increase transparency for philips sacd 1000
See if Dan Weirght orother Mod" guy out there has tooled up for it yet.He told me he thought it was great sounding out of the boxand was going to offer three levels of modification.Try a searc with "Modify" in it.You'll get a lot of forum hits but there are two other guys I can't remember the names of now who have folks trust in tweakin' the digital goods.I might just plomk down on one of these myself at some point.Let us know what you do. G'luck |
See, I knew the sound of Philips SACD1000 has a transparency problem, I post thread of a reviewing AB comparing with my MSB and everybody went against me and was telling me this and that. Some tells me the high opens up, how much? I broke it in for 500 hrs already... Some people tells me to get it mod? $500.00 for the unit and another $800.00 to mod it? No warranty after mod? You gotta be kidding me! I might as well go get a SCD-1 or a SCD-777! I have the same problem, dim dark high with low defined low, dark and forward (no depth) soudnstage. Interconnect helps, try some fast & slim tonal body ICs, like XLO/Tara Labs. I really wonder if the people who went against me on my thread are even knowing what CDs and SACDs are, they are a format which have a fast accurate sound with hi-resolution. I really dont know why people spent over a decade to try to mae the CD sound like vinyl! Apparently they NEVER suceed... SACD1000 cant NOT produce a $1K class sound at all! Its a good player at $500.00 which plays ALL THAT format... It may sound good with a certain system, but I can tell you if you have a truth-telling system, SACD1000 will not satisfy you! READ THE OTHER THREAD GUYS, NOT ONLY ME AND THE STARTER OF THIS THREAD HAS THE SAME PROBLEM! Dont blind yourself with what other people say, TRUST YOUR EARS & YOUR TASTE! |
Infinity Audio: I would suggest mental help for your split personality disorder. First of all, your original post complains about this unit yet you did not even read the manual, have it hooked up in a manner that offers less than optimum performance and then you ask me if i can find out if your personal components are capable of working with this unit. Your second set of posts that you initiated regarding this unit comes less than a week or two later and states that you are basically happy with the unit. As far as i know, nobody forced you to make this post or change your point of view. Your third set of posts, which i consider these to be, states that you aren't happy with the unit and that we are all fooling ourselves. There is a conspiracy here to defraud the public and lead them to hell as far as you're concerned. Just for laughs, you should take a look at the transaction feedback for some of the people ( like Rmml and myself ) that have posted positive comments about this machine. Maybe then you would realize that we have owned / experienced dozens upon dozens of various audio components. As such, we should have a pretty good idea as to what other competitive products are out there at various price ranges. I can honestly say that i have OWNED ( not just listened to ) at least 18 DAC's, 15 CD players, 6 transports, etc... I would consider this to be relatively well versed in the field of digital. On top of that, you list Tara as being a "fast and bright" cable. I don't know of ONE person that would consider Tara as being "fast and bright". Most people consider Tara cables to range anywhere from relatively neutral to warm and smooth. I also don't know of too many people that consider Kimber to be "thick & muddy" while lacking midrange and treble response. I do understand that some cables perform differently from system to system, but your descriptions are like no others i've ever heard or read before. As such, you should probably have the doctor check your ears AND your head at the same time. No sense in having to pay two different doctors or make two separate trips. Sean > |
I too have a SACD 1000. It is sensitive to cable change. I have used solid core and stranded silver interconnects. Silver is a good option to extend the top end. Also, there is a filter switch on the back which will affect the top end, especially with SACD. The sound overall is a bit rolled off with 16/44, but with the SACD info. and the filter in the high position, the top end is very open. Solid core copper also works good. The unit needs to be on some kind of damping material and needs a good stand. I use a Monster 2500 line conditioner which also helped clean up the sound. The top end of this player is not irritating which many confuse with a false sense of extension. So many have begun to associate a bit of pain with detail in digital that if you don't have analog on hand to use as a reference it is easy to forget a truely good top end. The player is a good player, not a reference, but still musical. Enjoy the unit, Jallen |
