• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

cd player recommendations

Art K. said:
It's not bad I've had both that and the NAD 545 here for demo and IMO the 545 is considerably better sounding. However for about the same price as the 5004 you would have to get the refurb 545 and the warranty is only 1 yr. I feel that that the Marantz is a bit better build quality. So really it would depend what you are after which you would prefer.
Click to expand...

I'm reviving this old thread as someone here at AK has been looking for a budget cd player. I've had the Marantz CD5004 for a couple of months now and may put it into the reference rig to see how it compares directly with the NAD C545BEE...I may have to eat my previous words, we'll see.
 
nissan guy said:
Just picked up a sony 707 esd cd player. Haven't had much time to listen to it yet but so far it seems to be much more detailed than the kenwood and it also seems to have much more bass. I was looking for a newer player but for the price and build quality i couldn't pass it up. Its missing the remote and the wood sides. I will most likely buy a remote and make my own rosewood sides for it when i get time.

I may take it in to a local electronics store who has a very good tech, and have him go over it and make sure its all set to be listened to for a while.
Click to expand...

Ahhh.... You did good!!:banana:

I was going to say that player or the 7 or 77 (they add balanced outs).
Very fine player with quite possibly the best transport ever made!!:music:

BTW My X77ES sounds better than most VERY high end players the names of which are hardly ever mentioned on AK.
 
guiller said:
Please let us know your impressions.
Click to expand...

I did a comparison last night and I can say with certainty that the NAD is a better sounding player. They both sound excellent and both are excellent at rendering realistic timbre. The Marantz is a bit more forward and isn't quite as refined on either the top or the bottom end. The bass is fuller with the Marantz but seems just a tad over ripe. The highs aren't quite as articulate, I can clearly hear different brands and types of cymbals with the NAD that I cannot with the Marantz. The transport is quieter in the Marantz and that is nice but as good a $350 player as it is, I could not live with it in the main rig unless my other deck was in for service.

Conclusion is that the Marantz CD5004 is a fine sounding deck which has outstanding build quality and quiet operation. It's a excellent bargain at $350.

The NAD C545BEE is an outstanding sounding player with better resolution and an more organic presentation. Everything is in it's place and sounds more live than the Marantz. Operation isn't as quiet and the transport can be noisy with some discs, not most though. I've cross checked the same discs on my wife's Rotel RCD 971 and find that the discs also make more noise with that player than the average disc, though not as much as on the NAD. The Marantz is virtually silent with every disc.

I love the sound of the NAD, now if only the transport were quiet and it didn't have the auto shut off feature:scratch2:.
 
Art K. said:
I did a comparison last night and I can say with certainty that the NAD is a better sounding player. They both sound excellent and both are excellent at rendering realistic timbre. The Marantz is a bit more forward and isn't quite as refined on either the top or the bottom end. The bass is fuller with the Marantz but seems just a tad over ripe. The highs aren't quite as articulate, I can clearly hear different brands and types of cymbals with the NAD that I cannot with the Marantz. The transport is quieter in the Marantz and that is nice but as good a $350 player as it is, I could not live with it in the main rig unless my other deck was in for service.

Conclusion is that the Marantz CD5004 is a fine sounding deck which has outstanding build quality and quiet operation. It's a excellent bargain at $350.

The NAD C545BEE is an outstanding sounding player with better resolution and an more organic presentation. Everything is in it's place and sounds more live than the Marantz. Operation isn't as quiet and the transport can be noisy with some discs, not most though. I've cross checked the same discs on my wife's Rotel RCD 971 and find that the discs also make more noise with that player than the average disc, though not as much as on the NAD. The Marantz is virtually silent with every disc.

I love the sound of the NAD, now if only the transport were quiet and it didn't have the auto shut off feature:scratch2:.
Click to expand...

Does the 5004 has the serious listening mode (forgot what it really is called)? My 5003 has a mode that turns off all other functions such as lights etc and enlivens the signal path only. Much like 'source-direct' function of an amp.
 
Thanks for taking the time to tell us about that Art. How did you end up with a Marantz CD player anyway?
 
davidro said:
Does the 5004 has the serious listening mode (forgot what it really is called)? My 5003 has a mode that turns off all other functions such as lights etc and enlivens the signal path only. Much like 'source-direct' function of an amp.
Click to expand...

Yes it has that mode and that is the only way I listen to it. So does the NAD, however you have to engage it every time you turn on the NAD and it stays on with the Marantz.
 
Mr. Lin said:
Thanks for taking the time to tell us about that Art. How did you end up with a Marantz CD player anyway?
Click to expand...

Needed a player for the living room so that during the summer when I'm hanging in the back yard I can hear good music. It's a perfect match for the Marantz SR5005 AVR.
 
Art K. said:
Needed a player for the living room so that during the summer when I'm hanging in the back yard I can hear good music. It's a perfect match for the Marantz SR5005 AVR.
Click to expand...

Once you have a modern Marantz amp or receiver there's no other CD player you can match that with at least aesthetically :D
 
Cd 6004?

