New Marantz SA-KI Ruby SACD/CD player

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by bruce2, Sep 11, 2018.

  1. No problem. We'll walk you through it if you need help.
     
    Bill Mac likes this.
  2. PATB

    PATB Recovering Vinyl Junkie

    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Congrats Bill. I love SACD but have no player at the moment. That has not stopped me from acquiring SACDs (just ordered the Thelonius Monk and Mingus SACDs from Music Direct). I just rip them at the moment, but I love spinning disks so am saving money for a decent player.
     
    Bill Mac likes this.
  3. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Congratulations! Member "High Fidelity" will think you an idiot for not buying a Sony though! :D
     
    Rolltide and Bill Mac like this.
  4. Slippers-on

    Slippers-on Forum Resident

    Location:
    St.Louis Mo.
    Congrats Bill. You will love the build as well as the sound of that Marantz Reference.
     
    Bill Mac likes this.
  5. Bill Mac

    Bill Mac Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    I do miss my good old "friend" High Fidelity :D.

    Thanks everyone :)! I really look forward to getting the SA-10! I've been happy with Oppo players for quite sometime. But I read so many positive reviews about the Marantz Reference line that I wanted to try one. My system isn't a "reference" system but I think the SA-10 will compliment the Wyred 4 Sound STP-SE and SX-500 amps quite well.
     
  6. Break it in with some of your SHM-SACDs and enjoy. The problem with a reference player like the SA-10 is that it's hard tolerating lesser units after using it. I think in 2019 we are more or less at the end of seeing improvements in redbook playback, so it should provide you many years of the best sound possible.

    I will be looking forward to see how you feel it stacks up with the 205.
     
    Bill Mac likes this.
  7. Warren Jarrett

    Warren Jarrett Audio Note (UK) dealer in SoCal/LA-OC In Memoriam

    Location:
    Fullerton, CA
    Boy, this has really not been my experience, so far, during my last 3 weeks of concentrated comparisons. If you listen to an Audio Note or Aesthetics standard redbook player, these are examples of digital sounding far better than ever. Then, listening to 3 extremely fine SACD, DVD-A, and "universal disc" players, they are not better than redbook at all. The higher res specs appear to be better and their advertising appeared to be better, but the consumer market response was that they are not, and my dedicated audiophile listening results (so far) actually seem to prove (to my ears) they are not.

    If the SA-10 is sonically SO MUCH better than my Modwright/Marantz SA-8005, and my top NAD model (M55) optimized for 2-channel audiophile sound, and my top Rotel DVD-A player similarly optimized for 2-channel sound, then my results may not be conclusive yet. But, when my friend came over to hear, he was shocked how inferior the NAD M55 with SACD sounded compared to the same disc's non-SACD track through my Audio Note CDT-4x and DAC-2X-Signature. The Oppo BDP-95 is a little better than the NAD, but not better than a great redbook player.

    The Oppo 105 and 205 go too far into "analytical", compared to the 95, for my audio systems. I think, for an audio system that would benefit from a dry, analytical sound, the Oppo 205 just might be an improvement compared to the vast majority of (or maybe all) dedicated/reference SACD players and universal disc players, just as the 95 is for my system. So I look forward to reading about Bill Mac's comparison results, also.
     
    progrocker and Mr Bass like this.
  8. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    The NAD M55 is a very old player now (pre Blu ray, did it even have HDMI? if it did it was very early) and wasn't "hi end" even then ($1800 when Universal players were a new thing and still had a premium) so I'd be amazed if it came close to the Oppo's you've mentioned (I know my Arcam DV137 didn't and that was similar to the NAD). Comparing it to an Audio Note CD transport and DAC or Marantz SA-10 (neither are universal players and cost what? about 5 times the amount?) is insane and if it came anywhere close to either of them then the NAD would be the bargain of the century and, if that were the case, show that Audio Note and Marantz were very overpriced!
     
    warp2600 and Bill Mac like this.
  9. Warren Jarrett

    Warren Jarrett Audio Note (UK) dealer in SoCal/LA-OC In Memoriam

    Location:
    Fullerton, CA
    OK... thank you for pointing out my "insane" thinking, that may have been your most useful information, although a bit insulting. But you have got a few things wrong, too. For example, neither Blu-Ray nor HDMI have anything at all to do with better sound through an audiophile 2-channel audio system. And, some audio equipment that are "very, very old", such as a Marantz 10B tuner compared to newer FM tuners (or even worse, digital tuners), and analog compared to digital, can be argued as better, though causing debate. Those are decades older, not just 6 years older, so let's check that these companies are really giving us better sound every few years, by offering products that look a little better and cost a lot more.

    So is it so insane to visit DVD-A and SACD again, wondering if less expensive equipment from a few years ago, designed with newer technology, CAN have some kind of sonic advantage? All totaled, you are 100% right, though, because the NAD is long gone, whereas the Audio Note redbook, the Oppo BDP, and the Marantz SACD are still here.
     
