REVIEW - 555es vs Adcom GCD700

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by John Royster, Sep 8, 2002.

  1. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    So I received my new Sony 555es SACD player a few days ago and have had a few hours on it. I've lived with and loved my Adcom player for about 7-8 years now. Figured it was time I delved into SACD.
    I used several redbook CDs initialy, ones that I'm very familiar with - Peter Gabriel, Santana, Police, Janet Jackson. All four are recorded very well and represent the pinnacle of my collection. Both players are connected via analog L/R.
    555es - Did I have my sub on? That sure is a lot of bass. Checked and double checked and nope - no sub. The sony really did have more bass than the adcom. Vocals and upper-end were smoother, less digital/edgy. But at what expense? Lost was the air and transparency from the adcom. I even heard this from SACD, a loss of air. Tonally SACDs sound fantastic (thriller, boston, journey, deep forest). I really feel like I'm liking the tape with SACD, it is THAT accurate. [​IMG]
    Pros - smooth midrange, vocals very natural, bass pretty strong so much so that I may need to re-adjust my speaker position.
    Cons - collapsed soundstage, loss of depth
    So I do like my new 555es, but I may have some reservations about it. We'll see as I listen more.
    OH - one more thing. As strictly a transport (both players connected via coax digital) the 555es left my adcom sitting in the dirt. adcom was thin and compressed, sony even made my lowly 3802 dacs sound decent.
    Thanks for listening - for the price the 555es is a nice player. I've got more listening to do as to which CDP I prefer.
     
  2. KeithH

    KeithH Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2000
    Messages:
    9,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    John, thanks for posting your impressions. Interesting observations. For what it's worth, some say that the Sony SACD players need 400 hours to break in with CDs and another 400 hours to break in with SACDs. I have never experienced break-in with my Sony SACD players, but that could be a function of my listening habits. In any event, I will be interested to see if your impressions of the 'C555ES change over time.
     
  3. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keith,
    For what its worth I am leaving my 555 on continous play 24x7. I figured I should give a little time to settle in. It barely had 6 hours on it when I listened.
    And yes, this thread is a review and NOT an existence/non-existence of break-in thread.[​IMG]
     
  4. Mike Broadman

    Mike Broadman Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2001
    Messages:
    4,951
    Likes Received:
    1
    I just bought the 555ES. Lovin' it.
    Break-in? Oops, should I wait a while to listen to my new Sonny Rollins SACD?
    Nah. [​IMG]
     
  5. KeithH

    KeithH Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2000
    Messages:
    9,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    John,
    I certainly don't want this thread to turn into a debate about break-in. Rather, I was just opening up the possibility that you will notice an improvement over time. That said, I would not run the player 24/7 in repeat mode. My concern is that could be bad for the laser assembly. I don't think a player is really made to play 24/7. In my opinion, you would be better off only playing discs during your normal listening sessions. Just my $0.02.
    Mike,
    I'm with you. Play 'em if ya got 'em. [​IMG]
     
  6. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll do some more listening tonight. The adcom boasted a class A output stage which may have contributed to the "air" that I'm used to.

    Build quality on the 555 is top notch for a player in the price range outshining the adcom in this respect. I especially like the feature to turn off the display.

    More comparisons later.
     
  7. Lewis Besze

    Lewis Besze Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 1999
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    Intersting indeed,actually almost contradicting.
    You say that Adcom excells as a player but not as a transport?
    Also the highs were smoother but less "airy" on the Sony?
    By "airy" you mean less detail in the high end,or you referring to the natural ambiance of the recording[soundstage],or the lack of "tail" of various accoustic intruments?
    Just trying to "understand".[​IMG]
     
  8. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    On the quick testing I did the sony was much stronger as a transport, it sounded OK - I've never liked my 3802 DACs for stereo. But when I used the adcom as a transport the life was sucked out of the music in a kinda bad mono way. The player is fairly old and much thought might not have gone into the digital output.

     

Share This Page