Rega Jupiter 2000 CD Players

Jupiter 2000

User Reviews (16)

Showing 1-10 of 16  
iv1969   AudioPhile [Sep 20, 2009]

THIS IS A REALY GOOD CD PLAYER
VERY MUSICALITY
GOOD RITM
A LOT OF AIR
GIVES YOUR CD S A NEW LIFE
A REAL ALLROUNDER

WEAKNESS

TE ONLY WEAKNESS IS THAT THE RESOLUTION CAN BE BETTER IN THE TREBLE

OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
5
Miker   Audio Enthusiast [Dec 07, 2006]
Strength:

Detailed without being dry

Weakness:

none

I compared the Jupiter with Arcam, my existing CAL two box system, and some higher priced Sony units at the time. Like the Rega turntables the Jupiter has a way of conveying the feel of music. The sound is full in the mid to lower bands with a great amount of smooth detail. The highs are clear and natural on 95% of the CD's I listen to. Some CD releases are just hopelessly bright or dull, and if one were to tune a system to make them passable, all the other recordings turn to mud or steel.

Customer Service

never had to use

Similar Products Used: CAL, PS Audio, Denon
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
4
twodolphins   AudioPhile [Feb 22, 2005]
Strength:

Nice design

Weakness:

Extremly harash sound on this price level. Lack of deepness.

This is NOT a very good CD player. I am the ex owner of Planet, Planet 2000, Jupiter 2000 and I have also concurent equimpent like QUAD CD-P, Primare DVD30, Denon 2900, Sony SACD EX777, and Denon 2910. Planet 2000 is a good player for reasonable amount of money. But, Jupiter 2000 is simply too expensive for what it gives as a sound and it is not better comparing to any of before mentioned players. There's NO significant improvmenet comparing to Planet 2000 in any sens. If you are an owner of Planet and you are looking for something better, then just change the manufacturer. For 1900 euros you'll find a better CD player and even a nice SACD or universal player on the market which sounds better !

Similar Products Used: Quad CD-P Rega Planet Denon 2900 Denon 2910 Sony SACD 777 Primare DVD30 NAD 310
OVERALL
RATING
3
VALUE
RATING
2
henner   Audio Enthusiast [Jan 12, 2005]
Strength:

smooth, detailed and engaging sound. This machine makes music enjoyable. Very high construction standard for it's price.

Weakness:

slightly shut in at the high frequencies. A bit more noise from external disc mechanism than a standard loader.

Firstly I agree with much of what the previous reviewer says about the Jupiter 2000, a well done review. I had an Arcam CD23 stolen. It is no longer made, so to replace it I auditioned the Arcam CD33 and the Rega Jupiter. Differences between digital sources are more subtle than comparing other components, but they are apparent. I did'nt like the CD33 as well as the CD23 (if you ask me Arcam should have stuck with their exclusive "Ring" DAC technology instead of "upsampling"). Guess I'm not a huge fan of "upsampling", it does add more detail and dimension, but seems to strip the music dry. Both the Rega Jupiter 2000 and the Arcam CD 33 use 24 bit DAC's made by Wolfson microelectronics. The Arcam uses "upsampling", the Rega does not. On audition the Arcam had more air and "hall sound", the Rega Jupiter had better sound of the instruments and better dynamics. Each machine had very good detail, with the Rega coming across in a less obvious way. While both machines were revealing of lesser recordings, the Arcam made them sound really bad. My thinking was, do I want a machine which will render half my cd colection useless? To its credit, the Arcam was more open and 3D than the Rega. The very top end of the rega is tipped down a bit and so was somewhat shut in by comparison, the plus side of this was less digital garbage in the signal. The Rega had deeper, fuller and tight bass as well, maybe a tad overblown by comparison to the Arcam. Although the Rega is $750 dollars less, I thought it had better overall build quality, and the no drawer design appealed to me. I think the way the machine grips the disc is partly responsible for the foundation it puts under the music. The downside being since the transport is externally exposed, on some discs you can hear it turning louder than other machines I have used. As far as comments about the rega puck "wobble", pull the cover off any cd machine, play a disc, and you will see the same "wobble". In the end it was two things that really made me walk away with the Rega - the sense of scale it gave to classical symphony and piano concerto recordings was closer to what I hear at the Myerhoff symphony Hall. The Jupiter was very impressive in this respect. And the way John Coltrane's horn sounded through it, full and dynamic like live music. On the Arcam, his horn sounded dry. Both machines were ok with classic rock, but the CD33 was a bit hashy (to be fair it was only revealing the top end hash present on the majority of rock recordings). The Rega stomps the Arcam with classic jazz (trane, miles etc.). Both were very good with classical, with the Arcam having more ambient hall sound, while the Rega had an incredible sense of scale, everything seeming large as life. To sum up, I'd say that if 3D imaging is your main priority, you'll like the Arcam. If a slightly rich dynamic sound similar to live music appeals to you, you'll like the Rega Jupiter. This is not to say the Rega does not do soundstaging, it has great depth and wide also with good seperation of each instrument. Its main, and I'd say its only shortcoming is a slight lack of ambience and "air". That is what I miss most from the Arcam CD23 I had. I felt I had to choose a machine that would be enjoyable for the long haul, the Rega Jupiter is a machine I am happy to own. I'd say Rega's description of it's product is accurate- "the Jupiter has a unique design direction necessary to reproduce a musical sound from a digital source of information". Though the Jupiter 2000 is now a 4 year old model, it is still one of the better machines out there. I'd give it a listen if you are considering a player at this price (or even higher).

Similar Products Used: Arcam CD23. Accurus ACD 11
OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
5
andjur78   AudioPhile [Nov 17, 2003]
Strength:

The Sound keeps you involved even after 3 hours. The build construction on outside looks good. No fancy gadgets...the true audiophile way I believe the Remote is optional (so would save gadget money if you are on a budget.

Weakness:

Slightly closed in top end on orchestral recordings and slight loos of detail. System matching would be strongly advised. (I think you would probably need solid state amplification ,and brighter than usual response speakers) The top clamp on this player here does not spin true and wobbles! They should get this right at any price range.

I work in the sound industry and have hear allot of players of late. I took the MKIII Jupiter player home on demo and listened to it in both HiFi system and Studio headphone situations. The first listening impression is of a lean sound with plenty of good quality bass drive.The top end was smooth and closed in.Some would call this player to have polite sound.listen longer (at least 2 hours on) now everything has warmed up and nested in.The sound changes and starts to become very musical and involving.The tops are smooth and a bit more prominent than before. It's "together" sound. All the rich harmonics of many instruments are portayed very nicely (on good recordings of coarse).I don't hear every backgroud detail on orchestral recordings as I do with other higher priced players out there, but what is there is very cultured and real and keeps you interested. The other similar priced players that claim to have more so called "detail" are really too aggressive and two dismentional to my ears.Good at first but later a bit boring and stark.The Jupiter sound keeps you locked in wanting more, even after 3-4 hours.It's a bang for buck player.I think you would need to spend allot more on a Digital player to get more "real" 3 dismentional, detailed playback, but then it gets silly and you have to constantly remind yourself that you have "well spent" that extra cash every time you listen to your gear don't you!.Personally I cannot justify the extra money above this price level for a Digital source. If you want more sound in a source then I'd recommend to go to black viynal.It still wins hands down over all the Digital formats even in 2003! But if you want a good Digital player in this price range...

Similar Products Used: MFA3.2 Arcam FMJCD23 Arcam FMJCD33 Naim CD5 Audionote CD5.1X Marantz (latest one in 2002) Linn Genki Cyrus CD7 Denon DCD1500
OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
4
Ad Trajer   AudioPhile [May 27, 2003]
Strength:

Rich, warm, silky mids with a wide soundstage and detailed bottom end. Like Vinyl.

Weakness:

As most reviewers have commented, conservative by nature, not as detailed as some and not for those who want an in your face player or a tall soundstage

Bought this player after being disatisfied with an Arcam CD72T purchased 12 months ago. Too bright, lean in the mid range and too muddy at the top and bottom. I auditioned many players and then heard the Jupiter. A fantastic player! I found the Jupiter to be the most MUSICAL of the lot. No, it didn't have all the detail of an Arcam, Musical Fidelity or Marantz, or hair on the back of the neck properties of the Cyrus, but the more you listened, the more you WANTED to listen. Most other players start to sound tinny at moderate levels after 2 hours. I often listen for 4 hours at a stretch and have found this player to be engaging, warm and rich and much like my vinyl set up. You are tempted to play out the CD rather than pick the next selection in the hope it sounds better than the last. It is what LISTENING to music is all about. The soundstage is wide and deep, but other players a taller soundstage (highs and lows). It depends on the experience you want. Height is often obtained with a muddy low end and too much shrill in the highs. The Jupiter does not have these properties and is the reason I ultimately bought it instead of the Cyrus. Final note, it DOES go well with tubes! by EL34 triode with minimal power sounds silky in the midrange with this player!

Similar Products Used: I auditioned Arcam 72T, 82T, 92T, CD23FMJ, Musical Fidelity A3.2, Marantz CD17mark2, Rega Planet, Cyrus 7Q
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
4
fzxguy   AudioPhile [Nov 16, 2002]
Strength:

It plays music! Great soundstage, detailed, and analog sounding. Well balanced, from crystaline highs, to tight bass with a gorgeous midrange in between. A very non-fatiguing player.

Weakness:

Lacks the last degree of air and detail prized by many reviewers and listeners.

I owned an original Planet which I compared again a Theta Miles, which it beat, and a Cal Audio CL-15 which I thiought sounded slightly better, but not at more than twice the price. I was comfortable with the Planet, loved the top loading design, and the sound. As I trade unpublished recordings, I found the Planet transport sometimes unwilling to play those discs. With enough patience they would play, but required re-loading. To upgrade from the planet I wanted to go to a real high-end player, so I bought a Used Audio Research CD-2 ($3500. new). What a beautiful sounding unit!! Yet, as sweet, delicate, refined, detailed, non-fatiguing, and full sounding as it was, it did not communicate the emotional impact of the music that I was accustomed to. (I listen to a $3K LP rig about a 1/3 of the time) As much as I loved this piece, and wanted to keep it.... it lacked emotion. So, I purchased a Rega Jupiter: There it was... the emotional content of the music, and 95% of the nuance, delicacy, and detail that the CD-2 had. In this process, I learned a lot about reading reviews and discovered some of the audiophile "values" that we all have. There are many wonderful pieces of equipment out there, enjoyed by lots of people. They don't sound the same, because what people listen to, listen for, and want to hear, is different. So I realized that I didn't have the same values as Wes Phillips, but values closer to that of Sam Telig. (Stereophile reviewers) I discovered that what truly mattered to me was the music... the musical message.... the emotional content of the music. I found that this was more important to me than the sound. That is; hearing every nuance and detail. It is said, that no piece, however engineered or expensive can excell in every area, and I believe it. Certain audiophile values are mutually (or electronically) exclusive. Sad, but I believe true, every great piece does many things well, but not everything. The Jupiter, lacks the last bit of detail and deliniation between notes. So for me the question was: do you want to hear the music of the violins, or know how much rosin each violinist used? The choice was not as easy for me as it sounds. These are both wonderful players. I used the Jupiter and the CD-2 side by side for 3 months, but the music won, and I don't regret it a bit. Next time I get the upgrade bug, its not a digital front end I'll be looking for. System: Oracle Delphi MKIII, Premier FT-3, Grado Sonata ARC SP9- MKII Bryston 4B-ST Magnaplanar 2.7 Music: I have very eclectic tastes: Mostly 50-60's Jazz, but Blues Rock - male and female artists Classica

Similar Products Used: Original Planet Audio Research CD-2
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
JIM   Audio Enthusiast [Nov 04, 2002]
Strength:

MORE OF EVERYTHING OVER THE PLANET 2000.

I HAD THE PLANET 2000 AND UPGRADED TO THE JUPITER.IT TOOK ABOUT 80 HOURS TO BREAK IN.QUITE A BIT BETTER SOUND AFTER THE BREAK-IN PERIOD.CONSIDERABLY BETTER THAN THE PLANET.I'M VERY PLEASED THAT I SPENT THE EXTRA MONEY FOR THE JUPITER.IT ALSO SEEMS TO PHYSICALLY RUN (OPERATE)SMOOTHER THAN THE PLANET 2000.THE QUALITY OF THE IC MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Graham Nelson   Audio Enthusiast [Apr 25, 2002]
Strength:

Good balance, fine replay of the music and the detail therein; thus, it is well up to matching with very fine amps and speakers.

Weakness:

May be a tad sibilance. Awkward getting CD''s in and out - a bit more room for the fingers would not go amiss.

My Jupiter is a little different and may not be representative of the model you can buy in the shops because this one was a pre-production model that I bought - obviously used - from the designer of it. This is without doubt a very fine CD player and I agree with other reviewers before, that it is not unlike hearing decent vinyl replay when this machine is playing. It has detail without edginess, lovely balance across the spectrum from bass (very tight and deep with the right amp/speakers) through mid range to treble, offering great detail. It is, however, quite ruthless in revealing the best and worst recordings! As such it can sometimes excentuate sibilance a tad. If I have any criticism it is that it may sometimes seem just a little laid back. However, that''s not so noticable except when I plonk the same CD into my Technics SL-P1200 ... A tip - keep it switched on because it plays at its best when it''s warm; otherwise it can sound a little harsh esp, with female voices. But once it''s warmed up it''s gorgeous! Does it beat the Linn Genki? Well, I''ve not had the chance to compare them side by side but if my memory servces me correctly I''d say they are very similar in that they are both excellent at showing the tonal colour of the instruments, of showing off the detail and separating the instruments from each other so, if you want to, you can follow the oboe line or the first violins or the cellos, or whatever ... But I''d be hard pressed to s ay which of them is the better. However, when offered the chance of buying Genki @ almost £1k and a used Jupiter 2000 @ much less than half that price, and from the guy who designed it .... no contest!

Similar Products Used: Ancient Rotel with modifed QED Digit and 2 x Positron power supplies; Technics SL-P1200, Linn Genki
OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
5
Kurt   Audiophile [Dec 31, 2001]
Strength:

Musical Beyond Belief, Detailed without being clinical, smooth. Did someone say GIANT KILLER? Yes.

Weakness:

NONE.

Incredible. This unassuming, sub-$2k CD player smoked all of the above "Similar" products. It wasn't even close. I wanted to love the Linn Ikemi, because I figured that after a while, I could trade up to the CD12 (with an additional $15k or so). Easy upgrade path. The Jupiter extinguished that possibility. I'd heard so much about the FMJ23 and the Naim CD5, again, however, no contest. The YBA 2 Alpha, a stereophile "Class A" product, smoked. To make sure I wasn't the only one hearing and feeling this, I invited two women friends over (separate times). The only thing I told them, was that one of the CD players was twice as expensive as the other. Without exception they choose the Jupiter everytime, and were quite surprised that it was the less expensive player. To this day I am amazed and, well, quite please with the results. I was able to get a GREAT CD player for less than $2,000.

If you like MUSIC, not hyper-detail, not bass (independent from the synergy/gestalt of the "entire" musical experience), not prestige (from spending ungodly sums of money), then please seek out the Jupiter. It is a wonderful, full, rich and musical CD Player at a price point that will allow more folks to enjoy their music.

My system:
Rogue Audio 99 preamp
Rogue Audio M-120 amps
Rega Jupiter CD Player
Audio Physics Virgo's and Edge Audio Speakers system 2.1
Mapleshade Speaker Cables and Interconnects

In sum listen to this CD player and you will understand its charm, its musicality its cost/benefit ratio.

K.

Similar Products Used: Cary 306/200, YBA 2 Alpha, Arcam FMJ23, Naim CD5 (with Flat-Cap), Linn Ikemi etc.
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Showing 1-10 of 16  

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.

audioreview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

Other Web Sites in the ConsumerReview Network:

mtbr.com | roadbikereview.com | carreview.com | photographyreview.com | audioreview.com