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

mike,
for the sake of argument, were the sony units (and teh phillips) burned in (say, 1-200 hrs) or fresh out of the box.

Also, how does the SACD of the Marantz compare to the Phillips?

Did you compare all of these in your "home" system?

THANKS!!!

I was checking out the AA board and it seems that all owners of both of these players have determined that the Phillips is superior in sacd as welll as redbook playback over the 9000es.

There is one owner that said it has better sound than his previous 9000 and his Phillips 1000 on both redbook and sacd.

Ears: You missed my post dated 6-11.

I didn't miss it....it says you have not used the sacd on the phillips and are happy with the sacd/ dvd playback of your sony...?????

I can't find anyone who prefers the sony in sacd or dvd[progressive] who has actually compared both players after burn in.

Check out the avs forums for the dvd reviews.

I only have s-video hookup were my 963sa is installed and i liked the sony 9000 picture quality much better via s-video hookup, than the 963sa.
Having said that,from reading reviews of the 963sa in progressive mode,the sony evidently does not compare.

My Phillips will most likely get replaced by the upcoming xa9000es with firewire sacd out,this will be sonys new reference player.

I just hope there will be some compatible dsd dacs that are far south of 10k to go along with the xa9000es after it is released.

Ears: Did an A/B tonight and Sony is clearly better SACD. Music was Hovhaness sampler (Telarc CD-80530-SA) recorded in pure DSD. Sony had better depth and detail, at moderately low listening level, was more relaxed and even throughout the spectrum. Both machines connected with Kimber silver streak 1/2 meter. In fairness, I never use the Philips SACD circuit some maybe it's not "broken in".
But it has been powered-up the 5-6 months I've had it.
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it! P.S. Thanks for keepin' me honest!