  10. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    My intent wasn't to insult, I just think the "test" isn't a useful one and the word "insane" is just amplifying the point, not a personal insult! The first "Universal" players were very expensive for what they were sound wise (my comment on pre HDMI just goes to show its age and part of the cost was going to video reproduction and the implementation of 5.1 sound rather than just stereo) and my point was all the Oppo's you mentioned are better sounding than that NAD (even implementing video and 7.1 surround sound). At that time I don't think any could even play SACD natively (not part of your test) but part of the point. I would go as far as to say that the very best "Universal" players of the day were probably as good at CD's as a CD player 1/3 or a 1/4 of their cost as they were cutting edge technology and you were paying for that! So, IMO, your test is akin to saying that a $5k CD player (and I would think the Audio Note combo cost at least that?) sounds better than a $500 CD player and, IMO, I would be very worried if it didn't!

    A better test would be the Marantz SA-10, one of the higher end Luxman's or Yamaha's as these players don't have video, play DSD natively and are CD/SACD stereo only so are dedicated to reproducing sound. The Audio Note combo may well be better than any of the players I've mentioned, but comparing it to a NAD M55 doesn't tell us anything?!?

    PS I think Richard Austin has tested some of the higher end CD/SACD players and prefers the sound of the Audio Note combo so this may well be the case?!?
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
  11. PATB

    PATB Recovering Vinyl Junkie

    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    My OPPO Sonica DAC (same DAC as the 205) playing DSD of an SACD (ripped) sounds inferior to my Audio Note kits DAC 4.1 LE playing the CD layer of the same SACD (using a CEC TL5 Transport), primarily because of the NOS tubes on the output stage and power supply. So I wouldn’t be surprised if an SA8005 with a modified output stage and power supply will give the SA-10 a run for its money. However, you end up with an expensive SA8005 with a sucky transport relative to an SA-10. If you just want good sound and don’t care about the transport, why bother with a player? Just rip the SACD and get a good DSD DAC (lots in that price range).
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
  12. Warren Jarrett

    Warren Jarrett Audio Note (UK) dealer in SoCal/LA-OC In Memoriam

    Location:
    Fullerton, CA
    You may not have intended to insult, but you should know that you did, by writing as though I am an idiot for not already knowing that SACD doesn't necessarily sound better than CD, and actually specifying insane thinking for thinking it might. Well, I acknowledge that you are right, and therefore my listening tests would not be useful to you. You are not right that the NAD did not play SACDs in native DSD, because that was a requirement in my choosing it to compare to CD. Never-the-less, you already knew what I just learned for myself. But in audio, I don't believe what anyone claims without confirming with my ears, because for every 1 person with your opinion, there are 10 people who say SACD and DVD-A are intrinsically better sounding than CD, "due to higher resolution". My investigation exposed the truth to me, that your opinion is the correct one. And I extrapolate now that the same problem may be true of the hi-res downloads that so many people are giving-up owning a CD player, in favor of "hi-res superiority".

    Now, why does the Oppo BDP-95 sound so much better than the vast majority of CD players at any price, and even better (to my ears) than the BDP-105? I have read that the 95's dual D/A convertors were more seriously implemented to aid stereo sound rather than multi-channel and video, whereas more for video and multi-channel in the 105 and then even more so in the 205. But again, for every 1 mention of that, I have read 10 that say the 105 sounds better because it is newer, and the 205 even better. Do you have any opinion about this?
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
    progrocker likes this.
  13. Warren Jarrett

    Warren Jarrett Audio Note (UK) dealer in SoCal/LA-OC In Memoriam

    Location:
    Fullerton, CA
    Well, you have another opinion that not many people share. So my reaction is "maybe I should try that, too".

    I just want digital to sound almost as good in my 2 channel audio systems, and to my ears, as LPs. I gave up on that as even a possibility until I recently heard the Aesthetix Romulus, the high-end Audio Note transport and DAC, and the lowly Oppo BDP-95. Now I know it will take more personal experimentation to separate fact from fiction. I already knew that listening to people's opinions and advice will not help much, because it is all so strongly expressed, and yet so consistently inconsistent.

    Maybe the New Marantz SA-KI Ruby SACD/CD player is today's
    ultimate solution to my goal; maybe it is ripping SACDs or hi-res downloads; maybe it is high-end redbook. Or maybe it is still best to give up on digital (for best sound), and stick with loving analog.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
    Robert M. and PATB like this.
  14. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Seattle area
    FWIW: You might want to consider giving a PS Audio Direct Stream DAC a listen sometime. The Oppos are indeed very good, but they are not the last work in digital. And my DS DAC sounds more like superb analog than any other DAC that I have personally heard. And unlike many, it doesn't need tubes or an "HDAM" output stage (like Marantz uses) to romanticize its output to make it more palatable. It just sounds incredibly transparent and natural as is.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
  15. Warren Jarrett

    Warren Jarrett Audio Note (UK) dealer in SoCal/LA-OC In Memoriam

    Location:
    Fullerton, CA
    I have listened to the PS Audio Direct Stream DAC in a few systems compared to Audio Note, because of so much hype and so many people who claim to love it. But, I don't hear anything particularly good about the DS. To me it sounds dead, lacking in dynamics, and sounds nothing like live music nor like high-end analog. From Audio Note playing redbook, and the Oppo 95 and 105 playing DVD-A and SACD, I hear more life. And still more "life" from analog.

