Which will sound better out of these two please?

[Wayne C]

Marantz cd 63 mark ii KI Signature edition vs

The CambridgeAudioAzur 640c Version 2 and has anyonetried one up against the other model, I realise the Marantz is 13 or so years old but could it be better

thanks in advance

[iceman56]

Hi wayne

Not heard the cambridge cd player.
But i own a maranz cd 63 ki sig
Which sounds very good to my ears.

if you can pick up a mint one off ebay or similar for around £100 i think you will be pleased with it. dont fall into the trap of thinking newer is better. some of the older stuff is very good.
i dont think you will get anything much better for the price. only problem is it may be a mismatch with the audiolab amp possibly too bright / clinical sounding.

[Duvet]

Tough call but the Marantz is long in the tooth and prime for mech or laser failures as it has been discontinued for many years now .

[KeithL]

I sold mine 4 years ago and it was showing signs of a tired laser mechanism. There was a huge gap between the Marantz and its replacement, a Naim CD5X.

[peter312]

Having heard both, my personal preference is for the Marantz. It has a "richer" sound to me.

I'm sure someone else will prefer the Cambridge.

[johnnyesox]

My old Marantz 63 ki is still going strong [so is my A400],which is very surprising,considering some of the parties my daughter has [nurse]at her house where the old black stuff now lives,sounds bloody good as well! The stuff is a lot older than 13 ,more like 16-17 I would expect?

[rabski]

All IMHO,

Cambridge: Clean and defined sort of sound. Good dynamics, quite a lot of 'slam' with the right CDs. Almost verges on a hard sort of sound, especially into amps/speakers with that sort of emphasis. Bass a little ill defined, but clean and strong. Decent build and good service backup.

Marantz: A touch smoother. Excellent with vocals and acoustics. Possibly a bit more laid back, but lovely to listen to and very untiring. Good bass response and quite life-like overall. Questionable reliability in view of the potential age and, in my direct experience, crap service and backup.

YMMV.

[iceman56]

KeithL wrote:

I sold mine 4 years ago and it was showing signs of a tired laser mechanism. There was a huge gap between the Marantz and its replacement, a Naim CD5X.

I dont think he is going to pick up a naim at a similar price to the maranz though.

[uzzy]

Welll they will sound different - as to which sounds better .. only your ears can tell.

That is the great think about CD players, they all sound different but none can compare to a decent turntable arm and cartridge.

In a way that may be sad - because you try a dearer better made turntable with a better made arm and a dearer more sophisticated cartridge and you can hear each improvement. With a cd player you buy it and that is how it sounds - if you want something different you have to buy a new one.

Isn't progress bloody frustrating.

What totally confuses me is I have a HB burnit pro cd recorder and it has two 24 bit burr brown DACS - on playback it is bass light and not as airy as the old Meridian CD506 20 bit machine I use - but CDs burned on it still sound as good or better than the original when played back on the Meridian.

Don't you just hate CD players.

Uzzy

[Fatmarley]

I've owned both machines.

The 640 is cleaner but a with a narrow sound stage and the transport is crap* (It will skip with lightly scratched CDs - at least mine did!).

I'm not sure about the transport in the Marantz, but if it's anything like the one in my old Marantz CD63 MK2 (was a step down from the KI sig IIRC) then the transport is also crap*


How much would a second hand Rega planet cost these day?




* this is compared to to the almost bullet proof Transports in my Arcam alpha 5/5+ CDP's