Marantz CC4300 -- got it instead. (1 Viewer)

[Arnie_A]

I suppose the DACs on my SR6200 receiver are good enough where I don't need a CD player with a good DAC.

I dropped by a local hifi dealer last night and after checking out the NAD 541i and CC4300 (I know, not apples:apples), I figured that I could just use the CC4300 as a transport and let the receiver decode.

Initial impressions of the CC4300 is that it's very user friendly. It does have both optical and coaxial digital outs.

However, one thing that surprised me is that the sound seems to be better when using the CC4300 than the (POS) H/K FL8380 even though they're both being used as transports.

Well I WAS happy with the H/K until it broke after 3 months. It's in for service now (warranty). I just hope the CC4300 doesn't go anytime soon!

BTW, I paid $240 for it, new.

 

[KeithH]

Arnie, there are differences in sound quality between players when used as transports. They don't all sound the same. Of course, you are not able to compare the Marantz and H/K changers directly. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts once you get the H/K player back. In any event, I hope the Marantz changer works out for you.

 

[ChrisAG]

I hope the CC4300 works out for you. I was considering this unit after an unsatisfactory week with a CC3000, which I found to be lifeless using the analogue outs and only slightly better using my Marantz SR6200's DACs (which are themselves only average quality, in my opinion). Maybe the CC4300 is better. However, I've decided to go the SACD route, having just ordered the Sony SCD-C222ES. This player is supposed to be very good for regular CD playback, and (theoretically) has better internal DACs than the average mid-priced receiver.

Have you tried the CC4300 in analogue mode?

 

[KeithH]

Chris, I agree with your assessment of the 'C222ES and choice in picking it up. I can't say that it is better than the CC4300 since I have not done the comparison, but the 'C222ES is an excellent at its price point. It exceeds the performance one would expect for $350, in my opinion.

 

[Arnie_A]

Chris,
No I have not tried the CC4300 in analog mode. I have yet to do the DAC comparison between the CC4300 and SR6200.
It would be interesting to see some kind of real statistics of component reliability (any component, not just CD players/changers). My friend has a 2 year old CC4000 and he has had no problems with it whatsoever.
As I said in my first post, I was happy with the H/K being used as a transport but once it broke down, I was awfully after 3 months of use PO'd.
I did consider the 222ES but I don't think my setup would be good for a multi-channel audio since I have Bose speakers for surrounds and center (temporary!). At this point, I just want a sufficient (to me) 2-channel audio that's not too overboard; I'm not an certified audiophile yet.

 

[KeithH]

Arnie, I'm not trying to be difficult, but the 'C222ES functions perfectly in stereo. Not only is it a very good CD player for the money, but it also gives you stereo and multi-channel SACD as a bonus. Note that all SACDs have a discrete stereo track. So, you would not have to be "multi-channel-ready" to benefit from the 'C222ES's capabilities.

 

[Arnie_A]

I don't think you're being difficult. In fact, I'm learning a ton of stuff as I browse this forum more and more.
Thanks for all the help and info.

 

[KeithH]

Arnie, no problem.

 

[ChrisAG]

Keith, thanks for the 222ES testimonial, it's always nice to get other's opinions when shelling out hard earned cash
I was considering the 555ES but it would have been at least $1100 Canadian, compared to $700 for the 222ES (taxes and customs brokerage fees included, to my door). That $400 CDN difference is only about $250 US, but is more significant to us Canadians since the cost of living is a little higher up here :frowning:
Arnie, I'd be interested in reading any future observations you have regarding the CC4300 in Analogue vs. Digital mode.