I own an 861, and I think it's an outstanding player. I agree with picklgreen - at this level of performance, it's less about which is a better player, and more about which player best aligns to your aural taste and sonic priorities. The 861 is the most solid CD player I've ever seen. It's the size of a small car and built like a Humvee. It looks like it is worth every penny of its asking price.
How does it sound compared to the 390S? It's curious that you ask that question. I just purchased a used 390S (I've wanted to hear a 390S, and with buying used, if I don't like it, I can resell at the same price for which I bought it). The Levinson is also well-built, but doesn't possess the sheer size and mass of the Wadia. Both are very nice looking components.
I currently run the Wadia and Levonson via the single-ended outputs; please take that into account as you read my comments. I understand that the Wadia and Levinson both improve when one can run balanced. My next project is to replace my Kimber interconnect with the balanced version.
I do think that the differences between the two players are fairly substantial, assuming the rest of the system is revealing enough to pass along those differences. In comparing the Levinson with the Wadia, I'm running both players direct into the amp. The Levinson imparts an analog liquidity to the presentation. Bass is stronger than the Wadia, and the treble is a little airier, a little more extended. The midrange is more recessed than the Wadia. There is an overall ease to the presentation - everything is extremely balanced sounding. The Levinson is a little warmer sounding than the Wadia, a little richer - again, more analog-like.
The Wadia, on the other hand, really belts out the dynamics, making the Levinson seem a little laid back in comparison. The Wadia is drier than the Levinson . The Wadia is a little leaner sounding with more forwardness in the midrange.
Where the two differ the most, however, is in the soundstaging/imaging department. Again, the Levinson's presentation is very liquid and smooth. The Levinson is much more laid back than the Wadia - the soundstage is more recessed, starting a few feet back behind that portrayed by the Wadia. The Wadia's soundstage is more forward (although the Wadia does a better job of dpth layering - images are more clearly delineated from front to back), and the images are larger. The Wadia really excells in imaging - there's a three-dimensionality to the images (almost like someone is pulling the singer's nose to create a three-dimensional head from the flatter picture presented by the Levinson), the likes of which I've never heard from any other player (Krell, Cary or the Levinson). I think this is due to the phase-correct Digimaster DACs and filters employed in the 861, and once heard, it's very addictive.
I'm still going back and forth, but I really find it very hard to turn off the Wadia and plug in the Levinson. The music is simply more alive sounding through the Wadia, with instruments more "there" than through the Levinson. That said, I wish I could have a little of the warmth that the Levinson brings to the party. It's all about compromise, though, no?
The bottom line is that they are both top-shelf players, but their differences will cause them to each appeal to folks based upon their individual preferences. Keep in mind also that system matching is probably important. This is how they sound in my system; if possible, they should be auditioned in the context of your own system.
Hope this helps a little to answer your question!
