More on the LONG burn-in time for the Marantz SA-8001

[emaidel]

I previously posted that the folks at Marantz informed me that burn-in on the 8001 "could take as long as 200 hours." I thought that was a bit much, but now that I have about that much use on it, I have to say that it's never sounded better: everything's better, including a new sparkle to the highs, a far more powerful bottom end, and a lushness to the midrange and voices. I never gave burn-in much thought before, but have to admit that it's a very real phenomenon when it comes to this unit.

I also thought that, since the CD and SACD circuitry are different, that perhaps each needed its own burn-in, and so I asked Marantz. Their response was that for CD's the recommended burn in time is 200 hours, and for SACD's it's 300 hours!

I don't have anywhere near that amount of use in listening to SACD's on the unit, but have had it running 24/7 with the unit set to "repeat" and the volume on my preamp turned all the way down, so that it can burn in on its own, without me necessarily listening to it for 72 hours straight (or more!).

And, guess what? It already sounds better, and I've still got a long, long way to go to reach that 300 hours. The dynamic range, three-dimensional soundstage and deep, throaty sound to certain instruments just keeps getting better and better. Overall, it is becoming more and more "lifelike," and "involving."

I would imagine that, if the 8001 needs this amount of burn-in, then so may many other SACD players.

[JohnMichael]

I agree the sound did continue to improve but I did not pay much attention to how long it took. The SA 8001 sounded better than the CD 5001 right out of the box. I leave the SA 8001 on all the time for best sound. Yesterday I put in Joshua Bell's "Poeme" and the body and string tone was incredible. This was the first time I had played this cd on the SA 8001 since it was new and was amazed. I had never heard this cd sound so good.

[Mr Peabody]

Emaidel I must have missed your original post, how much better is the 8001 over your prior Adcom rig?

[emaidel]

Emaidel I must have missed your original post, how much better is the 8001 over your prior Adcom rig?

The difference is night and day. ALL CD's that I play on it have an all new life, clarity and "punch," and the SACD performance (on certain discs) is nothing less than incredible. Just yesterday I listened to the DSD/SACD remaster of Telarc's Soundstream recording of Mahler's 2nd, conducted by Felix Slatkin. The improvement in sound, both from the Marantz SA-8001, and the superb remastering (by Paul Blakemore of Telarc) was absolutely stunning.

I have rarely ever purchased a single component that has made as much difference as the 8001 has.

[PDN]

I've been thinking about upgrading to the SA8001 but I have no plans to start buying SACD's. I do however have a number of HDCD's but does this unit decode HDCD's and if so, does it indicate this on its front panel? My Rotel RCD-1072 does and a small LED lights up when it's reading HDCD's. I plan to purchase more of these as artists start to produce CD's in this format. They do sound a helluva a lot better than standard factory CD's. I just got the double CD set of the Bee Gee's all time hits and wow, what a huge difference in HDCD. Can anyone comment on this unit not decoding HDCD's? Thanks.

[emaidel]

Can anyone comment on this unit not decoding HDCD's? Thanks.

The SA-8001 doesn't decode HDCD's. My guess is that they, like many recording engineers, have selected the SACD format as superior, and have chosen to support that medium instead.

And, before you totally dismiss SACD's out of hand, I'd suggest you visit a high end retailer and listen to one, and compare the CD and SACD layers. You may be pleasantly surprised...

I bought the SA-8001 primariy for its highly touted CD performance - not for its SACD capability. As it turns out, it's the SACD I'll be looking to buy from here on in, and not the CD.

[Feanor]

The SA-8001 doesn't decode HDCD's. My guess is that they, like many recording engineers, have selected the SACD format as superior, and have chosen to support that medium instead.

And, before you totally dismiss SACD's out of hand, I'd suggest you visit a high end retailer and listen to one, and compare the CD and SACD layers. You may be pleasantly surprised...

I bought the SA-8001 primariy for its highly touted CD performance - not for its SACD capability. As it turns out, it's the SACD I'll be looking to buy from here on in, and not the CD.

There are a heck of a lot more SACDs out there than HDCD (-- and they're easier to find).

That said, Reference Recording (http://www.referencerecordings.com/)'s opuses are great. Also, it's surprising that certain CDs turn up that are apparently HDCD encoded though they don't advertise the fact; here's an example I recently came upon, (sorry, classical music), that lights the HDCD indicator on my DAC
...

[emaidel]

I've come to the realization that I have neither the 200 hours for the recommended CD burn-in, nor the 300 additional hours for an SACD burn-in on this player suggested by the folks at Marantz. If I listened to my system for two hours a day, seven days a week, totalling only 14 hours, it would take me months to even approach either time period. And, I certainly don't write down how long I listen to anything, whether it be CD's, SACD's or even LP's.

Soooo, with that said, I have to admit that the sound of this unit continues to improve. The very first CD I played on it was Robert Shaw's rendition of "Ein Deutsches Requiem" on Telarc. I played that disc again just recently, and was amazed at how much better it sounded: decidedly more distinct, greater imaging, better bass response, etc. And this is a fairly old CD too - a Soundstream recording, that by Telarc's own admission, isn't up to the standards of its newer DSD-mastered discs.

Next, onto an SACD. I was initially very disappointed with several new Telarc SACD's, notably for a lackluster, and almost flat out dull, sound. This included several recent recordings by Paavo Jarvi and the Cincinatti Orchestra. Now, those recordings sound remarkable: while the top end (read: cymbals) is still somewhat "soft," everything else sounds so good, it's hard to imagine it being any better. There is a sense of three-dimensionality no CD I own has ever been able to duplicate, as well as a sense of liveliness and realism that nothing has even approached before. The sound of the brass, especially trombones, is something to behold, and the power of the tympani and bass drums is such that I almost believed I was listening to the music on a completely different system!

So, I continue to enjoy this SACD player (I can only imagine how a better unit would sound!), and also continue to find the SACD medium an absolute delight. I haven't been this impressed with anything since I first bought my Dahlquist DQ-10's 31 years ago!

[hermanv]

What? Burn in? Subjective claptrap. The fact that my stuff sounded ever so much better after a 100 hour burn in is clearly a figment of my imagination. :D :D :D

[emaidel]

What? Burn in? Subjective claptrap. The fact that my stuff sounded ever so much better after a 100 hour burn in is clearly a figment of my imagination. :D :D :D

I initially thought that burn-in was sheer nonsense until I experienced it myself. First, it was a set of Audioquest "Crystal" speaker cables. Initially, downright harsh sounding, they eventually softened up and sounded a lot better after time. Next, it was my Parasound PLD-1100 "Line Level" preamp: in the instruction manual, it stated that while the unit will sound good right out of the box, at least 72 hours of "burn-in" time was needed to make it sound its best. And, that turned out to be the case.

And now, it's the Marantz SA-8001. It still seems to be getting better: I played a few discs on it over the weekend that I'd played previously, and all sounded noticeably better than before, especially an EMI disc of the same "Ein Deutsches Requiem" by Brahms, conducted by Simon Rattle. That recording, especially when I first played it on my older Adcom setup, sounded harsh and thin. Now, it all but knocks my socks off! It surely didn't win a Grammy for best Classsical Vocal recording in 2007 for nothing!

If this is "subjective claptrap," then it's most welcome subjective claptrap! (And, "subjective claptrap" is a great choice of words too!)

[daviethek]

[QUOTE=emaidel]I initially thought that burn-in was sheer nonsense until I experienced it myself.

True story. I remember my Anthony Gallo Speakers. The guidebook said the break in could be up to 200 hours.......good out of the box and then pretty damn bad until they were broken in. Well, they sounded good out of the box and then a short time later sounded as if they were underwater. This lasted for about 200 hours. They slowly they cam back to their operational standard. I doubted my purchase more than once during the break in. I will know next time to ignore the music during this period.

[hermanv]

I have no problem understanding speaker burn in. The cones flex, little crinkles develop, surrounds flex and loosen, it all makes great sense. A mechanical break in process.

I just don't know about a cable burn in. My Wire World Reference Series III+ and my Cardas Golden Presence Interconnects all benefited greatly from a quite extended burn in (about 200 hours before they stopped changing). The Cardas cables are just plain simple (and sound great) so there's little explanation. Cardas has things to say on his site, I don't agree or disagree for that matter, but I don't quite get it.

And it gets worse, some products just slowly improve over time others turn ugly and then recover. It's all too close to magic. It's impossible to convince a non-believer who hasn't heard the phenomena for themselves.

[jrhymeammo]

That's why I love quality used speakers.

Hey ema,
What IC are you using for your Marantz? I tried about 5 different sets and have finally found a preferred pair with my new integrated amp. I wish I could honestly say my Marantz has evoloved its sound over time, but I've gone thru 2 different pairs of speakersInot including my current pair), 4 different pre/amp/integrated, dozens of tube combinations so it would be irrelevant.....

I guess this unit isn't so bad considering I have not replaced it with other digital source gear. I hope you'll continue to enjoy it.

JRA

[JohnMichael]

Since you did not ask me I was using the MicroPurl by Alpha Core and thought I needed more. The MP is 25 guage and I tried the Alpha Core Triode Quartz 2 which is a 21 guage cable. Much better with the SA 8001 with greater deffinition and dynamics.

[emaidel]

That's why I love quality used speakers.

Hey ema,
What IC are you using for your Marantz? I tried about 5 different sets and have finally found a preferred pair with my new integrated amp. I wish I could honestly say my Marantz has evoloved its sound over time, but I've gone thru 2 different pairs of speakersInot including my current pair), 4 different pre/amp/integrated, dozens of tube combinations so it would be irrelevant.....