    And, in my opinion, tubes don't "romanticize". Maybe budget tube equipment does. That word is a characterization expressed by someone who doesn't like tubes, or thinks they are inferior to the best solid state. From implementation of tubes in high-end equipment, I would more use a description like "liven-up" or "make sound more like live music". And these are what I am searching for from digital now also. So far, analog and tubes have given these properties to me, without "romanticizing".

    I don't think you are wrong. I just think we listen for different things. And I have noticed this from our past interactions as well.

    OK, I am going to leave this thread now. I am getting too excited, getting too close to insulting some of you, and generally sounding too much like an audio extremist. Thank you for your opinions and for reading mine. See you again in other discussions, with all the pleasure in the world sharing audio opinions.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
    Slippers-on likes this.
  16. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Seattle area
    Your comment makes me wonder which firmware you heard running on the DS you heard it. While I will agree with you that it is not quite as lively as are some sources, the liveliness has been tremendously dependent on which firmware it is running. Pikes Peak and Yale, for example, were both super-dead, and I completely skipped both of those revisions due to their lack of toe-tapping rythm. And IMO the previous revision called Snowmass was probably the liveliest version so far. But the current revision called Redcloud is almost as lively, although it sounds better in some other regards.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
    Warren Jarrett likes this.
  17. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    It is difficult for me to have an opinion on your findings here. I came to the party late on the Oppo's and actually bought a Primare BD32 mark i on run out (it's based on the Oppo 93 but with a completely different analogue stage) as I found that I slightly preferred the sound of the Primare to the Oppo 105 at the dealers on their system (this was for stereo only CD and hi rez) and when I got home it was night and day better than my old Arcam DV137 in my stereo system. I have an Oppo 205 in my my TV set up and that is also night and day better than the Arcam but I haven't tried the Oppo and the Primare in the same system at home. I have not heard the Oppo 95 as that was out of production by the time I came on board but, given my experience with all the other players then, I feel confident in my opinion that the 95 would also be much better than my Arcam DV137 (I did also hear the NAD M55 for 2 hours at a dealers at the time so know it's of a similar quality/sound to the Arcam). So this explains my experiences but doesn't shed any light on your question!

    I can say that, in imo, the way digital is presented by a player (any player) can make us like one player more than another player and it isn't all about expense or accuracy (I think you're referring to it as "live" sound to your ears). I bought a Yamaha CD S3000 on run out (half price) a couple of years ago and still find myself preferring the Primare BD32 on a few recordings. What I can say with confidence is that generally I prefer the SACD layer on the Yamaha over the CD layer (I notice when the player fails to read the SACD layer and plays the CD layer instead), however, SACD players are limited to a few manufacturers that go for a "Japanese" sound (if there is such a thing). Because the current manufactures of SACD players have a similar approach then I think that if you like Audio Note's approach to digital sound (hear it as more live) reproduction then you will still prefer their digital reproduction over the competition (I think it's hard to say what's right or wrong (live sound) as everyone's system is so different and can present the same sound in a different way). I do think is that if Audio Note were to make an SACD capable player/DAC then it could well sound better than their CD equivalent but now that SACD is effectively dead it just isn't worth any investment exploring this.
     
  18. lonelysea

    lonelysea Ban Leaf Blowers

    Location:
    The Cascades
    I plan to avoid all this controversy by getting an Accuphase CD/SACD player when I visit Asia later this year.
     
    scobb likes this.
  19. Blair G.

    Blair G. Senior Member

    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Seems to me there are some overly sensitive participants here
    It’s like everything has to be right or wrong, no room for opinions.
     
    nutsfortubes and Dennis Metz like this.
  20. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    I recently bought the SA-KI Ruby. It now has around 75 hours of use and is sounding quite good. SACDs are fantastic.

    I was not feeling well recently and listened to quite a few RCA Living Stereo Hybrid discs on the Ruby. It helped get me through. I love classical music when under the weather and the hybrids sounded really great on the Ruby.
     
  21. Slippers-on

    Slippers-on Forum Resident

    Location:
    St.Louis Mo.
    Please don't leave for good. As a Marantz Reference lover, I'd love to hear your opinion onn the SA-10.
     
    Warren Jarrett likes this.
  22. siebrand

    siebrand music lover

    Location:
    Italy
    sonic diferences between Yamaha CD S-3000 and this Marantz Ruby?
     
  23. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    My SA-KI is up to around 150 hours now. Sounds very good and is now connected to my McIntosh preamp with a $36 Blue Jeans cable. No sound degradation from using a much more expensive Kimber Kable IC.

    Really happy with this player. And the 5 year warranty means Marantz stands by the quality of this product.
     
  24. clhboa

    clhboa Forum Resident

    I just ordered a open box one from Music Direct. Can't wait to check it out!
     
    PATB and Bill Mac like this.
  25. dougotte

    dougotte Petty, Annoying Dilettante

    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Hey! I was thinking about buying that one! Cancel your order immediately.;)

    Let us know how you like it.
     
    clhboa likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine