Sony 9000es v. Phillips 963SA - anyone compared?

People, what are you talking about???
SONY 9000ES "is very good with SACD" ??? "has excellent reliability" how come mine 9000ES as SACD player sounds worse then my old Arcam 6 CD Player (bought in London for 300GBP), how come mine SONY broke after 2 months ??? After reading Odes to Sony now and then I have started to think that my wife and me are unlucky persons additionally deaf. But I have found, first time in my life in last TAS that SONY SACD players are sonically inferiors to good CD players.

I'm going to subscribe to this magazine because it is what I'm hearing.

More details about 9000ES in http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1053858815&openflup&18&4#18

Sorlowski

I read your post here on AgoN when it was originally posted, and believe it or not, I actually remember your post on Audio Review.

Honestly, I've had my problems with Sony, the corporation, and their customer "service" if that's what they call it.

But, the sound of the 9000ES on SACD (well recorded ones) is incredible.

I, too, prefer the sound of my old CD player to the CD playback of the 9000ES (I have a 4 year old Rega Planet)
But, one one hand, the Sony needs many hours to break in (try comparing it to another new CD player!) and on the other hand, I think I'll always like the sound of the Rega.

I'm truly sorry that you had a bad experience.
Tell us, have you found a new CD player that you prefer?
I am HOPING that the guys at Rega develop a SACD player.

Gthirteen: I give the nod to Sony for SACD. Haven't really used the 963 for SACD or DVD (gee!) -am totally happy with the 9000ES for these functions. The Philips (i.e., upsampling) gives timbres and textures much more "identity" than regular playback. Dynamics are very good also.
I'm very excited about acquiring a "full Monty" unit (e.g. Arcam) down the road. Does digital finally sound like music?

Solowiski,

I audit several Arcam CD players after reading some of your previous posts. Unfortunately, to my ears, S9000ES playing SACD is better than Arcam's redbook. Arcam's redbook did not beat SACD's dynamics, soundstage, and resolution IMO. If you have right gears, S9000ES' SACD is not too bright like its red book.

Back to the topic, to my eyes, 963SA has a better video color. For the look, the silver faceplate of 963SA is a little "cheap" looking in short distance. For SACD playing, the setup in the dealer for 963SA is not up to the level of my listening to S900ES. So, I would say S9000ES is probably better but remember 963SA is multi-channel and read CD-R.... ( I did own one Philip before, to be honest, the built quality I would give it to SONY, if you ever open a Philip player and a SONY S9000ES.)

i have both the sony 9000es and the new 963sa. the 963sa is in my ht room and the 9000es is in my audio room. i prefer the 963sa for video/dvd and cd playback. i prefer the 9000es for sacd playback. i also own a classe cd only player in my audio room (which also plays hdcd discs) and i prefer this player to any other sacd/cd player under $7,500 that i have listened to, which include the sony players: scd-1, 777es and the marantz 14 and sa-1 players. I do like the accuphase and classe sacd/cd players at over $10,000, and i also liked the musical fidelity tri vista tube sacd player that i heard at he2003. imo, sony has never produced a good sounding redbook cd player (unmodified) but the quality and build, dvd/video, and sacd playback are very nice. if you want nice dvd/video/cd/sacd sound for a good price, the 963sa is hard to beat. if you want the best sacd/cd player for under $10,000, go listen to the musical fidelity tube cd/sacd player. cool looks, dynamite sound!