Sean: Oh also, even though you have listened to many many Hi-End items, it doesn't mean that your taste is as general as the public trend out there, honestly some people DO like the SACD1000 but sonically, I realy wouldn't recommended. Its worth it as a $400.00 do-everything-player, but it's DEFINITELY NOT the choice as a redbook "reference cd player" Apparently, NOT ONLY ME has the same problem with the SACD1000! Read the other thread! I seen AT LEAST 10-15 people are disatisfied with it's top and bottom, even YOURSELF has a thread saying that the top is a little bit roll-off... and you are telling me that I have a split personality and have a problem and shall I go see a doctor? I think you do, not me... Yes I have made another thread saying that I am happy with the sound and may do a mod... I AM A TECH AND I DO MOD MYSELF!! It's consider an activity to me, and unlike all others I dont pay 200% of the unit retail price to get the unit mod by others trying to squeeze out 25-50 more percent of it's sonic ability, also ruin it's warranty. I am a tech. myself that's why I mod and fix as well if anything... YES, I WILL SAY ITS WORTH IT FOR $400, SO THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ME SAYING THAT I AM HAPPY WITH MY PURCHASE. Truefully... I am! I use it with my Secondary Bedroom HT anyways.... READ THREADS IN AUDIOREVIEW.COM AS WELL... You should find half the poeple there been saying SACD1000 sounds warm BUT YET KINDA OF DIM AND ROLL UP TOP WITH LESS DEFINED BOTTOM. It's apparently not good enough as a reference as other says, but what can you expect from a $400.00 unit? Oh, if you expereience a lot of Hi-End gears, that doesn't mean that you have a God of Ears with a neutral judge... A lot of the current Hi-End audio gear are all colored in tonal characteristic anyways. I just think that as a SACD/CD player it deals with a high resolution format and SOULD have a good top end as well as to it's resolution... My Tara Labs AIR 3 do sound bright with my SACD1000. Did you ever own a pair of AIR 3, so then? As I said, don't listen to others but trust your ears. You said you never heard people saying that Taras are bright, go take a look in AudioReview.com and do a slight search on Audiogon Threads... it may help you understand AIR 3 =) ALso, I have the filter set to 3 with no filteration as you and other suggested, changes are super subtle butwhen I plug it into my Main System it sound a bit more opened up on top, BUT YET STILL NOT AS GOOD AS I THINK IT SHOULD BE? As a retail price of $1599.99 MSRP, I expect a whole lot more, but since I got it for $400.00 then what can I expect? I dont really get offensive but here in audiogon, if you like the thread you answer if you dont agree you say so but dont try to start a fight here... Threads are for people to tell others if they like or dont like, place to discuss not argue... I like sound like this, doesnt mean you will... and seriously I dont think I have problem with my listening and setting because other people has tell the same problem out there in other threads. MAYBE YOU CAN STOP SELLING PHILIPS SACD1000 ON AUDIOGON & EBAY SO YOUR OPINIONS CAN BE NEUTRAL SINCE YOU DON'T GAIN NOTHING PUSHING IT? |
and honestly if SACD1000 IS THAT GOOD, Marantz SA-12s1 would have a problem selling at almost $3000.00 / per unit. They are the same unit but Marantz has better parts and transformer and molded into a alluminum shield and the chassis wiwth Marantz are pure copper base. Genuine HDAM modules not Philips lower spec, and Elna Audio Grade instead of regular grad on PHilips. |
Infinity: I have stated up front that i did not consider this to be a reference grade player as i experienced it out of the box. To refresh your memory, I had stated that the player had STRONG bottom end output when initially fired up. I also stated that i found the top end to be soft and slightly rolled. The soundstage also seemed to lack dimensionality and air. I have also stated that i found the SACD 1000 to respond quite noticeably to both interconnect and power cord changes. I also stated that i thought that the construction of the player, primarily the cheezy plastic drawer cover and tray mechanism, is lacking. I also stated that i thought that their was room for improvements in terms of both isolation and damping of the chassis. I have addressed all of those concerns, save the plastic drawer cover and tray mechanism, in my installation. With that amount of criticism / commentary, i think that i've been quite fair in my assessment of the unit. As to the initial good points of the unit right out of the box, i stated that i thought that the player offered very clean and liquid midrange reproduction and that it appeared to be a unit that would be very worthwhile to modify. You can go back and read all of this for yourself. As such, i'd ask you to name ONE product that does not benefit from break-in, proper set-up, doesn't respond to tweaking or can't be improved via aftermarket modification. Can you do this ? I think not. As such, i've stated that this is a solid player and would be a good candidate for further refinement / modifications should one choose to go that route. To add to the above, as time has passed, the player has settled in electrically and i have worked with the system that the player is in. Right now, i would say that i am quite pleased with how things have progressed with this player. Quite honestly, i haven't had to do too much to get to this point either ( compared to some other gear that requires a lot of "support components"). My experience with this player is that the better the rest of the system is, the more that you will like the player itself ( once fully broken in and set up decently ). The resolution of this player has made me re-think a few observations that i had about the system that it is installed in. Quite honestly, some of the criticisms that i had regarding the higher noise floor and slight lack of transparency of the backbone components of this system had nothing to do with the actual preamp / amp combo. Changing the digital source to the SACD 1000 both opened my eyes to this fact AND taken this system to a new level. As such, the aforementioned problems were not within the system itself, but within the source components. I think that if you were to look within your own system, this might explain some of the problems that you are running into and blaming on this unit. While i HATE "uppity hi-fi snobs" but will end up coming across as one when i say this, i do have to question the performance capacity of the preamp section that you are using, the power amps that you've chosen and the speakers that are in use. The fact that your speakers are large 3 way four driver floorstanding towers that are available for $269 brand new on Ebay may offer some hints as to why you may be hearing what you are. While you may have upgraded some of the crossover components inside of them, it is tough to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. As anyone that has ever built or modified a speaker knows, you can't buy 8 "good" drivers and build a large cabinet and make ANY type of profit of it at $269 ( including packaging ). That is, unless the quality of components and construction is nothing less than bottom of the barrel. That is why i stated that i prefer to start off with a good base unit ( like the SACD 1000 ) prior to modification. Some of you may remember my comments pertaining to this in a previous SACD 1000 thread. As to your comments about me selling these units on Ebay and Audiogon, i have sold a very small quantity via Audiogon. I have never listed them for sale on Ebay. I have been completely up-front with everyone about where these units have come from, what i paid for them, what to expect out of them, how to break them in, etc... Some have asked me to make comparisons to other digital components within their system and i have told them that they should stay where they are i.e. basically costing me a sale. Rather than sell and make a small profit, i would rather be honest and maintain the level of integrity that i do have. As to the satisfaction level of these players, some individuals have purchased a unit from me and ended up buying a second SACD-1000. To make things clear, they purchased their second unit AFTER using the first for a period of time. As such, they knew exactly what to expect out of an SACD 1000 and opted to buy another. I think that this speaks volumes of what they as an end user think of the product. Like anything else though, you will always have some people that do not give the unit a chance, do not allow the unit to settle in, do not work with the rest of their system to accommodate the specifics of a new piece of gear, are not trained listeners or simply have different sonic tastes. Sometimes, it is a combo of all of the above that leads one to dismiss a product. Personally, i have not received anything less than positive commentary about these units via email. Having said all of the above, who am i to tell you what you should like or shouldn't like ? I've always stressed that one should buy and use what they like as individuals, as they are the ones that have to listen to their choices. Hopefully, people will make choices that they can live with on the long term and enjoy them for the duration of their stay. Sure, i have my preferences and have voiced my opinions / thoughts on more than a few thousand occasions : ) but that doesn't mean that you are forced to agree or come to the same conclusions. My main concern with your responses to existing threads and threads that you've started regarding the SACD 1000 were that they lacked insight, did not take into account proper set-up of the component and that you did not even bother to familiarize yourself with the SACD 1000 itself OR how to set it up for best operation within the confines of your system. If you had, you would not have asked me to do your homework for you in another thread. There was never any form of consistency to anything that you posted and many of your posts, including threads that you yourself started, are 100% contradictory in nature. The fact that you were quick to jump to negative conclusions about the product, then post a thread that stated that you were happy with the product, then go off on a tirade about the product after one negative post tells me that you lack stability and / or are easily swayed by public opinion. I think that if others were to follow your threads regarding this unit, they might come to similar conclusions. Your lack of integrity is also something that has been hanging out in the back of my mind regarding your "flip-flopping" of opinions on this unit. As such, i'm glad that i did not sell you the unit that you now own and that we were not able to complete the transaction that you initiated. It has probably saved me a lot of headaches in the long run. Sean > |
This exchange between Sean and Infinity audio { IA } has been good for all audiogone members. Integrity is all we have between us and a disregard for that is treason in our circles. IA is having a good time with this but I see a deeper problem. These threads and exchanges are learning tools for the average audio enthusiast . Many people turn to people like Sean for leadership because it is obvious if you have followed his extensive , altruistic responses ; he takes great pains to help people he will never know. Sean probably insulted IA to provoke a response so this exchange could occur. Bravo Sean. He backs his reasoning with facts and well supported opinions that any seasoned audiophile is familiar with. I follow this because I too am interested in becoming more intelligent and responsible in this interesting field we all love and obsess over. Sean uncovered an all too familiar issue of speaking before thinking and it is an embarassment to IA I feel sure. We all should however swallow pride from time to time and IA , its your turn. We all embrace arguments in that growth results from the dissection of two divergent points of view . That is the essence of intelligent sparring but Sean is eating your lunch. Fess up IA , you need to do your homework and think twice before putting on the gloves when your saftey pins have undone. |
Brainwater: It was not my intention to take the route that i ended up travelling. While i would have preferred to sit back and enjoy the day and not been forced to play the part of "hard-nosed bastard", i received more than a few emails inquiring to the validity of IA's comments. While anyone that has followed all of the various SACD 1000 threads that are currently open would have been familiar with IA's inconsistencies, some folks simply don't read every thread related to similar topics. Rather than respond to a few dozen emails individually, i decided to confront the situation "head on" and try to clear the air. In order to do that, those that have not followed all the various threads would need to be brought up to speed as to where both IA, myself and several other individuals were coming from. By tying the various SACD 1000 threads into one and providing various links, i had hoped to make it easy for others to better see & understand how we arrived at this point. In doing so, i probably went "slightly" overboard. My main goals were to help others to fully comprehend the inconsistent comments that have been posted by IA regarding this specific product. There were other points of conflict that also came into play, but i had wasted enough time and energy as it was. I think that i made my point, probably in both a large and cruel fashion, but i did what i thought needed to be done. Judging by IA's previous responses, i still don't think that he sees his posts and attitudes as being inconsistent. If we have learned anything from this turn of events, it should be that it takes no talent or consistency to post comments on the internet and stir things up. As such, one should take their time and fully digest the comments that one reads AND makes while considering the source of information. For that matter, my comments are no better than any one else's and i hope that everyone here realizes that. That is why i presented the evidence that i did via the links that i posted. I left it up to the reader to decide for themselves how credible IA's statements were. As to me, the only thing that i have going for me is that i "try" to be both honest and consistent and do the best that i can. IA basically attacked me and several others that had reported "positive" results with the SACD 1000. He even went so far as to infer that there was some type of conspiracy taking place. Hopefully, those that are concerned will recognize this and take it into consideration when reading my posts / point of view. As to Glai, i apologize for sidetracking / ruining your thread. I would only add that you might want to do a search of the archives regarding the SACD 1000 and look for others that are using this machine. From there, you can email them directly or ask them publicly as to their thoughts on what works best. I had hoped that we could share information as a community regarding this product but it appears that this is not to be. IA: As to your additional comments regarding your Focal based DIY speakers, i see no mention of these within the system that you posted on Agon. You also stated that this was being used in your "second system", which i took to mean your HT system. On top of that, the SACD 1000 is a multi-channel device, making it a logical HT component. Since you have the Fluance speakers listed as your HT mains, putting 2 + 2 together did equal 4. I also thought it pertinent that you considered the quality of these $269 towers to be "excellent" as a rather telling factor to those that might not have known what your personal preference in sonics / equipment consist of. To top all of this off, in another SACD 1000 related thread, you stated that you were using B&W's with the Philips. As such, you've only further confused me and added to the lack of credibility in what you've posted. I can understand owning multiple speakers and systems, but the manner that you've presented various bits of information make it hard to follow along and / or swallow. Sean > |
I thought that some of you might find this interesting. Take a look at this thread, review the link below and then decide for yourself who was "joshing" who. Given some of the exchanges in this and similar SACD 1000 threads, i find the first "offer to buy" pretty amusing to say the least. Is it possible that someone had outside motivations in trying to drive down the prices on these units ??? Let the evidence speak for itself as the offer was made AFTER raising all the ruckus about the low quality and poor sonics of this unit. Sean > http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/wtb.pl?dgtlplay&1048523492 |