I guess this unit isn't so bad considering I have not replaced it with other digital source gear. I hope you'll continue to enjoy it.

JRA

Initially, I was using a set of Kimber braided silver cables. Then, I switched over to a set of German-manufactured cables under the name, "Benchmark," which seemed to add about another octave of bass, as well as a much "sweeter" sound to the mids and highs.

This is NOT the current high-end audio manufacturer of the same name, and I can't find any information anywhere on these cables. I purchased them years ago from one of my representatives who was also representing the Benchmark line at the time. They were quite expensive and are very heavy and thick (over 1/2") with beautifully machined, polished metal locking collars which are too thick to use on equipment with the RCA jacks spaced closely together. I'm also using a Benchmark cable from my preamp (Parasound PLD-1100) to my power amp (Adcom GFA-5800).

[hermanv]

Initially, I was using a set of Kimber braided silver cables. Then, I switched over to a set of German-manufactured cables under the name, "Benchmark," which seemed to add about another octave of bass, as well as a much "sweeter" sound to the mids and highs.
<snip>
.Normally I like silver cables due to all the ones I've tried having very low or zero grain. The Kimber KCAG is a braided silver cable, I'm not sure if this is the one you had. In spite of the reputation of the KCAG, I found them to be a bit bright with some energy in the upper mid region that I don't think was supposed to be there.

If you reduce treble, a cable will sound like it has more bass. This follows an old speaker designer axiom "if you want better bass, work on the tweeter". Probably shouldn't be taken as literally as it sounds, but there is a fair amount of truth in the idea.

[emaidel]

Normally I like silver cables due to all the ones I've tried having very low or zero grain. The Kimber KCAG is a braided silver cable, I'm not sure if this is the one you had. In spite of the reputation of the KCAG, I found them to be a bit bright with some energy in the upper mid region that I don't think was supposed to be there.

.

Yup, those were the ones, and I think your assessment is spot-on accurate. I always found them a bit too bright, which seemed OK when I was using B&W 802F speakers, but which was a bit too much with the Dahlquist DQ-10's.

I don't believe the improvement in bass was due to a lessening of the highs when I switched over to the Benchmark Audio cables: highs and mids were as distinct, or perhaps even more so, but without the screech of the Kimber cables. The bass wasn't merely louder, but rather, deeper and more powerful, almost to the point of it sounding as if I had purchased a better subwoofer.

Too bad these cables aren't available anymore (at least in the U.S.).

[hermanv]

Too bad these cables aren't available anymore (at least in the U.S.). I have no idea what the price was on those Benchmark cables, so it's hard to say equivalents exist. From how you describe the bass and lower midrange, several cables I've heard accomplish much the same sound. They do run into real money though.

I explored he web and found many sites with recipes for DIY cables, by the time you buy some first class RCA connectors ($15-$35 each X four) some ultra pure wire ($2-$10 foot) and some foamed Teflon insulation, you've spent about $100 per meter times two cables. Even given economy of scale, well made commercial cables are less of a rip-off than you might first guess.

UsedCable.com (http://www.usedcable.com/) will let you "borrow" cables to audition for a memebership fee.

[Feanor]

I've come to the realization that I have neither the 200 hours for the recommended CD burn-in, nor the 300 additional hours for an SACD burn-in on this player suggested by the folks at Marantz. If I listened to my system for two hours a day, seven days a week, totalling only 14 hours, it would take me months to even approach either time period. And, I certainly don't write down how long I listen to anything, whether it be CD's, SACD's or even LP's.

...

The longest burn-in I've seemed to notice was 400-500 hours for my Panasonic digital A/V receiver. Yes, of course, it could be my imagination, after all it was impossible to directly compare before and after.

[hermanv]

The longest burn-in I've seemed to notice was 400-500 hours for my Panasonic digital A/V receiver. Yes, of course, it could be my imagination, after all it was impossible to directly compare before and after.It's kind of amazing that the vehemence of the nay-sayers force us to tippy-toe around the topic in these discussions.

[jrhymeammo]

Since you did not ask me I was using the MicroPurl by Alpha Core and thought I needed more. The MP is 25 guage and I tried the Alpha Core Triode Quartz 2 which is a 21 guage cable. Much better with the SA 8001 with greater deffinition and dynamics.
Thank you for asking.
I'm currently using RiverAudio Digiflec Pro Gold. I'm slowing becoming a huge fan of their cables.

[emaidel]

Thank you for asking.
I'm currently using RiverAudio Digiflec Pro Gold. I'm slowing becoming a huge fan of their cables.

You made me curious about those cables, but I can't find them anywhere, even after a google search. Where can one find them, and what's their price?

[jrhymeammo]

http://www.rivercable.com/

They are not the cheapest cable around, but not expesive by Hi-Fi standards.