Help I need a new CD player

Johnno2

New member
Feb 2, 2009
45
0
0
Visit site
After 8 years heavy use my marantz cd7300, has started to misbehave :doh: . It refuses to read some discs but reads others, its not the CDs as some are newish with no scratches and they all play on the microsystem, I have cleaned the laser mech buts still get the same problem with some discs,

A new player is in order as repairs might cost nearly as much as my budget for a new player at £250, The obvious chioce is another marantz (cd6004), but would not visualy match the amp, However, the cambridge 351c is now available for the same price and is a worthy alternative according to WHF review, and has th same brushed aluminuim finish as my pm7001, Is this a decent player, i have just googled it for more information and was shocked to see that it looks pretty sparten on the inside, but does use a torodial power supply which seems odd for a cd player, . Has anyone heard this player , I understand Richer sounds will take it back anyway if I dont like the sound, Is it worth a try or should stick with marantz?
 

paulsue38

New member
Mar 26, 2010
55
0
0
Visit site
The Cambridge got an excellent Hi fi News review doing very well in a group test against some expensive players including Primare, Densen and Moon. Not surprisingly the expensive Primare won the test but the Cambridge held its own. The player that was judged outstanding though was the Marantz Pearl Lite.

Paul
 

radiorog

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
149
21
18,595
Visit site
Hi Johno, I have not heard the marantz amp, but last week audtioned quite extensively the 351c and the 651c, along side mt old 640c. BTW, i auditioned my 640c recently with a rega brio r and my dynaudio speakers, and the 640c was in the same ball park as a cyrus 6 which i audtioned alonside. The cyrus was slightly better, but the CA was VERY close. I was highly surprised.

Anyway, i auditioned all 3 CA cd players last week, and first thought when i bheard the 351c was, it has tremendous detail. More i think than my older 640 possibly, but the sound is a lot warmer. This mix of detail and warmth (for me) is very appealing. I then tried the 651c and this also sounded A-mazing! The 651c however showed more depth in soundstage, and more sort of 3d imaging due to the spaciousness between all the different instruments and vocals. I am currently chosing between these 2 cd players to replace my old and broken 640c, but am really struggling to decide which is better. The 651 had more depth, but maybe the 351c was richer. It did sound a bit more "blurred" for want of a better word, as the spaciousness of the 651 wasnt there, but the music was immensely enjoyable.

I have posted recently to what hifi about my quandry as to which is better, and I am eagerly awaiting a response, although i don't think they have seen my post. :(

A staff member in richer sounds said the cambridge was really nice compared to his marantz which he said could strip paint....i'm guessing he meant it is quite bright then? You will know more about this with your Marantz experience, but the CA 351c is an amazing player. Sounds beautiful tbh! I would totally recommend auditioning. Take your own speakers...thats what i did! lol. :)
 

radiorog

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
149
21
18,595
Visit site
....cont. ....

oh, forgot to mention, my older 640c sounded almost as good as the cyrus, and the 651c sounded similar to the 640. It was warmer, which was a bonus, but might have had slightly less punch, although this was really just the fact that it was warmer. So the 651c is to me, nearly as good, or better than the cyrus, as the cyrus sounded quite bright/cold (less energy), although detailed. The 351c in comparrisson, as you might have figured from my post, is very similar in sound, just with less spaciousness. Therefore, to me, it sounds as good as the cyrus, just different. Must be pretty good then. I would go audition.. ;) :)
 

Johnno2

New member
Feb 2, 2009
45
0
0
Visit site
Thanks I am always wary of buying second unless its solid state equipment, ie amps or tuner, when the are mechanical parts there is more to go wrong.

I am going to go to richers at the weekend and take the c351 home and try it in my system, If its detailed but warm thats right up my street, i really want to avoid anything over bright as to not over provoke the metal tweeters in the MA's , The Marantz helps a little here. Could be a match made in heaven, I will let you know what I think of the c351 :)
 

Johnno2

New member
Feb 2, 2009
45
0
0
Visit site
Got home a new c351 from richers , first impression was a very well built machine with a thick solid feeliing aluminuim front panel, stuck it on my system and was slightly dissapointed at first, it seemed to lack the big weighty sound of the marantz cd7300. but the player was stone cold and brand new , it had just come out of the boot of the car on a very cold day. So i left in switched on a running for an hour or two, and went and made a cuppa. Came back and had a good listen with various CD that I know well, and was begining to like the sound a bit more now, the player sounds more full , but still not as weighty as the marantz, ,I put back in the Marantz and played discs that it will read, and yes its slightly more bass punch , but not as much as I thought,

Then I put back in the CA and what I am noticing is the CA has a more neutral sound that flows with the music a little better and makes you aware of the musics rythmic qaulities (is this what reviewers mean by good timing?) Treble is clear, not bright , but kind of sweet, not harsh at all, i think I am going to keep it, Richers said i can have the six year garantee if I keep it which is a good deal .

Compared to the Marantz its just a differnt presentation rather than an obvious upgrade, I still may get a quote to see if the Marantz can be repaired cheaply, If not its going on ebay for spares.
 

stephennic

New member
Jul 27, 2008
75
0
0
Visit site
Congradulations on your purchase, I had a lend of the marantz 7300, and it was a nice smooth warm full sound, quite relaxing some may find it lacks a little punch, I also had a 640c v2 which was fast and punchy but I found it was to bright on my system. I heard that the new cambridge is a bit more neutral.

Cheers

Steve.
 

Johnno2

New member
Feb 2, 2009
45
0
0
Visit site
stephennic said:
Congradulations on your purchase, I had a lend of the marantz 7300, and it was a nice smooth warm full sound, quite relaxing some may find it lacks a little punch, I also had a 640c v2 which was fast and punchy but I found it was to bright on my system. I heard that the new cambridge is a bit more neutral.

Cheers

Steve.

Thanks, I am liking this player more and more, its a got that liquid qaulity I like, its not an immediate attention grabbing sound, well not in my system , but a sound you can live with , then again its not unexciting either , Its not a thin sounding player , its full and warm and refined but still got fair dynamics, but its still sounds slightly less bass weighty than the Marantz..... with some tracks, not bad for a £250 machine Its a keeper !
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts