Hot Product Archives

Published May 1, 2001

• Back

Sony SCD-C333ES Super Audio CD Player

The single question submitted most frequently to "Ask Wes" is a heartfelt what do I do now? from audiophiles confused by the plethora of competing digital formats. Red Book CD -- the dominant format of the age -- seems almost passé. Now we have up-sampling digital filters and DACs, as well as hi-rez DVD (DAD uses the two channels of 96kHz/24-bit sound built into the DVD-V standard and DVD-A offers both compressed multi-channel and uncompressed two-channel). And then there's SACD. No wonder people are confused.

And it gets worse! SACD is watermarked, but its musical signal is not. DVD-A watermarks the signal itself -- a situation one audio writer has likened to establishing your possession of a pristine pool by peeing in it.

I finally got to spend some time with an SACD player and it answered some of my questions about the format -- but boy-oh-boy, did it ever raise some others.

It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers

The Sony SCD-C333ES is Sony's first five-disc carousel changer and it's also the least expensive SACD player they have rolled out so far. It's a hefty unit -- it measures 17" wide by 5.5" tall by 16" deep and weighs in at around 24 pounds. Built on what Sony calls a "frame and plate" chassis (which means it derives much of its structural rigidity from a solid steel base-plate and its solid aluminum faceplate), it feels substantial and it's certainly rattle-free.

The C333Es has a Direct Stream Digital (DSD) decoder, a current-pulse D/A converter, and 24-bit "variable coefficient filters." It has both TosLink and coaxial digital outputs (for CD replay only) and uses a brand new single lens pickup with twin laser optics for CD/SACD compatibility.

The C333ES will play CDs, SACDs, CD-Rs and CD-RWs in any sequence. And unlike either of its more expensive stablemates, the recently deleted SACD-1 and SCD-777ES, the C333ES recognizes CDs and SACDs and automatically shifts into the proper playback mode. Of course, this comes at a cost -- the machine takes forever (at least eight seconds) to read a disc's TOC and shift into the proper playback mode. In the case of dual-layer SACDs, it plays the SACD layer unless instructed otherwise.

The C333ES comes with the usual programming options, including CD text and all the standard multi-disc sequencing features. It also has a front panel headphone jack with its own volume control. But where it differs from any other CD changer I've ever played with (and where it mirrors other SACD players) is in its choice of five digital filters for playing back Red Book CD. It lists them as STD (standard), Clear (slow roll-off), Plain (slow roll-off), Fine (slow roll-off) and Silky (slow roll-off). For the vast majority of CDs, I was perfectly content with Standard. However, there were at least a few CDs that sounded their best with each of the other options -- I could not determine any rhyme or reason for this, but it was true nonetheless. The very hit or miss nature of the filters' effectiveness will please some audiophiles and irritate the dickens out of others. Count me in the second camp.

The C333ES's remote appears to be Sony's standard changer remote -- it's the same unit I received with my CDP CX400s -- none of the unit's special features seems to be remote accessible.

The C333ES lists for $1200, but a friend in the mail order arm of retail tells me that demand for them has been slow, so you can probably strike an effective -- he reckons a serious (and aggressive) shopper might be able to buy one for $899. If you have a helpful, knowledgeable dealer nearby, however, expect to pay about $100 more than that -- and consider it worth it.

The real question is not whether machines think but whether men do

I haven't lived with a carousel-type CD player in a long time, so I was pleasantly surprised by the SCD-C333ES's build quality and near-silent mechanical operation. Early models seemed clunky and prone to breakdowns, but I only experienced one problem with the C333ES during my entire audition, and that was of a logic-related nature: the unit stalled while reading a CD's TOC. All I had to do to get it running again was to power it off and wait a few seconds before booting it up again.

The Sony sounded fine out of the box, but it definitely opened up after a period of break in. The sound got fuller and sweeter and the bass solidified.

I had no SACDs when I received the unit for evaluation, so my first few days were spent listening exclusively to CD. Lost in all the hoopla over the new format is that fact that SACD players make very satisfying CD players. The overall nature of the C333ES's PCM performance was somewhat forward, but on balance it was remarkably similar to my Musical Fidelity A3CD CD player. Most of the time, I preferred its sound using the STD filter, but having the options of an additional four filters encouraged me to experiment with all of my less-than-perfect-sounding discs -- and wonder of wonders, most of the time, one filter or another actually seemed to improve those sonic clinkers.

But its basic CD sound, through the STD filter, was extremely satisfying. For example, on Arista's wonderful Ladies and Gentlemen … The Grateful Dead [GDCD 4975], a four-disc compilation of the band's stand at the Fillmore East, April 25--29, 1971, the C333ES captured the fabled dance hall's acoustic wonderfully -- the sound of a huge room, filled with vocal fans, is spot-on. As are Phil Lesh's agile, bottom-scraping bass lines. It also captures, at least as well as any other CD player I've ever heard, all of the little imperfections of a live outing -- the gloriously missed vocal harmonies and the off chords created by muffed fingerings. (Classic rule of jamming -- if you play that clam a second time, everybody will think that's what you meant to do, no matter how stupid it sounds.) And when Garcia and Weir are in the moment, their twin leads sound so articulate and so perfectly joined, it's difficult to imagine hearing it much better than the C333ES portrays it.

But when I received some SACD discs and began playing them, I suddenly understood what all the fuss was about. My first SACD was Miles Davis' Kind of Blue[Columbia Legacy CS 64935] and it was instructive to hear this old favorite rendered through the new format. The bass was so solid and palpable I think you could crack walnuts with it and the complex sound of Davis' muted horn seemed to extend so far up the frequency chart it hovered in the air for what seemed like minutes before floating out of hearing. Were veils lifted? Did scales fall from my ears?

Not exactly. But for the first time, I heard KOB without vinyl roar and without CD's brick wall. It was simultaneously a small difference and a profound one -- the difference between hearing history and hearing the music performed now. There's still hiss -- that's a by-product of the tape the master's recorded on -- but once the music starts, it masks the hiss effectively. And, for the first time, the overtones of the instruments are cleanly portrayed, lingering in the air, fading gently from audibility.

Technically, this is a shock. There's no theoretical reason why these "legacy" discs should sound less digital than their PCM originals. Whatever was lost in the process should remain lost. However, we've learned a lot about remastering, and there's also some speculation regarding the large amounts of RF energy involved in the DSD process and how that energy might make the replay DAC perform in a more linear fashion.

Now, you might not find this the revelation I did -- and I have to admit that I didn't feel that every DSD-remastered SACD was a huge (or in some cases, even an) improvement. But some of them sound extraordinary: Dylan's Blonde on Blonde [CS 841], Mingus Ah Um [CS-65512] and Monk's Straight No Chaser [CK 64886] stand out.

But to really get a taste of what's possible on SACD, you need to find a DSD recorded SACD -- and, in an incredible irony, to do that you need to seek out the smaller independent recording companies who have embraced the format. Telarc, Chesky, DMP, AudioQuest Music and Water Lily Music have all released an impressive amount of new music on DSD SACDs -- and these are the discs that point to SACD's true potential.

Joe Beard's Dealin' [AQ-SACD 1055] is the very model of a modern blues album. Its bass is deep and physical, but the surprise is the clarity and extension of the guitars, Beard and Duke Robillard trade licks, and Robillard romps enthusiastically through solo after solo and it sounds like you're there! Liquid and articulate, it doesn't sound digital, it doesn't sound analog, it just sounds like good times blues. Wow!

Then there's the sound of Jon Hassell's Fascinoma [WATSA 070], which is otherworldly and strange-but-right, with its breathiness and its now you hear it, now you don't call and response interplay. I reviewed Fascinoma as a CD and I thought it sounded good then -- but my oh my, the SACD is light years beyond it.

To ask the hard question is simple

So is SACD better than the two-channel DADs from Chesky and Classic, which utilize two-channels of 96kHz/24-bit data on the standard DVD-V disc? That's an interesting question. Since I didn't have any DADs that matched my SACDs, it's hard to answer definitively. The two formats have a lot of similarities. I'd say that, overall, Classic's remasterings of classic analog goodies had a better batting average than Sony's. Every single Classic DAD sounded drastically better than the CD equivalent -- and many sounded better than the best LPs of the same performances I've heard. Going head to head with Chesky's original 96/24 recordings, the DSD SACDs sounded slightly sweeter and creamier. Not a huge difference, more like that between video and film -- once I allowed for the innate differences, I just made my choice based on my musical mood. As to DVD-A, I haven't heard it, and I'm frankly not all that interested in it until they stop pissing in their pool.

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master -- that’s all."

So there you have it. SACD has tremendous potential -- especially when the recordings use the DSD process. But -- and this is a huge but -- so far, only our more adventurous labels are producing discs that exploit the format's full capabilities. Why is this a huge but? We aren't going to change the world with a handful of discs, no matter how fabulous sounding (just ask Chesky and Classic about that!). We need to achieve saturation of the market -- and that means majors pushing the format in every mega store, shopping mall, and record hut in the country.

And, hey Mr. Record Mogul, forget about charging people $25.00 a pop for fifty-year-old records, at least for now -- maybe you'll be able to get away with that once you convince folks they need an SACD player. And those high-priced babies better all sound a lot better than their $16.95 equivalents or you're going to face a backlash that makes this Napster brouhaha look like a tempest in a teapot. The next Michael Jackson record will sell one copy -- the rest of us will just rip one off the Internet.

But if we ignore the software reality for a moment and just focus on the merits of the Sony SCD-C333ES, I've got to say it's a good 'un. It doesn't seem to have the top end extension of the SCD-1 I've heard in various Sony demos, but it isn't off by much. It's affordable and well built and the carousel is more convenient than I would have guessed. It's an excellent CD player and, playing DSD SACDs, it gives us a glimpse at what our hi-rez future might be like, if we can only find enough software. And that my friends, remains the unanswered question.

...Wes Phillips
wes@onhifi.com

Sony Electronics Inc.
Sony Drive
Park Ridge, NJ
07656

Website: www.sony.com

• Back
  
  

All Contents Copyright © 2000
Schneider Publishing Inc., All Rights Reserved
Any reproduction of content on
this site without permission is strictly forbidden.