Marantz SA-10 vs Marantz SACD-10

I have an Esoteric UX3 which is the same as an X3 but the UX3 also has DVD Audio playback. A good audio friend brought his Marantz SA10 over to compare. Both players were connected to the Aux inputs on my Mac C2500 tube preamp. We used the exact same power cords and audio cables on both players. I was able to match the levels exactly on each player because my Mac allows you to fine tune each audio input. Levels were matched and we began. We used duplicate CD’s in each player and got them synched pretty easily. We both found my Esoteric player to sound better in all aspects to the Marantz. Same for SACD’s. I think the main reason are the Burr Brown PCM1704 R to R ladder dac’s in my Esoteric. It had a very analog flow and sound you just could not get from the Marantz. The Marantz sounded sharper but not better.

My friend left very disappointed with his tail tucked between his legs. I believe my friend spent $7-8K for his Marantz. I got a better deal from Spearit Sound in Northampton, MA back in July 2012. I paid $4K for an exhibition stock unit that went for $8500.00. The best purchase I have ever made. My friend now owns one of the newer Esoteric players and is very happy.

I just got the Marantz SACD-10.....can only compare to PS AUdio SACD transport via Holo Audio May DAC.  The SACD-10 to Holo Audio Serene Pre amp via balanced outs....first impressions, an absolute winner.  Still breaking in, but am testing various formats, etc.   I have many SACD and still buying, for me it is THE format.  I have an ability to process and format to 5.6 DSD as well, More to come!!

replaced my Marantz SA-10 with a Teac 701T transport combined with the Yggdrasil MIB DAC connected by a Shunyata Theta SPDIF cable and am glad I made the change; more organic sounding, closer to high end analog, more detail and better soundstaging, great combination !

Comparing different brands using the exact same cables automatically discredits the comparison.  That is a bad A/B test.  The goal is to make each unit sound as good as it can in the system it is going to be used in.  Not comparing it on a friends system, in a friends room, which is different than yours.   That is almost meaningless.  Also, comparing two players by just dropping them into your system is also a bad test.  It is in no way acceptable to believe that the cables one owns currently are still going to be the correct ones when swapping out equipment.  The chain is broken and the cables most likely need to be changed if you are trying to max out the system.  This is so annoying that people don't understand this.  You can't just do A/B comparisons using one set system... anyways,  I own a ruby and a sa10 and really wanted to buy the sacd10 when it came out.  But after listening to all available YouTube videos fronted by a sacd10 and reading the comments below, then auditioning in my system, one thing has become very clear.  The sacd10 is definitely a lower quality sound than the sa10, and by a mile.  It is a completely flawed player.  It has man-made ringing, which is clearly audible even on the videos.  It doesn't come close to the clarity of a sa10.  Whether you prefer Esoteric or Marantz is a matter of taste, but I doubt any Marantz owner would choose a SACD10 over a sa10 as a standalone player.  I don't see that at all.  But I definitely see sa10 owners wanting to use a sacd10 as a transport to a dac.  That I think is a great option.  Fabulous!!  Marantz and Esoteric are completely different sound signatures; they are not competitors in any way.  

@mahandave 

+1    

Couldn't agree more, I have three source components and spend much time with each trying different power cords and interconnects till finding the best combination. 

It is rather amazing how much better a component can sound with better matched wires. I admit that I have limited wires to try, and I'm sure there is a combo I don't own that could provide better sound. Never the less what I have has allowed me to fine tune each components sound to a much more enjoyable experience.