|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.120.105.127
In Reply to: Cary 303/300 vs 306/200 posted by imnfwong on May 17, 2005 at 21:48:53:
The 303-300 is supposed to take time to read the disc, buffer 5 seconds of audio data and then play. It is part of the strategy to reduce jitter.The 303-300 sounds best with balanced outputs, IMHO.
As Sherlock said, it is a revelation to upgrade to NOS tubes: Telefunken ECC82/ECC802S, Siemens ECC82 (nickel plate), Radiotechnique 12AU7, etc.
I have had no problems with vibration. Like others, I have owned the 306-200. I prefer the 303-300 by a big margin.
Follow Ups:
Oldvinyl and Sherlock
The 303 I listened to was indeed using factory tube. I have compared notes with another user who had made a direct comparison. While without a doubt both the 306/200 and 303/300 are great machines, he also found the 306/200 to win on sweetness of high and weight of bass. I am really interested in hearing more from you as to how the 303 is better in your terms. Further, would your opinion be different if you compare only on SS output.
As I wrote before, I have had the 308-T, 306-200 and now the 303-300. There are several differences I hear (and prefer) in the 303-300:
- more localization of bass in the soundfield (I can tell where
instruments are placed in the orchestra)
- the soundstage is deeper, wider and taller
- the sound flows, that is the music will swell, blend, billow up,
fill out the room (like a real ensemble)
- the interplay of instruments allows the blending of timbres,
textures, melodies to be more prominent
- the sound is more palpable, weightyAs I said, I only use the balanced outputs and the tubes are on. I don't care for the sound of the solid state output.
The 303-300 starts to get the music right in the way that an analog system can. Granted, there is still digititis in recordings (glare in high frequency).
Note too that I listen to quite a few HDCD's. The decoding is different in the 306-200 and the 303-300.
As others have said, this is all about preferences and synergy. My tastes may not be your cup of tea.
> > > Note too that I listen to quite a few HDCD's. The decoding is different in the 306-200 and the 303-300. < < <
Yes, the 306-200 uses the PMD-200 chip. I suspect the 303 does not. The 308Ts do not. The PMD-200 is superior, IMO, than the chips used in the 308T (and 303?).
Jack
Dear Jack G
Thank you for telling us that 306's DAC, PMD-200, could be superior. I also read from somewhere that the 306/200 could be using more DAC chips than 303/300. If these were so, the better digital conversion function/performance could be the reason why 306 occurred to be more "musical" to me and to a few other inmates.
The DSP does the decode in software.
Enjoy the music.
.
nt
Enjoy the music.
Your question wasn't addressed to me but I owned the 306/200 for a few years and have a 303/300 here on loan. Comparing just the solid-state outputs these players are completely different in my opinion.The 306/200 has a warmer richer sound with deep bass while the 303/300 is more neutral across the board and 'brighter' in the treble. They're both great players but your choice might have more to do with which one plays best in your existing setup. If your system has great treble extension bordering on bright, go for the 306/200. If your system is already rich and warm, go for the 303/300. That was over simplified but I think you get my point..... Again - I'm talking about the solid-state outputs from each of these players.
Dear AbeCollins
Thank you for jumping in and I appreciate your generosity in sharing your opinion and, from the unambiguous statements you made, your insight. I guess this was what I was looking for - an exchange of views, assessment, opinion and finally insight. Hi Fi "tasting" is subjective and personal. I consider it even an art similar to music appreciation. If music critics can talk about the comparison between Mozart and Beethoven, so should audio critics in comparing between machines.Your assessment between the "tonal" qualities between the two machines are exactly same as mine, only you expressed it better. I of course agree also that the preference is a matter of matching with the amp and the speakers.
Having reach this point, the new information I could add is I drew my conclusion not from one system, but two. The first system is the audition system with Chord amplifer and Utopia Be. Under that system I drew the conclusion that 306/200 is warmer, with more details and more weightly bass. 303/300 has a deeper sound stage, but less bass (this naturally gives more treble on hearing). Musicality? 306 is way better. This one is hard to measure but it stands out on AB comparison.
The other system is my home system with Spectral amps and Thiel CS5i. As you could imagine, the 306 fully compensated the bass response part of the CS5i while the treble was slightly toned down. Depth and soundstage? Amazing. When I played Rod Steward's "Till There Was You" for the first time with this set up, I literally fell off my armchair when the 30Hz bass notes were played. There was an "earthquake" feeling even under normal listening volume. That is how weighty 306's bass is. Unfortunately, I could not try the 303 under my home condition. That's is why I would like to find out if other people has more substantial hearing and comparing experiences than I have.
I hope I could get more people to talk about what they think, so we all can learn from each, other one way or the other, rather than to question what other's think. We need more sharing, not less. We are not paid to write and we need not "write" between the lines.
Thank you once again for jumping in.
I must disagree.......with the proper tubes.....ie Siemens chrome plates or TELE ECC802S.......the 303 has MUCH better bass extension, greater soundstage and warmth ,and much better high freq extension. It just blows away my prev beloved 306-200, which IMO is still an outstanding CDP.You can check my posted system(s) for comparison. I own the 303-300, the 306-200 (an excellent player for the money) and I have owned the 303-100.
Dear Sherlock
I trust your judgment since you have more direct Cary experiences than I have. At the point of my test I could only base the comparison using factory tube. Between the tube and SS ouput on the same 303/300 machine, SS was better. Between the SS of 303 vs 306, 306 was better. If I knew replacing the tube would overturn the situation then I would have waited. Anyway I am still happy with my choice and I hope other inmates can benefit from your solid opinion here - that's why this forum is useful.
I'm not sure if he was comparing the tube output of the 303/300 to the 306/200 or if it was a solid-state vs solid-state test. For my earlier comments and my comments below, I'm comparing solid-state vs solid-state outputs....I no longer have the 306/200 but to my ears and audio memory, it seems that the 306/200 was warmer and less extended with richer deeper bass. I believe the 303/300 has slightly better defined bass and the overall sound of this player is 'faster' and more extended in the treble than the 306/200.
Hi Abe.....perhaps the SS comparison is warmer on the 306-200, but the tube output stage of the 303 is certainly warmer and more life-like than the 306-200 no?
OV said it better than I did........I agree completely. BTW for the money the used 306-200 is the best player for 2K. The 303 is significantly better (when retubed) for 3K however. IMO.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: