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

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!

Speaking as somone who just had the Sony 9000es for two years with 900.00 worth of ic's hooked up to it, the Phillips 963a sounds better on redbook out of the box with 60.00 ic's and the stock pc.
It has way better imaging, air and soundstage after 100 or so hours break in than the 9000 ever had.

As far as Sacd....no contest, the Phillips wins again with the very first song played being "Tin pan alley" by SRV.
The Sacd playback is an obvious improvement in the same areas of imaging and sounstage plus more air than the fulley broken in 9000 es with more exspensive cabling.

The sony offered a lot better build quality and was tottaly reliable for me with decent sound but lets face it, it was a first gen combo player with great build quality for the money....but technology moves forward[at least in this case] and my revelator tweets agree 100% with the sound comparison.

If you put your ear up to the transport of the 963a , you can hear a faint ticking but only on redbook and after the 1000's dependebility record, who knows how these will hold up.
This player cost less than a lot of different cabling i have purchased over the years and should be considered an absolute steal at it's list price, even though they sell for around 400.00 shipped.

After around 200 hours, i will add better ic's and pc's and hold out for the upcoming Sony with Sacd output.

I agree, the Sony is a well built piece.
Rbstehno, have you tried the Phillips in your 2Ch rig for extended periods of time, and if so, you still prefer the Sony?

gthirteen, i have not used the 963sa extensively in my audio setup. after around 50 hours of breakin, i evaluated the 2 players. the 963sa was better than the 9000es except in sacd playback, but it was very close comparison, not a night and day difference. Maybe after another 50 hours of breakin will the 963sa sound better in this area. Also, as for reliability, many high end rooms at he2003 used philips cd players as transports with external dacs for their source and the sound was excellent, most rooms didn't use sacd players.