的过程中，荣获了业内50多个重要奖项，并使Meridian成为了极品CD音质的代名词。

  倍受赞誉的508与800 CD/DVD机是Meridian目前最好的CD播放机。仅508就独得了20余项大奖,其中包括被权威音响杂志Stereophile评为"A"级器材,而当他们面对音效更加出色的Meridian 800时,则不得不再增添一类"A+"器材的等级评定!

  Meridian反对一切欠缺稳妥的做法，主张所有的设计与制造都应从最基本、最扎实的地方做起,并以此提供最佳的音效、超强的碟片处理能力及可靠耐用的品质。继大获成功的800 CD/DVD之后,我们决定将其部分先进技术运用到一款新的CD机--588身上。

　　588采用了一个为800系列所研究开发的技术，即通过一个精确的DVD-ROM 驱动器来读取碟片上的数据信息。该驱动器准确的拾讯系统能够做到最佳效果的CD和CDR重播。

  来自碟片的数据会经一个非常强大的数字处理系统检验，校正，并解码。在数据信号的通路上还有三个大型存储缓冲区--它们每一个都会依次输出平滑的数据流，而使末端音频信号中的jitter（时基误差）失真降至最低。以上这些步骤确保您能够从碟片上享受到最高品质的音响效果。

  先进的数/模设计与建构技术相结合,提供给您顶级的产品性能。588采用了6层式PCB电路板,7组独立供电系统，最新的表面安装技术，以及为了保证靓声而精挑细选的元器件。

  ROM驱动器能够完美地将电脑光盘上的数据读取出来。最佳例证便是：用ROM光驱载入一个电脑程式几乎从不出错。因此，析取CD上的数据也应毫无问题。实际上，588会不止一次地从碟片上读取信息以确保数据的准确性。

  通常,电脑是不会去理会来自光盘的数据流是否正被平滑而顺畅地读取。但是对于高品质的音响器材而言,最终的信号数据流必须保持平滑顺畅--没有时基误差。我们的独特技术便在此有了用武之地。离开驱动器后，音乐信号就交由精密的数字音频电路来处理,以保证高度的数据完整性和最低的时基误差率。

  588依靠降低时基误差来达到高保真的还原。与其它CD机尝试采用控制转盘的振动来减少时基误差的方法不同，588的三重缓冲存储器结构从根本上杜绝了这一情况的发生。

  在588内，音频信号是由一个位于末端输出级的精确主振荡器来控制。而这一精细工作的结果便是获得了清晰、开扬、有说服力的音质还原。

第三次则是在千年家中，虽然听的不是588而是英国之宝新的入门作507，但那种从容的气度、播放大动态的举重若轻，优雅的音乐味，已远远把我的行星比下去了。当然行星的人声之美还是要高过507一点点。507的人声清沏但较薄，行星的解析略差，人声的细节虽然有点模糊，但是那种微微的朦胧和温暖的调子，却别有一番风味。

于是暗下决心，在相当长的一段时间内疯狂的在网上扫描588的芳踪，可惜几次都因为客观的原因与她擦肩而过。但终于还是在千年兄的帮助下，让她来到了我身边。
588、8PR都是可遇不可求的，二美得一都足矣安度一生，如今居然二美在侧，左右逢源，真是享尽齐人之福呀：)

到家后，经过十多天的相守，对588了解了很多，也渐渐摸清了她的一些脾性。
第一是588对电源很敏感，可以说是换线如换机。我做过实验，使用银彩SPX30SI，和使用普通电源线AB。使用普通线588的音声密度小，声场的纵深被压缩了，空气感差了些，还有就是二端的延伸也小。明显的例子就是听亚伦泰勒的曲子，吉它的余韵收的快了，人声的厚度和磁性变差，感觉不到位。还有《丝竹管弦》中的古筝，余韵也小了。
第二是588对避震的要求。以前我是用一块很便宜的复合绘图板，1CM厚度，下面垫象棋子来承托588，使用水晶檀木钉。后来找到了一块胡桃木的承板，下面垫橡胶脚，并用水平仪调了水平。结果感觉声底更好，虽然这种感觉很模糊，说不清，道不明。但换回以前的承板，就觉得不好听了。
第三是588对碟的要求。588的分析力很好，一些刻录碟在她里面毛病百出(偶使用的是三菱的蓝盘，普通的40X刻录机)越听越不想听。不如像听行星一样，正版D版通吃，效果都不错。就连一般低价版的正版碟，感觉也不爽。。。。这回该烧碟了。。。。

最后简单说说听感吧，谈不上评测，588发烧器材准A+的地位，也用不着我来评测的。尤其是拿君子行星来AB对比。
__________________________________________________________

CD：Meridian 588 CD机
耳放：叶立8PR，使用吹喇叭57年荷兰原厂长屏D环U7。
耳机：HD600老版+卡线
线材：CD--银彩SPX30SI
信号-紫荆花终级版，卡大斯铑白金RCA头。
8PR--原机跟机线。
脚钉：CD--水晶檀木钉
8PR-檀木钉
CD--胡桃木承板
8PR-普通承板

第一次开声听588，给人的感觉不是那种特惊艳的感觉，初听不会令人耳目一新，但随着时间增加，你会深深被它打动。你会为她的声音所无法自拔。那种温和、优雅的感觉就像一个风度翩翩的英国绅士，或是一杯百年红酒，从骨子里透出的高贵。
偶觉得588还有点像圣斗士中的穆，温和，睿智，超凡的实力深深隐藏在高贵的气质之下。不像撒卡那么强横霸气(马克？)，也不像沙加那样光芒万丈，神一般的感觉(高文？)。
借用一句中肯的评语：它的音色既有传统英国音色的甜味、斯文稳重，又有美国器材高分析力、声音干净的特点，可以说是一台完美兼顾了欧洲音乐味和美式HIFI味的CD机。

先谈谈弦乐吧，这是我最着迷的地方。我有一次夜里听《舒特拉的名单》那凄美的琴音令我反反覆覆听了七遍，直到深夜2点。。。
交响上耳机与箱子的差距是天渊之别，但独有人声、弦乐耳机与箱子却各擅胜场。我从末听过这么好的提琴回放，竟超过了我上次听天价前后级推B&W 805、以及千年家AUDIOVECTOR MI-3的感觉。那种琴声是“活”的，换句“专业”点的形容词就是，588将琴音真实的呈现给了大家，也就是所谓的现场感。588上的琴音密度极好，远远超过行星很多很多，琴音的高频部份，清沏透明，但和马克的那种泉水般清冷的透明不同，它是那种带着英国之宝独有音染的透明，是一种微微的暖调。
行星的高频也有音染，但过份了一点，暖的有点模糊了。而588的这种暖调是不失透明的暖，像三月的春风吹面不寒。而且它的高频延伸，比行星强出太多，如一线风筝直入蓝天尽头，尤其是换上银彩30以后，呵呵，如果上银彩G6？不敢想了，不敢想了。
琴音的中频部分，密度很高，琴体的共鸣感很强，琴音还有一种微微的粘稠感。也就是传说中的“木头味”吧。
低频部分，用大提琴--《图画音乐会-大象》来说说，一个字“爽”。下潜很深，直逼心底。而且琴体结像很好。

交响：588的解析力很强。它能够出色地把录音中的细微之处一一演绎出来，细致晶莹，清晰可辨，那平时隐在弦乐部、管乐部之下的三角铁等小细节，全部都完整的显示出来了。而且动态控制很好，虽然中规中矩，显的霸气不够，气度略逊，但也依旧举重若轻，从容自然。
人声：试了天空、民歌蔡琴、亚伦泰勒的曲子。无语，强!蔡大姐的声音我在行星上听过年纪大了一点，507上听又年轻了一点，马兰士17上听太腻了，美丽安200上听淡了，CEC上燥了。。。直到588上，我才听到这样磁实感性，平滑柔和，完全没有颗粒感的人声。那是一种柔滑如丝，泛着淡淡珠光，润泽华美，又毫不腻人的声音。

声场∶588的音色较507略暗，但密度更高，声场更加开阔。

---------------憩云生原创

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－分割线－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－

转贴]英国之宝507、588，莲genki、ikemi试听对比（原英，中文翻译：wxchjy）
scfan

级别: 论坛博士后
发帖: 1384篇
来自: 向日葵小班
鉴定: 上海
注册: 2002-7-29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

请大家耐心看完，会对meridian和linn的当家CD机有较深入的了解

Meridian 588 CD Player/Recorder Review by MichaelL

Model: 588
Category: CD Player/Recorder
Suggested Retail Price: $3500
Description: CD Player

Review by MichaelL (A) on October 01, 2002 at 05:03:31
IP Address: 129.82.53.155

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meridian 507 and 588
My wife and I were able to audition these players at home last weekend, thanks to Listenup in Denver. Both of the players were broken-in demo units. All the other equipment was held constant, including cables, power cords, etc. I matched the sound pressure as exactly as possible using a Radio Shack dB meter, using a Radio Shack sound pressure meter, set at slow response and C-weighted. I used the correlated pink noise from the Stereophile Test CD #2 to set the level. The output of the 588 was just a bit higher than the 507. For the 588 I had to lower the volume setting from 51 to 49 on my Rowland preamp to get it to play at the same loudness as the 507. I used the unbalanced outlets for both players. We listened to the 588 first for several hours Saturday evening and then we listened to the 507 for an hour or so, using the same CDs. The next day (Sunday) we listened to the 507 all day and in the late afternoon we listened to the 588.
Also, this was a sighted comparison, but I believe that neither of us had a bias for one player over the other. They both look alike and if anything, I was expecting them to sound the same because very trustworthy sources told me that they sounded the same to them through the unbalanced outlets. I was also hoping that the differences would be negligible or hard to tell because the 507 is more affordable.

But the differences were very clear and not terribly subtle. I am not very good at describing these differences, but I will try.

The 507 sounded brighter than the 588. This is not to say that the 507 sounds bright, but in comparison to the 588 it was brighter. The piano, female voice, mandolins, zithers, dulcimers and violins all were brighter on the 507. The 588 added more lower resonances to all of these instruments for a near lifelike presentation. As one might say, with the 588 you heard more of the wood. In general, the 507 was weaker in the lower frequencies than the 588. The extension was there, of course, but not as resolved or defined as the basses were on the 588. The 507 seemed fuzzier, so to speak, in the bass. Perhaps this also contributed to the impression that the images were completely open and stable in the 588 while the images had ragged or fuzzier edges on the 507.

The players had different soundstages. The 588 had a wider soundstage -- my wife exclaimed the it extended beyond the speakers -- than the 507. Again, the 507 had excellent width, but in comparison to the 588 it seemed narrower. Also, on the drum recording on the Stereophile test CD#2, the soundstage was were more recessed behind the speakers on the 507. In general, it seemed (although this was not so clear) that the 588 had a bit more depth.

Both players had lots of detail, but the 588 rendered the harmonics of a concert grand much more clearly and distinguished the impacts of the different hammers on the strings. This was also true of the quiet timpani playing on the drum cut on Stereophile's CD 2. Similarly, the little whistle or chirp at the very start of higher register organ notes was better defined on the 588.

A very noticeable difference was that in comparison, the 507 still had some of the grain or granulation that I associate with the CD sound. To put it simply, it sounded like a CD player and seemed to be in the same league as our previous player, the CAL Delta/Alpha (non-updated) combo. The 588, on the other hand, sounded to both of our ears stunningly smooth and seamless. I focussed on female voices and piano. In fact, the absolute clarity of the piano and voice made me think that while the 507 is an outstanding player, the 588 is sublime.

On a final note, earlier I had auditioned the Linn Ikemi and Genki in a store. While the 507 is closer to the 588 than the Genki is to the Ikemi, the differences between the 507 and the 508 are still as clear and obvious as they are between the two Linn players. As far as the Linn/Meridian comparison is concerned, I can only say that while listening to the Meridian in the store made my want to try to listen to these players at home, I had no such urge to take either of the players home. To my ears, the Ikemi is still dry and unmusical compared to the Meridian 588.

For what it is worth, that's how these players sounded to us. Associated equipment: Dunlavy Cantatas, Rowland Model 1 and Consonance. Dunlavy signal cables throughout. No power conditioners.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Weakness: I wish it were cheaper.
Product Strengths: No granulation whatsoever. Smooth, sweet and detailed
all at once. Stunning reproduction of voice and piano.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Equipment for this Review:
Amplifier: Rowland Model 1
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): Rowland Consonance
Sources (CDP/Turntable): See review
Speakers: Dunlavy Cantatas
Cables/Interconnects: Dunlavy
Music Used (Genre/Selections): Classical, Folk, Jazz
Room Size (LxWxH): 27 x 13ft x 9ft
Room Comments/Treatments: Damping behind listener
Time Period/Length of Audition: Weekend
Other (Power Conditioner etc.): None
Type of Audition/Review: Home Audition

——————————————————————————————————————

再看看这位TBone大虾的跟贴：

Posted by TBone (A) on October 01, 2002 at 09:16:37
In Reply to: Meridian 588 CD Player/Recorder posted by MichaelL on October 01, 2002 at 05:03:31:

good review ... i was also impressed with the 588.
I demo the unit in my house and put it up against the same player you did (and more). My impressions were certainly different - but that did not take away from my favorable thoughts about the meridian.

I thought that the 588 was a improvement over the 508.24 in areas of attack and resolution, the 508 could sound somewhat reserved in comparison.

However ... in a direct comparison ... i thought the 588 most obvious coloration was highlighted when playing R&R music and esp piano music. Compared to the more high frequency extended players like the Cary 306, Ikemi and MF Nuvista players the 588 made the piano sound slightly distant, smaller, less powerfull and even slightly confused during peak periods.

IMO - detail and transparency - esp at the extreme frequencies is not this players forte ...

However i can still remember comparing the soundtrack of 'the planet of the apes' on three different players one night, and the 588 easily gave the most favorable rendition. In fact - i switched the other players off and enjoyed the 588 strengths all weekend long.

In another demo (in a store) i witnessed a 588 easily bettering a NEW very VERY expensive turntable (and analog system which was incorrectly setup and certainly overpriced) that the store was trying to highlight - obviously without much success - as most of the patrons confessed to liking the cdp (588).

I had this player for about 2 week-ends and despite having certain reservations, i did enjoy having it in my system.

TBone
——————————————————————————————————————

Michael再回：

Posted by MichaelL (A) on October 02, 2002 at 13:45:08
In Reply to: Meridian 588 CD Player/Recorder posted by TBone on October 01, 2002 at 09:16:37:

Thanks for your insights. I want to respond to two observations you made, but not to dispute them but just to present what I thought I heard, which is of course totally compatible with you hearing something else, me being mistaken, or etc.
"i thought the 588 most obvious coloration was highlighted when playing R&R music and esp piano music. Compared to the more high
frequency extended players like the Cary 306, Ikemi and MF Nuvista players the 588 made the piano sound slightly distant, smaller, less powerfull and even slightly confused during peak periods."

"IMO - detail and transparency - esp at the extreme frequencies is not this players forte ..."

I cannot say that the 588 sounded less extended than the 507 or the Ikemi. One of the things I listened to closely was Krauss's voice and some of the instrumental solos on "Two Highways." There the difference between the 507 and 588 was extremely clear. It seemed to me that two things about the sound made the 507 seem brighter. The upper frequencies were more granulated and the lower resonances were not as resolved and coherent with the upper frequencies, leaving the higher frequencies isolated on top. On the 588 the higher resonances of her voice, for instance, were not granulated at all and they were seamlessly integrated with the lower resonances.

I did not do a direct comparison with the Ikemi, so you definitely have an advantage there. But I can say that in terms of the placement of piano, I did not notice a difference, and I did look for that. One thing I really don't like about the Ikemi is what it does to strings, particularly cellos. To me they sound abstracted and one-dimensional, especially quiet passages.

I would say that in terms of resolution, the Ikemi and 588 are identical. But to my ears, the 588 is much more transparent and open than the Ikemi. As far as detail is concerned, I have mixed feelings. I don't like players that highlight high-frequency details. I think that brighter players sometimes magnify the sound of squeeking chairs, the high frequency of a turning page, aspirations, etc.., but this does not seem accurate. These should be reproduced, but not magnified. This is probably not what you meant by detail, but I just thought I should state that it might be helpful to distinguish resolution and detail.

Anyway, I ended-up buying the 588 yesterday so whatever I say now is biased. So I am going to shut-up about this, but your post makes want to listen to Professor Longhair on the 588. It should be here soon.

Thanks
Michael
——————————————————————————————————————
TBone又回，这段对Linn的分析比较多：

Posted by TBone (A) on October 03, 2002 at 11:22:13
In Reply to: Re: Meridian 588 CD Player/Recorder posted by MichaelL on October 02, 2002 at 13:45:08:

well we certainly differ ... but thats fine, because i think the 588 is a very good player too, and even better than the 508.24 although this is certainly not a popular stance.
Having lived with a 588, 508.24 genki and the ikemi - in my system - here are my subjective thoughts ...

The Ikemi (and even the genki) was more transparent than any meridian i have heard. It highlights depth and width with more clarity - and more importantly it relies on the recording or mastering quality of the cd to achieve this goal. In other words - you can hear the individual details of each mix or studio or venue as per recording. On the 588 that information was present but it certainly sounded as if many cd were all recorded in ONE place ... the differences between one venue and another not nearly as well deliniated. Thats said ... the 588 coloration could actually be a asset. I agree with you that one low level passages the ikemi can sound somewhat dry - esp compared to the 588.

On frequency extension ... i have yet to hear ANY cdp past the cd12 and possibly the mf nuvista that correctly displays high frequency information with the power and accuracy of a real instrument. This is important during musical peaks in which the 588 seems to have less power and drive while shrinking musical instruments esp as gain progresses, while the ikemi soundstage remain totally intact. In defence of the 588 - this is a particular linn strength - and the 588 is far above what many other players can do.

However as even compared to other players besides the linns - the 588 would be far down in my list of players with extended frequency response as the main requirement ... and although it is not its weakness - its also just not its strength.

And - i prefer both my analog front end and my cdp to give me the most honest data in the high frequencies (both frequency extremes) as can be ... because IMO it is this extension in both extremes with proper detail that brings me closer to the real musical event. My high frequencies should NEVER be bright or sibilant, but natural and powerfull. This is a characteristic i want out of all my equipment, and this is a natural occurance i hear in concerts.

Ultimatly - i use my analog front end as my reference for digital. The Ikemi does come closer - even having certain advantages - and on certain recordings - it became very hard to hear any difference between digital and analog. I still prefer analog (sometimes by a huge amount) in many cases but the ikemi does bridge the gap a bit closer. With other players - the differences are magnified to a much greater extent.

So we are polarized on our findings - but this should not diminish my feelings for the 588 - which i really enjoyed. It has its own set of strenghts, mostly in tonality and smoothness. Although i seem to have put the 588 in a negative light - it was not always that clear when doing the comparison. I really enjoyed my time with the 588 - and on one weekend - it was all i listened too.

But ... i listen to mostly rock & roll, pop and jazz and i want my player to sound open and clear at low & full throttle - and when push comes to shove - in my system - the 588 was not able to meet my requirements & preferences nearly as well as the ikemi did.

TBone
——————————————————————————————————————
我想还是我来翻译吧，只是我的英语水平很差，必然有很多厄误，大家看了改，一起交流。
由MichaelL评论，2002年10月1日：
上周末妻和我能够在家中听这些唱机，这要感谢…。这两台机器均是在店里打开的，其他器材是原来的，包括线材，电源线等。我用一个（无线电声压测试表）尽可能精确地对比声压，设置在……，我用“sterephile”测试CD相关的粉红噪音来设定水平（音量？）。588的电平比507的稍高，对588我要在我的杰夫罗兰前级上把音量控制器从51的位置开小到49才能与507一样响。我对两台机器均采用非平衡输出。在星期六晚上，我先听507数小时，然后听了588一个多小时，星期天我们听了507一天，次日下午我们听了588。
这也许是一个显而易见的比较，但我相信我们中没有一个人对此两台唱机中的一台有偏好。他们从外表上看上去几乎一样，我希望他们听起来也一样，因为很多可信的来源告诉我们：这两台唱机在非平衡输出时是一样的。我也希望这两者之间的区别是微不足道的，因为507更使人负担得起。
但区别是非常清楚的、不是很小的，我不是很擅长描写这些不同，但我尝试着（描述如下）：
507听起来比588亮，这不是说507的声音亮，但是在与588相比时是较亮的。钢琴、女声、曼陀林、齐特琴、洋琴和小提琴在507上都较亮，588有更低的回响（低频？）对所有这些乐器的更活生的呈现（现场感？）。正像有人说的，在588上可以听到更多的木头味。一般来说，507在极低频（？）时比588弱。当然在507身上低频也有延伸，但没有588的层次感、精确、解析度，507的看起来较混。因此可以说，低音的音像588更清晰、开放，而507的有点毛边和糊涂。
这两台机器在音场表现方面亦不同。588有更宽广的音场，我妻子说它技高一筹伸展到音箱之外。当然，507也有优秀的音场表现，但与588比时就显得窄了。也许在STEREPHILE的测试碟中的鼓声，507的更深一点。但一般来讲，588的比507的稍深一点点。
两台唱机都有很多细节，但是588提供了更多的泛音，一个交响乐全部变得更清晰更辨，可以影响到在弦乐上不同的敲打（？）。这也使测试碟中的那段静静的定音鼓更真实。相同地，其中管风琴中的细小的尖的鸣叫声588表现得更明确。
一个非常值得注意的不同是，507还是有颗粒感、粗糙感让我与数码声联系起来。简单地说，它听起来象CD唱机，与我以前听过的CD唱机属于同一个“联盟”的，数码声。而588呢，听起来非常平顺和无缝（无缝，不会译）。我主要注意女声和钢琴，实际上，绝对清楚的钢琴、人声让我感觉，507是一款超水准的唱机，那么588就是一台杰出的唱机。
最后说一下，在较早的时候我还在一个店里听过LINN的IKEMI、GENKI。比起GENKI与IKEMI之间的差距来讲，507与508之间的差距更小，507和588，和两台LINN之间的差别都是很明显的。至于提到LINN＆MERIDIAN之间的比较，我只能说当我在店里听英国之宝时，使我想在家里试听。而我对两台莲没有这种冲动。在我听来，与588比起来IKEMI还是有点干和缺少音乐感。
缺点：我希望它更便宜点；
优点：如此没有颗粒感，平顺、甜美，细节丰富，再生精彩的人声和钢琴。

Tbone跟贴：
多好的评论……我也对588有深刻的映象。我在家演示这唱机和你对比的相同一些唱机对比，我的印象却不同――但这不影响我对MERIDIANR的喜爱。
我认为588比508在冲击力和解晰力方面有改进，508听起来……（这一句翻不好，与本文无大干系……）
然而，在直接的对比，我认为588在播放R＆R和钢琴音乐明显有音染（？），与一些高频延伸更好的唱机比起来：如CARY　306，IKEMIT，　MF　NUVISTA唱机，588使钢琴听起来有一点远、小、力度较小甚至在高音区有点混。
我认为，细节和透明度，特别是在极高频领域不是这台机器的长处（588）……
但我还能记得在三台不同的唱机里听行星组曲（？），588轻松地给予了最让人喜爱的声音，事实上，我马上用588换走了其他唱机，在整个周末享受588。
在另一家店里，我见证了一台588轻松地胜过了一台新的，非常非常贵的转盘（没有正确设置好和显然物无所值的模拟系统），这家店显然想以此作为店里的闪光之处，但显然没有成功，大部分顾客表示喜欢588这台CD唱机。
我已经有了这台唱机大约两个周末，不管我对此机有所保留之处，我还是一直在享受它。

Michael再回：
谢谢你的洞察力，我想回答你作的观察，但不是来争论而只是将我听的和想的呈献出来。当然在某些方面与你的听感是完全一致的，我被弄楚了，或者其他……

“我认为588在播放R＆R和钢琴音乐明显有音染（？），与一些高频延伸更好的唱机比起来：如CARY　306，IKEMIT　MF　NUVISTA唱机，588使钢琴听起来有一点远、小、力度较小甚至在高音区有点混。”
“我认为，细节和透明度，特别是在极高频领域不是这台机器的长处（588）……”
我不能说588听起来比507或IKEMI延伸差，有一件事是我听KRAUSS和一些乐器的独奏在“两条高速路”，507和508的区别是很明显的。507听起来更亮，超高频听起来更糙，而低频不是那么清晰、与较高频段联贯性不太好（？）。让高频有点孤立（？）。比如说，在588上，她的高音，一点都没有粗糙感，而且与中频的连贯性极好。
我没有将588与IKEMI作过直接的对比，你在这方面肯定有优势。但我可以说在某些领域，如钢琴，我几乎听不出两者有区别，虽然我努力去对比。有一样我最不喜欢IKEMI的是弦乐的表现，特别是大提琴，对我来讲这声音听起来心不在焉、二维的，特别是在安静的段落。
在解晰力方面，Ikemi和588差不多。但对我而言，588更透明、开放。至于细节，我有点区分不出来了，我不喜欢唱机太注重高频的细节，我认为这样有时会放大扭椅子的声音、翻乐谱、呼吸的声音等……，但这看起来不精确，这些东西应该被再生，但不能夸大。这可能就是你说的细节。但我只是认为，我要说清楚，这样有助于区别解析力和细节。
不管怎样，我最后于昨天买了588，不管我现在说我更偏好于什么，所以我应该不说了。但你的邮件……（此后一段无实质内容，我也翻不好）

TBone又回，这段对Linn的分析比较多：
当然我们是不同……不过那很好，因为我也认为588是一台好唱机，甚至比508更好，虽然这不是一个流行的立场。
在与588、508.24、genki和ikemi在我的系统中生活了一段时间以后，这是我的主要的看法：
IKEMI（甚至GENKI）比我听过的MERIDIAN更透明。它的特点在深度、广度方面更清晰――更重要的是它更依赖于CD录音和录音师的质量来达到这个目标。换句话说，你能听到每一个录音的不同的、特有的，每一个混音、录音室或录音地点的细节。而在588上也有细节，但这些细节听起来这些CD象是在同一个地方录制的……不同地方的不同没有被很好地描述出来。那就是说，588的音染实际上是有的。我同意你的说法：在一些低音量的段落IKEMI可能听起来有点干，特别是与588相比。
在频率的延伸方面……我（还没有）［原文中没有，我想作者应该漏了］听过有CDP超过LINN12的，可能MF　nuvista正确地有能量感地、精确地表现了乐器的高频信息，这在音乐的最高频区域是非常重要的。在这方面588听起来量较少，而且有点收缩乐器……，而IKEMI音场保持得很完整。不过从保护588的角度上说――这是莲的特别的长处――而588要比其他的唱机（LINN外）好很多。
然而与LINN以外的其他唱机比起来，588会远不如我能够说出的许多在频率延伸方面的其他唱机。虽然这也不算是他的弱项――但这也不是他的长项。
而我、宁愿既要我的模拟系统还要CD尽可能给我在高频方面更真实的声音，因为我认为，正是这种两端的延伸和正确的细节将我更真实地带到现场的感觉，我要的高频永远不会过亮或有丝声，而是自然的、足够量的。这是我对我的系统要求的特点，而这正是我听音乐会时确切的感受。
最后，我使用我的模拟音源来参考我的数码音源。IKEMI做得非常接近――甚至有些长处――而在某些录音中，它与模拟的区别变得几乎难以区分。我仍然宁愿喜欢模拟音源――但是IKEMI使数码和模拟的鸿沟之间架起了非常接近的桥梁。而对于其他一些CD唱机来说――模拟、数码之间的差距更大。
我们在发现方面如此两极化，但这不应当减少我对588的感觉――我真的很享受它。它有它自己的长处，在音质的平顺。虽然我看起来置588与否定的境地――但这在对比时并不总是那么明显。我真的对与588一起的时候非常感到开心――而在一个方面有弱点――这是我听过的太――
但是，我主要听摇滚、流行乐、爵士，我希望我的唱机听起来开放、清晰，在低频――当音乐进入到冲击力很强的乐段时，588和IKEMI都不能满足我的要求和偏好。

[ 本帖最后由 prince99 于 2009-8-8 18:51 编辑 ]