Is there an SACD that can play cds well?


I've read through the threads and read the Stereophile reviews. They all seem to say that high end SACD units playing SACDs are superior to similar CD units playing cds.

I have a Resolution Audio 55 playing cds into ML380S and ML335 and Dunlavy SCIV. Very, very good. But, no, I want better.

Now help me.

What specific SACD units in YOUR EXPERIENCE will play cds in equal detail and depth to the RA55/ML39/EMC-1?
lakefrontroad

Showing 4 responses by albertporter

I recently had a two piece Levinson ( transport + D/A converter ) here for one of our listening sessions. My Sony 9000 ES had barely one hundred and fifty hours on it, and with a selection of redbook CD's, the Sony won so overwhelmingly that the owner sold his gear the next week. I suspect that money was a consideration, but I also have no doubt that in this particular test, ( no SACD involved ), the Sony did a far superior job. The $1075. for the Sony makes it a great choice, even if only stopgap to avoid sitting on a high end piece that is diminishing in value. For all I know, one of the new Sony's that sell for even less than mine may do as good a job, that would make it an unbeatable value.
Hi Dekay and Bmpnyc, I am basically an analog only guy, but I feel pretty good about the 9000 ES, especially when there are enough break in hours on it. Tonight was music night, and along with my usual four or five visitors, a couple that occasionally comes (man and wife) also dropped in, bringing SACD titles that I do not own. The Audioquest sampler with Mighty Sam McClain and Robert Lucas was among them, and we played our favorite cuts, all the while, I was thinking that it sounded very good. Afterward for comparison, I pulled the two LP copies of these artists and played the same two songs on my analog rig. I can certainly say that the LP won the contest, but at no time since I have ever owned digital, has it ever been closer. I must confess at this point, that my SACD player is plugged into a Clear Image from Audio Prism, has Purist Dominus RLS power cord and Dominus RLS RCA interconnect. In addition, it is sitting on roller blocks and those are sitting on a special isolation base built by Purist Audio currently only sold in Japan.

All that being said, the player and all the extras attached to it still cost less than my phono cartridge. Consideration should be made on behalf of cost, and this unit is worth the money. The bad news is on the subject of CDR's, mine will not play any that I have attempted, not even the very highest quality ones I recently burned at 1 to 1 with the new Que!Fire firewire CD burner.

I too wish that Bmpnyc could visit and bring his Pioneer DV-37. I have no experience with any other players, except the Levinson that was brought here for that one test. That contest was so lopsided, I considered the Levinson could have been defective. When I ask about the possibility, the owner said it had just been returned from the factory where some mod was done. Perhaps break in on the Levinson could have been a factor. In any event, when the owner heard the comparison, he put his on the market the next day.

I don't want to influence any of you to buy the Sony and wind up disappointed. I was just jived that it worked so well, played my DVD movies and did an excellent job with both Redbook and SACD. I hope that others will make additional comparisons and post here. If something is better than what I have, I am not opposed to an upgrade, provided the cost is proportional.

Last thing. The couple that brought the SACD titles purchased a Sony 777 over a year ago, and when (tonight) I brought up the topic of break in on my 9000 ES, needing at least 200 hours, they laughed. They said that twice they threatened to return their unit and still later tried to sell it because of terrible sound. The performance only came at over 500 hours (their quote), and now they are so totally pleased with it, they would not give it up for anything. I hear this story over and over, so there must be something radical that happens to these players in the long term.

I am hoping that sometime soon, I can borrow their Sony 777 for one of our music sessions. This would provide an opportunity to do a comparison between it and my 9000. They want to borrow my Wolcott amps to try on their Maggies, so I have a little leverage :~). I will try to remember to post results if we manage the test.
The audition that I mentioned wanting to conduct ( posting of April 10 ) happened yesterday. My friend and his wife brought their Sony 777 ES for a test against my Sony 9000 ES. Part of this session included a regular from my Tuesday night group who dropped by and listened with us for about an hour.

I was surprised that the 777 ES was so much heavier and more professional in it's overall construction than my 9000 ES. I noticed a significant difference, even in the quality of the RCA output jacks on the rear panel. The top load mechanism is beautifully designed and the small brass stabilizer that sits atop the software appears to have been precision machined from solid brass, as opposed to a polished casting.

We listened to my 9000 on several SACD and redbook CDs, before playing the same material on the 777. The session went pretty much non stop for more than three and a half hours before any of us made a decision. Even at that, I feel that my limited exposure to these two machines is in no way conclusive, and should not be used as an absolute basis for judgement.

The bottom line is that neither player won in every category. Certain types of recordings, such as material from the Audioquest SACD sampler, was tighter and went slightly deeper in the bass with the 777. The 9000 presented deep bass with slightly more bloom, and a much livelier and larger soundstage on both voices and string instruments. The 777's rock solid image had a very slightly compressed sound around the midrange and mid bass frequencies, and the vocals imaged very near the front face of my speaker. The 9000 presented vocals about two feet in front of my speakers, almost the exact spot they are rendered by my LP rig. The total depth of the presentation from both of these players was otherwise fairly equal, with neither of them having the absolute space, width and height that the LP version has.

The preference in which player sounded better was literally split between two cuts from Stevie Ray Vaughn's SACD version of "Couldn't Stand the Weather." The Sony 777 played "Cold Shot," maintaining absolute control over all the guitar work ( with its purposeful distortions ), even at very high sound pressure levels. The next track, "Tin Pan Alley, " is a much cleaner recording and almost perfectly balanced sonically. In that situation, the 777 lacked the sweeping presence and depth of Stevie's guitar licks and his up front vocals. The 9000 got both of these correct, and balanced ( within its own sound ) much like the LP version I am so familiar with. However, as mentioned, the heavily modulated cut, "Cold Shot" that the 777 dealt with so easily, tended to become glassy and hard if pressed to high volume levels on the 9000.

The 777 had an option not found on the 9000. You may switch redbook CD's to one of four different filter selections. We began with number one, which is called standard, and worked our way up through the selection. At first, I thought the standard sounded best, then later decided that filter setting three was preferable. The odd thing is that different CD's seem to effect my preference for the settings. The Loreena McKennitt redbook, "Book of Secrets" was slightly rolled off in the extreme high frequencies with the 777 in the standard setting, while setting two caused a slight notch or phase shift between Loreena's lower register and the mid bass. Setting three in some ways felt almost like SACD in bandwidth, but with a decided sense of loss after coming from the best of that material.

The redbook CD sound on the 9000 was surprisingly like the 777 at it's standard setting. The exception being again, that the 9000 seemed somewhat more lively and dynamic, and the 777 had the option to select the filter that matches the requirements of your own taste and system balance.

We touched on the subject of break in after the music session, and my friend claimed his 777 required many more months of break in than he had anticipated. Mind you, this is not a guy that lets his unit sit around, there are probably (by his estimate) well over 2000 hours on this player. He said that the ultimate smoothing in the extreme highs was one of the last tonal balance issues to resolve itself in this process.

One last variable, his 777 had to make a long trip for the test, and was therefore without power for over one hour. Phil commented that 24 hours of steady on seemed to be the magic number for the 777. In that respect, it was working at a disadvantage against my 9000. On the other hand, based on his comments concerning break in, I am certain that the 9000 needs many more hours of additional run in, before it reaches it's full potential.

Just for reference, both players were tested with and without Symposium Roller blocks. Both were plugged into the Audioprism Clear Image power station, with AC connection to the players through Purist Audio Dominus power cord. The same interconnect was used for both players, Dominus Rev B, and both were tested in exactly the same location, sitting on top of the new Purist isolation base. In the end, both players showed common strengths and weaknesses, with the weaknesses being quite small.
Now both of you have me interested, I just hope you are not going to tell me that the upgrade cost more than the original price of the player.