The NAD's sound nice-but their quality is a crap shoot. It really depends if your system jives with their sound or not-wether it's worth the purchase-buy new though with a warranty-and perhaps extended one if you choose the 545NAD insist's on repair-not replace-so you may have a few trips.
Marantz usally replaces lower cost cd players-especially if you insist.
NAD warrnaty 2 years-Marantz 3 years.
Be aware the NADs don't like scatched disc's, even some slighly scatched ones -and burned cd's are a crapshoot (the 545 hated one burnd cd, a high quality MAM-A, and ejected it while still spinning!).
The NAD sound and Marantz sound (the 545-515; 5004-5001)are slightly different-but closer then far apart-each older and less expensive unit is a progression in this sound. IMHO their sound is more system dependent then anything else-that's why I would audition each-as most quality distributors have a 30-60 no questions asked return/exchange.
Have some fun- I am- and play with a couple of these players-no need to order one and say-that's it-find out what there is to offer- as that's what those return programs are really for. Still have my same stuff-but it's been a blast-and the kids love it!!
Personally-I think I would also demo the CD 6004-looks like a worthy upgrade- a hefty piece @ around 15 lbs. New transport new DAC, larger power supply, and improved analog network circutry.
http://www.musicdirect.com/p-50323-marantz-cd6004-cd-player.aspx
http://www.whathifi.com/blog/exclus...d-of-the-game-and-why-theres-life-in-the-old-
Do yourself a favor-and review them on your own system,
 
Last edited:
Every audio purchase is system dependent.

The CD6004 is very likely a good player. If it has the Marantz family sound it will be very good but not quite what I would be looking for. At that price one could get an NAD C565BEE refurb. It's all a matter of taste. NAD's sound is one I really like. Their CD player reliability has not been good of late however they say that they have it straightened out, we'll see. I wouldn't know anything about how they play scratched cd's as I don't own any.
 
Art K. said:
Every audio purchase is system dependent.

The CD6004 is very likely a good player. If it has the Marantz family sound it will be very good but not quite what I would be looking for. At that price one could get an NAD C565BEE refurb. It's all a matter of taste. NAD's sound is one I really like. Their CD player reliability has not been good of late however they say that they have it straightened out, we'll see. I wouldn't know anything about how they play scratched cd's as I don't own any.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking severly scratched ones-mild ones. Given modern tecnology and modern disc drive/lasers a retail $500 player should'nt have a problem new out of the box-even with the noisy transport IMHO, and something one would want to consider, as it doens't matter how good it sounds if it can't play your disc.
Not knocking NAD-it is what it is-but something one has to consider.
 
Last edited:
automojo said:
I wasn't talking severly scratched ones-mild ones. Given modern tecnology and modern disc drive/lasers a retail $500 player should'nt have a problem new out of the box-even with the noisy transport IMHO, and something one would want to consider, as it doens't matter how good it sounds if it can't play your disc.
Not knocking NAD-it is what it is-but something one has to consider.
Click to expand...

My NAD gear is all refurb. The noisy transport is pretty common on NAD and Cambridge CD players. In a normal sized room you probably wouldn't even hear it on mine but I'm in a 9x10x8 room and still only hear it on a small number of discs. Those same discs when played on my wife's Rotel RCD971 also make more noise than average. I agree and clearly stated so earlier that I think that the Marantz is built better, however I'm more interested in sound than a "built like a tank" quality. All I ask is that the player keep on playing if it doesn't then I move on. Not something I want to do but I am willing to do.
 
I agree about the Marantz and NAD having their house sounds. Some might call the Marantz a "warmer" (hate to use that term-but I'm being lazy), while the NAD more detailed.
I demoed a 545 recently-I really liked the sound-but it was a bit too analytical for me in the upper regions-not so bright like a Cambridge-but it has that Wolfson sound-although NAD did tame it down. While interesting to listen to for a while-with my ESS AMT3's H/K amplification it becomes a bit fatiguing. The bass while tight, seemd to be a bit hollow.
I think these players probaby benefit more from a lower resolution setup-for extended listening-although your experience may vary no doubt.
The NAD is much better then any Cambridge deck I have heard so far-but they do have a similiar charater.
Personally I think the C 565 BEE would be more to my liking, as they seem to have tamed the Wolfson a bit more, without losing detail.
Really minor stuff-except for the fatigue-as I like being able to sit down and listen for a while when I get the chance-and not always be looking for a LP.
The 5004 provides a good balance in terms of detail and listenability, and overall drive on my system anyway-what music should sound like.
I didn't buy the 5004-waiting to see what the improvements on the 6004 sound like-besides the USB input.
Having a nice build is a plus-but I agree it's about the muisc, and system synergy is really waht it's about-demo' 'em and have fun!:thmbsp:
 
Last edited:
I while be demoing a NAD C565BEE shortly-to see if it's a improvement on the 545. Better build quality-as supposed to be silent disc spinning wise
IMHO the added 'detail', at least on the 545 is more akin to brightness-which makes the bass seem thinner then the cd5004. The CD5004 doesn't really emphasis any frequency region obviously-but provides a smoother more enjoyable response-not the ultimate in detail-but if your speakers are able to relay excellent detail-you will hear the same details-just not so emphasized, and more musical.
Part of the thin 545 bass, at least according to my local NAD, may also be because the NAD amp the 545 is made to match has a bit of a bass boost to it out of the box.
MY AMT3's provide plenty of detail-so componets that emphasis one end or the other really stick out, and the 545 seemed like it was trying to hard to impress-and became tiring while the 5004 disappeared and the music was the focus. Plus the disc spinning is really annoying-really unbelivable for $500 these days.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom