[SENOR4Q]

It seems as if Cary cd players are the grado headphones of the digital world. People either think there is little, if anything better, or have some deep seeded issues with them while other companies, like Arcam seem to never get any negative press. Their players are either liked or loved. What makes this so?

 

[SENOR4Q]

No opinions on this? Grinch...Tuberoller...anyone.

 

[Tuberoller]

You are correct about the polarization of opinions. The Cary CDPs are either loved or hated.I was a Cary dealer for about a year and though I really,really like Denis Had and consider him a friend,I hated the Cary CDPs and only sold them when someone requested one.

I always thought the Dynamics and Soundstaging on the Cary players was kinda strange.It's hard to describe but something ain't right about them.They sound great with Headphone systems but on most speakers systems(IN MY OPINION) the soundstage sounds artifically expansive,almost like some type of processing is taking place.Dynamics sound similarly "enhanced".I could insert a Cary CDP in an established system and it was much "louder" and more impactful but I always thought that was due to the increased volume.I loaned these out and sold a few to a some head-fiers and only a few people really liked them a lot.My Dad bought every Cary digital player, still has them all and loves every one of them.It's a matter of taste and I thought the Cary players were too "digital sounding".

In regards to the Arcam Players,I have never heard an Arcam player that sounded any less than amazing.I loved them all and the new Upsampling players are that much improved.They have a unique sound that is very "analog like" but does not sound processed or artificial.

 

[dsavitsk]

That's funny, I am not really a hardcore audio guy, but in shopping for a cd player recently i had the opportunity to listen to both an arcam and a cary. my experience was probably not dissimilare to what you report as to how the equipmnt sounded, but my opinion was the opposite. The Arcam did nothing for me while the Cary seemed almost ideal. It was lush and beautiful. I don't care at all if it was accurate.

There is a Stereophile review of the Cary 300SEI where the reviewer gushes over the thing and the editor pipes in in a footnote that the measurments of the thing are so far off that it should not even be considered hifi. (the quote is "Footnote 4: I'm not going to be so charitable as RH. Given the fact that Stereophile would not recommend at all a loudspeaker that showed as unflat a response as the Cary when driving our standard simulated load, I don't regard this amplifier as a hi-fi product at all. It is actually a tone control, and an unpredictable one at that.—John Atkinson" See http://www.stereophile.com/fullarchives.cgi?398) I am with the reviewer, if it sounds good to me, it is good, and I like the Cary 308t a lot.

My guess, then, is that the polarization stems from the fact that different people are looking for different things from a high end stereo. This should not be a surprise, no one would suggest that either a porsche or a Rolls is a bad car, yet they do not do what the other does very well. A Camry, otoh, does a little of what each does, and does it well enough for most people, but when one gets to the extremes the criteria change.

As a source for comparison, one of the most enjoyable systems i think i ever heard was a CEC transport with a Melos DAC, a CAT pre, Aranov amps and Sonus Faber speakers. I compared it at the time to a full on Levinson system with Thiel speakers. I will make no claims regarding accuracy or anything like that, all i can say is that the former made me happy, and the latter did not.


-d

 

[gbeard]

Tuberoller's experiences are very interesting. It just goes to show you how many different opinions there are in this hobby. I know experienced people who don't like the vaunted Audio Aero players either.

I have a Cary 303-200 and I really like it. It would be pushing it for me to say I wouldn't part with it for anything--but IMO it is very good digital. I have had a fair amount of experience with some highly regarded digital components and while I would never expect anyone to say the Cary is "the best", I certainly feel my 303 to be an excellent player in the right system.

While I have never felt my player to sound excessively "digtal", I do understand how some might not like it. I had a very nice Metronome in my system for a while, and it was too laid back and "non-digital sounding to me. Another thing with the Cary--they take forever to break in. Mine didn't really sound good until the 300+ hour mark. As in all audio, how the Cary players sound is certainly dependent on the rest of the system, and of course, not everyone is gonna like them anyway. It's just the nature of audio gear...

My .02
gb

 

[pbirkett]

FWIW, regarding Arcam, they dont make bad players, although they do seem to have a "safe" sound, which many people like, but others find a bit unadventerous. Arcam are liked in the UK, but not nearly as much as over in the US it seems... I have heard plenty of folk criticise the Alpha 9, and the CD62/72 over on UK forums, although obviously, they do have their fans also.

 

[dave-the-rave]

After reading some glowing reviews, and at the urging of Grinch, I have recently auditioned the Cary 306/200 and 303/200 CD players. In fact, I had brought my Microzotl and Senn 600's to a NYC audio salon and was hooked up to a 306/200 listening to the Allman Brothers when the lights (and music) went out a couple of weeks ago.

I really liked what I heard from both Carys, much more than I liked the Naim 5 and CDX2 I had auditioned the week before. The Carys had a "grip" on the music, in the same way I think reviewers refer to am amp having a grip on a speaker. The Cary was beautifully balanced to my ears— great bass, the treble was all there, but neither at the expense of the other. (In contrast, the treble of the Naim's was more recessive.) The Cary 306 was leaner sounding than the 303, which probably means less smearing of the bass, but I found the 303 to be a better match with my system, which includes the somewhat bass-light microzotl. Synergy, people!!! Also, on some tracks I found the 306 to be less emotionally involving, as if it were a bit too lean and clean. On both Cary's, I definitely heard stuff on my discs I had not heard before. I hope to replace my Muse Model 2 DAC with a Cary 303/200 before the end of the year.

I haven't listened to Audi Aero, BAT and a host of other players, so I'm not saying Cary rules... but I do think I've found what I am looking for... (for now.)

 

[kuma]

Quote:

Originally posted by pbirkett FWIW, regarding Arcam, they dont make bad players, although they do seem to have a "safe" sound, which many people like, but others find a bit unadventerous.

Yep. They do not offend which I find *offensive*.

 

[JohnActon]

Just a few more cents...

Having owned first a 303/200, followed by a 306/200, I think the Cary CD players are very nice players. They're chock-full of the latest technology implemented superbly by a team of seemingly-talented designers ("seemingly," as I don't know them personally).

That said, they do have a subtle but distinct sonic personality that deviates from strict neutrality. This coloration is likely the primary cause for the polarization of opinions regarding their merits. In comparing them to other digital playback systems (Levinson, dCS and the Wadia I've since moved on to from the 306/200), the Cary's have a smooth, weighty balance that helps to imbue them with a slight warmth that is not strictly neutral. Likewise, with the upsampling engaged, they portray an exaggerated sense of depth. The soundstage is pushed back a few feet in comparison to the above-mentioned other systems. However, this greater depth of soundstage is bought at the price of image layering. The soundstage appears a little homogenous in that all the images seem to emanate from a similar point in space from a depth standpoint. Disabling the upsampling moves the soundstage forward some, but does provide more depth delineation to the specific images. In comparing the two modes of operation, upsampling seems to provide a slightly flatter, recessed soundstage with rounder images, while the non-upsampling mode provides sharpers images at the expense of the larger, deeper soundstage. It comes down to a preference thing.

In essence, the Cary players offer a warm, relaxed, slightly syrupy presenatation that is very musical if not exactly the last word in neutrality. I don't find them to be especially "digital" sounding, but "digital" to me implies a lean, hard, etched balance. I've always wanted to hear the 308t, as I've heard the tubes really do wonders for voice and other midrange instruments.

One caveat - their higher than average (3 volt) output level may be too much for the input stages of some preamps with low input overload tolerances.

 

[Tuberoller]

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnActon Just a few more cents... Having owned first a 303/200, followed by a 306/200, I think the Cary CD players are very nice players. They're chock-full of the latest technology implemented superbly by a team of seemingly-talented designers ("seemingly," as I don't know them personally). That said, they do have a subtle but distinct sonic personality that deviates from strict neutrality. This coloration is likely the primary cause for the polarization of opinions regarding their merits. In comparing them to other digital playback systems (Levinson, dCS and the Wadia I've since moved on to from the 306/200), the Cary's have a smooth, weighty balance that helps to imbue them with a slight warmth that is not strictly neutral. Likewise, with the upsampling engaged, they portray an exaggerated sense of depth. The soundstage is pushed back a few feet in comparison to the above-mentioned other systems. However, this greater depth of soundstage is bought at the price of image layering. The soundstage appears a little homogenous in that all the images seem to emanate from a similar point in space from a depth standpoint. Disabling the upsampling moves the soundstage forward some, but does provide more depth delineation to the specific images. In comparing the two modes of operation, upsampling seems to provide a slightly flatter, recessed soundstage with rounder images, while the non-upsampling mode provides sharpers images at the expense of the larger, deeper soundstage. It comes down to a preference thing. In essence, the Cary players offer a warm, relaxed, slightly syrupy presenatation that is very musical if not exactly the last word in neutrality. I don't find them to be especially "digital" sounding, but "digital" to me implies a lean, hard, etched balance. I've always wanted to hear the 308t, as I've heard the tubes really do wonders for voice and other midrange instruments. One caveat - their higher than average (3 volt) output level may be too much for the input stages of some preamps with low input overload tolerances.

Wow! You put most of what I was thinking into words. I know that the higher output voltage is sometimes implemented to boost dynamics on some players that are lacking. I don't know why designers consider this a viable option but I don't think it is. I also have a really hard time enjoying the soundstaging of the Cary players. Your sonic description is very similar to my own experiences. My use of the word "Digital" may not have been completely accurate. I mean to describe the sound as simulating analog in a most unflattering way. I had a lot of time to play with all the Carys and never could grow accustomed to that sound. I auditioned them in many systems and the sound was so bad in some of them that it was huge step backwards. As I said before my father owns several Cary players that he loves. I don't like any of his systems and our tastes differ immensely. The Cary players really are an "aquired taste".

 

[TravelLite]

Truth be told, I've never been aware that Cary players are in fact "polarizing".

Mind you, I'm basing that statement primarily on the postings I've read on the digital forums at Audio Asylum and Audiogon, over a period of time.

Overall, judging from the correspondents' remarks, I'd conclude that Cary players are just another (popular) choice in a rather crowded and competitive arena.

TravelLite

 

[kuma]

Quote:

Originally posted by TravelLite Truth be told, I've never been aware that Cary players are in fact "polarizing". Overall, judging from the correspondents' remarks, I'd conclude that Cary players are just another (popular) choice in a rather crowded and competitive arena.

Cary definitely has a POV. ( good or bad, that's better than not having any. imho )

Krell also is a love-it-or-hate-it players.