One last note, the last time I heard W.C. Fields quoted was in Allentown, Pa. by a drunk outside a downtown chain store. I prefer Oscar Wilde or G.K.Chesterton. Afterall, "Being educated puts one almost on the level with the commercial classes"....Gee Hammy, which one said that?? |
Dave, My guess would be Wilde, since the statement is meant at a wry indictment of the educated / commercial classes. Chesterton's use uf language was more straightforward, lacking the wit of Wilde.
How about "Arguments are to be avoided; they are always vulgar and often convincing." |
"It's only the intellectualy lost who ever argue", would be yet another quip from the same source. Applies to this situation, don't you think ? In another time and another thread, we might have been friends. If we could only listen to each others systems over a drink ...Ah! That would be interesting. |
Dave...to return to your original thread...I have always been impressed with the sound of Sony digital...very laid back and musical... maybe not as "exciting" as some but hey...even their budget players are very good...ofcourse "hi-enders" who seek more esoteric brands and relish at every opportunity to bash Mega-Sony will disagree...but that is the state of audio...it is subjective as it gets... |
Audioengr: I don't doubt that a faster and cleaner input signal would help any DAC. As i mentioned though, i bought my transport as it came factory stock with a "super-clock", extra regulation circuitry, AC line filtering, etc... Sean
> |
Dear Phasecorrect...I think it speaks volumes when a musician like Jdaniel seems to understand what I'm saying. He doesn't get defensive because he has no ax to grind or any deep seated psychological need to justify his rig! |
I only have a lowly sony, the scd-xe670, the single-disc version of the ($400 list/$200 street) scd-ce775 sacd/cd carousel. I've read that most of the sony's share the same "house sound." My impressions echo those of Jdaniel. I found mine "OK" over all.
It is laid back, sort of recessed and muddy. It's most noticable on redbook CDs of classical music. Much so much so on other types of music - acoustic and electronic - IMO. And especially when A/B'ing it again my EVS Millennium DAC or Panasonic RP82 DVDA player. Truth be told, except for classical SACDs, I much prefer listening to redbook on EVS or the panasonic. The bass on the Sony (xe670) is also softer and less tuneful and taunt that compared to my other players.
But given the (what I'm calling) Sony house sound,I could see how someone could prefer it and call it more like vinyl. It's just too recessed and colored (muddy?) for me. Again this was the Xe670, I'm not sure how much of this extrapolates to it's bigger ES brethern. YMMV. My $0.02 |
I'll bring the single malt Macallan Dave. I'd love to hear your sysem. You know, I've found one of the problems in this form of contact is that is tends to be very conversational but cannot convey the tonal inflection of true conversation. This creates miscommunication. You were giving us a hard time, but without the tonal inflection, we took it literally. I do apologize. After trading messages with you I realize I took it the wrong way. |
While there is much air and transparancy with the XA777es, what I'm missing is "ambient glow." (I will leave it to CD-player critics to describe what *that* is.) I've also noticed that their isn't as much room interaction with the Sony as opposed to the Marantz SA14 ver. 2. The Marantz seems to outline and heighten chords more than the Sony--whether this is real or not, I don't know, but the Marantz was certainly more seductive because of it, though I think it led to some slight muddiness in tutti orchestral passages that led me to put some damping treatment (towels, ha ha) on the walls. Average to excellent recordings, with a good capturing of ambience and glow to begin with, sound great on the Sony. The Marantz salvaged recordings that were more distant, bringing out more ambience, but not more 'line' than the Sony. I hope this makes sense. It's safe to say that the Sony brings out more of the musical line, (leaving the responsiblity of capturing ambience and sensuality to the recording crew), while the Marantz brought out more of the verticle relationships (interaction between notes in a chord and between instruments). Which is better? A matter of taste: Some conductors are more line/melody-oriented, (logical), believing that the sensuousness will just fall into place while keeping the composer's ideas in tact; other conductors are more sensuously oriented, (very interested in chord-play), just barely keeping the musical line together. I happen to prefer that latter in the rare cases when it works. |
Jdaniel...I know what your saying, however I get the desired effect with my ARC tube gear! |
Final thoughts on Sony XA redbook performance. I've decided I like the redbook performance of the Marantz SA-14 better. It's just more tonally opulent, even though this leads to some muddying of textures in climaxes, but not much. However, I was just looking through my journal in which I had reported to myself that, once I had gotten over the Marantz' "glow" and bass-heft, redbook still left me cold compared to SACD. So there you go. I've decided to keep the Sony for its SACD playback--(can't complain in any way)--and give my redbooks a rest for awhile. I sold another 800 of them. |
Jdaniel-I suppose that's where system synergy comes into play...through Watt/Puppy 6's and ARC tube gear (don't forget the power cord HT AC-11-a must for Sony digital gear) it is uncanny how it lays out the orchestra with exceptional detail and neutrality. My IC's are very neutral while my Speaker cables are full bodied yet controlled! |
Agree totally about detail and neutrality, but going from long listening periods of SACD surround and two-channel, to redbook was just *too* disappointing. It's *so* over for me and redbook; that's the point I was making. If you all out there don't want your boat rocked, *don't* listen to SACD! (And no, i'm not buying a $8K+ redbook CD player. ; ) |
Interesting Jdaniel, I have not been that disappointed with redbook considering most SACD's available incur PCM decimation during production and redbook recordings have improved markedly...I have some early 60's redbooks that are amazing. Some recording engineers know what makes for a good recording and others haven't a clue...that goes for CD or SACD! What does your system consist of?? |
Vandersteen 3A sigs, Vandy center and surrounds, Cardas Neutral reference inteconnects and bi-wires, Musical Fidelity A308 Integrated and a Harmon Pardon amp for center and rears. If a good recording means imaging, bloom, large soundstage, etc; then I have heard some great redbook CDs as well. SACD just offers something more. I listen to Classical and it just seems to flatten during tutti sections with most redbooks. Exceptions include some Reference Recordings, and some Collins Classics. (Find Vaughan Williams "Job" on Collins if you can.) Next year I'm going to pick up another Marantz, perhaps the SA11 S1 that's coming out IF it's as good as the SA 14 v2 on redbook. Looks like it's just going to be messy for awhile. |
Hammy started me thinking about inflections/voice tones etc. that we cannot convey here in space.It would be interesting, if along with passwords,we each could post MRI pictures of our heads,so our peers would have a better idea of how we hear sounds.Im thinking our ear canals must vary wildly,great post Dave....Bob |
Usblues,
A great observation that is too often understated in these posts and reviews in general. I have known many audiophiles in my life and none of them has the same composition of gear in their rigs. They may have owned the same gear at some point or dragged their gear over to a friend's house, etc. etc. but "settled" (if we ever do:-) on different gear to comprise their systems. I think this speaks volumes as to how we hear and specifically, what we find "real". Some people are taller than others and the "sweet spot" listening area we have for ourselves may not be the same for someone 5" shorter. I had an audiophile friend who had large ears that stuck out somewhat (think Alfred E. Newman - almost)who I always disagreed with over what sounded best. The point is, if it mimics what you percieve to be real and you are happy with it - cool!
I have owned a lot of digital front-end gear and currently have the Sony 999es residing in that spot. Some who know me thought it was a trade "down" but I got sick of having 3 racks dedicated to transport/DAC/upsampler not to mention cables, etc. You can see my review of the Sony in other threads. Is it "the best" I have heard (or owned) - no. Is it a sound I can live with - yes. At the end of the day, it does more things right than wrong. To the original point though, it would be interesting to see a study done on ear structure (and shape) with relation to hearing perception. I think it is a much more complicated (and subjective) human sense that doesn't get its due consideration when the "war of words" starts over audio gear - IMO. - Tony |
Yeah,its always nice to see a litle more light and a little less heat,that being said,its an amazing pastime,been listening to music since Jailhouse Rock and this time and place is about as good as it got,with the possible exception of Berkeley in the old days,though that was live stuff.This is a great place to engage to learn and get happy and get mad I reckon.Theres some funny guys here besides the aces who teach us the fine points.Hve a large day my friend....Bob |
Not giving up the Sony XA777 yet: My audiophile pusher finally talked me into trying a better A/C power cord, (Audioquest nrg2), and low and behold, the sound *is* more beguiling, and more ambience is evident. Interesting. I'm taking the unit to a modifier today to see if better caps and power supply will fit; if so, I'm going to have these items installed. I'll let you know if such mods give the player more oomph. |
JDaniel-I recently recieved my XA9000ES player and was disappointed with the sound vs my XA777ES player until I plugged it into one of the new Monster Cable power strips...Freakin Hell, what a difference in every respect...bigger soundstage, tonality improved, hash gone and overall harmonic balance more natural..all this with increased low level resolution and better extension and control!! Go figure? |
Got my hands on the latest ML No.390S and I am running it direct...it is amazing...nothing comes close to this experience...even the best of us get sidetracked!! |
Dave,
Are you saying the ML 390S is better than the Sony scd-XA777Es?
Later,
|
Dave, so now how's the Sony holding up to the ML No.390S? |
I sold the sony lickity split...holy mother of GOD...SACD playback from redbook plus HDCD!!! Get one fast...re-finance your home if need be!!! |
Sometimes you need to drive a Porche 911 GT2 to realize how slow your Miata really is. A reference CDP can make regulare CD's sound as good as SACD's. Now, imagine what a reference SACD player would sound like; a whole different level. |
Assuming that SACD is more than just smoke and mirrors. |
Merge03,
Have you actually heard SACD on a reference system? |
I'm glad Mark still supported HDCD on his latest player. Even though considered a dead format, I'm quite fond of it. I was suprized the Denon included HDCD processing on their new AVR-5805 10 channel receiver. Classe is still offering HDCD on their new redbook player, however they have elected not to offer a SACD unit for 2005. Wonder if Classe knows something about the future of SACD??? |
Classe *does* offer a 2 channel SACD player, I saw it reviewed months ago. I'm glad they're continuing to do so. I rarely listen to my redbooks anymore, except as background music, such is the superiority of SACD. You should hear the new RCA Living Stereo remasters in 3 channel! |
The RCA Living Stereo Sacd, did strike my interest are they any better than the Jvc XRCD's? |
I've not heard the XRCDs, but I've read on audioasylum that they are far superior. I can't believe these recordings are almost 50 years old. One of the great advantages of SACD remasterings of analog is no PCM anywhere. I hope. The only Living Presence I was a little disappointed with, both sound-wise and performance-wise, was the Cliburn Rachmaninoff/Tchaikovsky, though it was still 'good.' It's great to hear most of these in three channel, as the engineers hoped that they would be heard. |
BigKidz, which tubes DAC did you use in your comparison? I'm debating a new DAC or getting my SCD 777 modified. You've owned plenty of Sonys, which would you recommend, new DAC or mod? |
Sjh32, BigKidz is running a Audio Logic Tube Dac. |
would any of you big spenders like to take a challenge?
try a sony dvp-nc685v DVD-sacd player against your
set-up. can be had for just under $200.00. worse
case, you can use it as dvd player.
i've had audio note dac 3, meridian 508.x(dark),
MSB link dac thru denon as transport. none were
particularly better and sacd is smooth |
Hey Dave, how is the XA9000ES? |
Had it briefly and found it to be a bit leaner than it's predecessor, but still a solid performer for $2000 discounted. My favorite under $4000 players are the MF A5 and Krell SACD standard. |
