|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.3.94.72
In Reply to: Re: glad to hear you enjoy the 306/200 posted by imnfwong@yahoo.com on May 18, 2005 at 22:11:20:
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.
Follow Ups:
> > > 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.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: