Do I buy used?

[MajorFubar]

Forgetting for a minute the risks of buying used HiFi which could theoretically die within days leaving me out of pocket...

I've got probably around £250 to spend on a new CD player to replace my prehistoric, faulty Technics SLP777 from 1989. This model was near range-topping in its day, but presumably enough progress has been made within the last 20 years that I don't need to spend about a grand to significantly better it.

What I'm not sure about is how best to spend the money. £250 (or thereabouts) is within budget to buy me a brand new Marantz CD6003 or Nad C545BEE. But I could easily save £100 on the cost of both of those and track down a good, used CD63 mkII KI, which I know was very, very highly regarded in its day, but I never got to audition it so it is an unknown quantity to me.

Will the NAD or current Marantz outgun the classic CD 63 mkII KI?

The other relevant parts of my system are a late-spec Cyrus 2 and Mission M73 floorstading speakers.

Thank you

 

[plastic penguin]

The CD63 is still rated by some on here, but it really depends on what sort of music you listen to.

Why not, for instance, go for an early Cyrus or even (my personal favourite from that period) Rotel RCD 975 or 965BX. Any of these should outgun the Technics by a country mile. I know the Rotels are currently selling for around £100.

As you mentioned buying s/hand CDPs is a high risk business, so an alternative suggestion would be to look on retailers websites like Sevenoaks Sound and Vision or Audio-T. These companies usually have a very good selection of s/hand and ex-dem CDPs - going this route, they'll give you short guarantee, normally 3 to 6 months. At least you'll have a reputable dealer to return it to should it conk out.....

Good luck.

 

[Dougal1331]

I'm a big fan of secondhand gear myself- both my amp and speakers are such themselves. When it comes to CD players, I believe that buying new is the sensible option.

You never know when a used player could go thrupnies-up, so it pays to be cautious. A new one will have a guarantee, and you will know it has been well cared-for from day one.

But if you are tempted to go for a secondhand player, avoid anything more than about 5 years old, and seek reassurance from the seller as to the player's condition and amount of usage. Bargains can be had, but anything with motors and lasers and stuff can be a gamble....

You can get good deals on new kit too- look out for ex-demo kit at hifi shops- generally this means that it has merely been broken-in for you, and a lump of cash lopped off the tag for good measure. Outgoing product ranges often yield large discounts too.

 

[Dougal1331]

But out of your selections, the '6003 should fit the bill nicely. The '63s were great players but they are all quite elderly now, things will begin to fail at some point.

Also, a lot of satisfaction is gained from opening a factory-sealed box...

 

[Anonymous]

I paid £130 for my CD63 MKII K1 sig and have been very lucky as it works perfect (mint condition, hardly used and boxed) ...

They are very good (for the price paid) and can be upgraded

However, as mentioned, it is always safer to buy new if you can, and the Marantz sig has to be carefully partnered

The Rotel as mentioned are also very good and a lot cheaper ... Perhaps look at one of the Rotels .... save up for a few months and buy a new Rega Apolo for under £450 then sell the Rotel?

 

[the record spot]

Used can be a good way to stretch your gains on a budget; the money will go further but the caveat is there can be no guarantees if it goes wrong, especially when buying off Ebay or Gumtree and the like.

As plastic penguin mentioned earlier, you could go check out some dealers who offer ex-dem or used kit, or the BADA Marketplace site which offers all of their dealers kit on offer in one place.

 

[MajorFubar]

Thanks for the advice.
So the common consensus is that new gear in the £250 price-range should have advanced sufficiently to comfortably outperform mid-range/higher-end gear from late 90s which now has a typical used street-price of the same?

The reason I wasn't sure is that the 1990s really were CD's hayday, with manufacturers consistently pushing the boundaries with each generation of players. I had wondered how much this had plateaued during the 21st century, or dare I say it, if even they had taken a few steps backwards because of the pressure to devote R&D budgets to alternative technologies.

As for musical tastes: I'm very varied. I listen to jazz, light classics, MOR, electronic ambient, classic rock, The only genres which say nothing to me are rap-music and what currently passes for R&B.

I need a smooth-yet-detailed player with good low-down grunt, but which is definitely not shrill (which the Technics could be at times). I love my Cyrus 2 dearly but one thing it does not mate well to is shrill source-components.

 

[Anonymous]

MajorFubar:
I need a smooth-yet-detailed player with good low-down grunt, but which is definitely not shrill (which the Technics could be at times).

That's an accurate description of my Denon dcd500ae, and of the dcd700ae I also auditioned. The 700 wasn't worth the extra cash in my opinion. Well within your budget, the Denon range - and it's succesor the 510/710 series - is worth an audition.

 

[MajorFubar]

You know what, I have never ever seriously considered the option of a Denon CD player, and I don't know why not! I think it's because they have somehow always been overshadowed by high-profile rivals from such as Marantz, Rotel and more recently NAD. Maybe it's time I took a serious listen!

Speaking of NAD, how well do you think the 'NAD sound' would fit into my system?

 

[Anonymous]

MajorFubar:
You know what, I have never ever seriously considered the option of a Denon CD player, and I don't know why not! I think it's because they have somehow always been overshadowed by high-profile rivals from such as Marantz, Rotel and more recently NAD. Maybe it's time I took a serious listen!

Speaking of NAD, how well do you think the 'NAD sound' would fit into my system?

I think this is true for a lot of people. It might have something to do with geography; different countries focus on different manufacturers. I did compare my CDP to comparable offerings from Marantz and Rotel for longer periods of time. They're all quality brands, but the Denon suited my taste. Re: the NAD: Afraid I can't help you there, since I have no experience with their CDP's. I'm sure other members will help you out shortly, because I know some people here hold them in high regard.

 

[matthewpiano]

The NAD would suit your requirements very well sound-wise. It is a very capable player with a slight warmth to its sound and very good bass. Through the A400 and 751s (potentially a bright combination) it never sounds remotely bright or shrill.

My only caveat about the NAD is transport noise. It isn't the quietest machine on the planet, but then neither was the DCD1500 I had, or the CD63MkII KI-Signature.

I don't think the NAD is QUITE as good as the KI-Signature to be honest. The old Marantz is a bit of a gem and if you can find a good one they are well worth the effort. However, the fact that the NAD is new and can be bought from Richers with a 5 year warranty for only 10% extra is more than enough to sway things.

 

[matthewpiano]

Having said that I'm just comparing my NAD with an old CD52MkII SE I've got here and, at the moment, the Marantz sounds more natural and more open.

 

[Anonymous]

I think that if the old marantz cd63 MKii K1 sig is correctly partnered, you would need to spend a lot more than £250 to find a new better cdp