Tube CD player w/ balanced output

My first post after much lurking. I have started to upgrade my system bit by bit; as a result I have decided to finally abandon my bias against digital audio. My amp is a McIntosh 6900 so I would like something w/ balanced output to take full advantage of the options the McIntosh offers. I recently heard a couple of tube CD players (a Raysonic 168 and a Consonance 220T I think) and was quite impressed with the results. I'd like to spend say $1000 or under if possible. I admit to being new to the audiophile world after hovering at its edges for some time, especially when it comes to CD players, so if you think I'm looking in the wrong direction please let me know. Any advice, suggestions, etc. are greatly appreciated.
You are really limiting yourself finding balanced for under 1k that is any good.....The Raysonic is a nice player and a good choice.The extra $ would be worth it.I use one running balanced to my Cary 120s with a Audience Maestro IC..A truly nice match.I also put Halo tube rings on the 6922's which created better focus.
look at the cayin units, great sound, value.
Spend more. Check out the Lector.
Morrow HD23 Tube CD, HDCD and SACD.24/192.Two separate toroidal power supply transformers.$1K.
I will highly recommend the Doge 6 tube player for above your price but a absolute steal at $1399 from Pacific Valve or Cattylink which is a little cheaper even with a 2 day ship from China. This player will compete with players 4 x its price.
Second the Lector,with a pair of NOS RCA's the only thing between you and the music is the air.
Stretch your budget and look for used BAT VK-D5SE. Magic!
mac mcd 201 or 205....naturally balanced and a perfect match.
Thanks all for the input. Considering the responses here, I think I may have to readjust my projected budget. Seems like $1K isn't going to get it done if I want tube and balanced output. The Morrow Audio fits, but I can't find any reviews or commentary on it. Also had someone recommend a Shanling CD 300/3000 (both players look similar with the round display in the middle of the faceplate). From googling a bit it appears that the balanced output on the Shanling is for the solid state channel only (from a 6 Moons review: "6922 tubes do remain for the CD-3000, albeit below deck vented through perf openings and active only for the RCA outputs. The XLRs offer a transistor flavor for variety")--not sure how I feel about that. Will have to look into the Lector CDP 0.6 as it looks promising and used probably would not be that far out of my price range. A used Raysonic is another possibility. I'd love to be able to afford the BAT VK-D5SE but $2500 for a used unit is more than I can afford at the moment. Have heard wonderful things about the Doge 6--no balanced output but a very reasonable price. It's on my preliminary list.

Unfortunately the Lectors only have single-ended analogue outputs until you get up to the $9K+ Digidrive and Digicode combo, which is fully balanced. However, the CDP 7TL MkIII sounds great, so if you have the scratch there are two Digidrive/Digicode sets for sale on Audiogon right now.
Thanks for that info on the Lector. I thought that might be the case and your post confirms it. Alas, I don't have the scratch to afford the Digidrive combo. Right now I think my two prime options are the Raysonic 128 or 168 or the Consonance 2.2 Mk II. The Doge 6 remains a dark horse along with the Lector.
If you have to choose between the Raysonics the 168 is far better than the 128..
better transport,dual dacs,volume control so you can use it without a preamp.
If you can, audition a Cambridge Audio Azur 840c ($1100-used) Has balanced out and I think you will be very impressed.
Have read some rave reviews for the 840C and will add it to the list, thanks for the tip. Would prefer the Raysonic 168; it's more a matter of finding it for the right price. It doesn't seem to turn up used very often as of yet. One question: is there a difference between the balanced out on the 168 vs. the 128? The 168 is described on Raysonic's website as "True balanced". Another review I read (can't remember where) described the 168 as having "fully differentiated balanced output" or something to that effect. Is there a difference and how significant is it? Again, thanks all for the input
Although I'm not certain I would think that the 2 terms mean the same thing (true internal balanced). Some gear has xlr in/out puts but they are for convenience and the inside wiring is not balanced.
Maybe this will help:

CD128 vs. CD168 on paper
"One BB 1738 DAC chip vs. two BB 1792s. 24/96 vs. 24/192 upsampling. Sony KSS-213Q vs. Philips VAM 1202 top-loading transport. Balanced output stage vs. fully balanced circuit beginning at the converters. Fixed outputs vs. variable outputs. HDCD capability vs. none. Open/close button protocol to capture new TOC vs. auto read-in once cover is placed in transport well. 2.2V vs. 2.3V out. 102 vs. 110dB dynamic range. Permanent vs. optional illumination. 43 vs. 38-watt power consumption. Purely based on published specs, the differences between both machines seem quite minor but a look inside shows up further changes.... I could bore you with endless details but the upshot of the comparison was simply such a minor offset as to be far less than what tube rolling will shift in various directions. If your preamp has no remote control, the CD168's variable outputs hit that nail on the head. If you're a fan of black-out listening session, the CD168's halo-off feature will be preferable. If you fret over numbers -- one chip versus another -- buy the 168 and feel smugly superior. If money is tight, buy the 128 and know that those numbers mean nothing when the rubber meets the road in the kind of system context I image these players would find themselves in. In short, the CD168 is a feature-wise dolled up CD128 which sonically takes nothing away (not always a given). It thus justifiably shares the 128's prior Blue Moon award as a very slick, dialed machine and powerful recommendation in this sector. " - 6moons review

I believe the CD168 uses truly differentially balanced circuitry and that the CD128 does not. However, the question to ask is, does this really make a difference? There are well-regarded high end manufacturers who don't bother to provide balanced circuitry, because for home audio they don't believe the extra cost justifies the benefit. I have run a fully balanced system, and find I prefer my current single-ended setup. 6moons provides pretty comprehensive reviews of both the CD128 and CD168 along with some really nice pictures.