Head to head: Sony CDP-XB920E Vs CDP-XB920E modified
I wrote this review about five years ago. I'd never written a review before, so I thought why not? Anyway, hope you like it.
Head to head: Sony CDP-XB920E Vs CDP-XB920E modified
One of the major challenges CD player designers have to overcome is that of disc stability. Standard consumer grade mechanisms have a plastic clamp that engages once the disc has retracted into the player. Vibrations that occur once the disc is in motion (either from external sources or from the disc itself) are taken care of by the laser servo. The drawback being that the greater the servo has to work to track and focus the already moving laser head across the disc, the higher the resulting jitter and the poorer the sound quality. This problem is widely recognised and various manufacturers employ their own vibration reducing methods, the Teac VRDS (Vibration-Free Rigid Disc-Clamping System) being particularly successful and used by many audiophile equipment manufacturers.
Sony's unique answer to this problem, as first unveiled in their 1994 CDP-R10 was the "Fixed Pick-Up" mechanism, an arrangement where the optical reading laser is in a fixed position whereas the "vibration-resistant" spindle holding the spinning CD (held down by a metal 'puck') travels. There is no conventional 'tray', the user placing the CD directly on the mechanism, with the stabiliser or puck being placed on the CD, over the spindle (see picture). This well respected mechanism has held its own for many years and modified versions are still occasionally used by Sony in their showcase technology products, most notably during the unveiling of the new "Super Audio Compact Disc" standard.
Proprietry Fixed Pick-Up mechanism
One of the few mass market CD players to use Sony's proprietary fixed pick-up mechanism was the mid to late 1990's £300 CDP-XB920E. Featuring Sony's Current Pulse type DAC, with four Coefficient Digital Filters selectable through a panel mounted rotary dial, the XB920E is a sturdily built player which employs Sony's improved "frame and beam" chassis made of metal frames in different shapes and sizes to control vibrations. Capable of holding its own amongst much higher priced players, this UK tuned Sony enjoys an excellent reputation and is highly sought after.
The XB920E sounds clean, and well balanced. An excellent soundstage with great depth and height, is accompanied by a tight revealing bass, razor sharp, but not overpowering treble, and a clear well focused midrange. This can be a ruthlessly revealing player and does not pander to the whims of poor quality recordings. Although sounding best fed with high quality jazz, classical, or folk this player is equally at home with well recorded rock where the tight bass adds an underpinning of musical tempo that lesser players lack. However, when compared to more expensive players, its failings become clear. It isn't as revealing as it first appears, it lacks warmth and definition, has a slightly over-exuberant treble and generally clouds the music in a fine veil. These are minor points at this price level though, and on a sound per pound basis, this Sony remains excellent value for money.
This player had been in the family since new and given the high build quality, excellent proprietary mechanism, user-friendly interface, and revealing well balanced sound quality, it was decided to invest in a tweaked version to see if the sound could be improved upon. The £150 modifications centred around the analogue signal path and included replacing standard components with Sanyo Oscons, Nichicon Audio Gold and Silver MICA, 1% Polystyrene & ELNA Silmic capacitors. 1% low PPM & 0.1% precision resistors were employed throughout in critical circuits. Extra damping was added to the mechanism and Carbon fibre matting was glued to the lid in order to damp down any remaining resonances.
..
modified circuit board detail . . . . . standard circuit board detail
XB920E modified & standard lids side by side
Some very sceptical ears sat down to the listening session. Would the listeners be able to hear any difference? If so, would it be for the better or worse? We liked the sound of our XB920E, we knew it inside out. We didn't want to loose it. Surely changing a few circuit board components wouldn't make much difference? The unmodified XB920E already sounded superior to the previous reference, a £1000 1988 Marantz CD85 with the legendary CDM1Mk2 laser mechanism and TDA1541 Crown DAC which, surprisingly, sounded veiled and muddled in comparison. It must be pointed out though that system synergy is very important (as was found out later in this review) and in other systems the CD85 might sound more convincing than the XB920E.
From the very start of the session, even from the very first bar played, the difference in sound quality of these two Sonys was obvious. And it wasn't a subtle difference. The Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions Ambisonic CD is one of the most pure and well recorded albums we have ever heard. The unmodified player reproduces the sound in sufficient detail and space for the listener to imagine being there. Yet through the modified Sony, we didn't have to imagine anything. The clarity of the individual instruments gave the music a new lease of life, appearing tighter and coming across with more authority than previously heard. Harmonics were even more clearly audible, the timbre of each instrument more realistic than before. Yet even though it was easier to pick out individual instruments at will, the music still gelled together into a cohesive whole. The modified player extended the already excellent soundstage to such a degree that the sound almost achieved an extra dimension. The standard player now appeared amateurish and closed in by comparison. The already tight bass became even tighter and more controlled. The midrange appeared cleaner while the treble lost some of it's artificiality.
Turning to Sir John Geilguds narration of Peter and the Wolf, the most striking audible difference between the players was in Sir Johns voice itself. His warm familiar tones lost a hoarseness that had apparently infected the standard player. Other discs followed and it was obvious that the modified player had stripped back a veil that the standard player had thrown over the music. All aspects of the sound were improved, especially the dynamics which now appeared faster and under stricter control, the bass, which became tighter and more authoritative, and the soundstage, which increased in both depth and width.
In order to explore the bass reproduction of the modified player, TDL transmission line loudspeakers were drafted in from our secondary system to replace the reference B&W's. This turned out to be a total disaster. An already known but acceptable treble mismatch between the standard XB920E and the TDLs became unbearable, the modified player adding an extra dose of tizzy sibilance that the standard player had kept under control. TDL's are well known to sound over bright if mismatched, yet the increase in mismatch when compared to the standard player was unexpected. This points to a possible failing in the treble of the XB920E, probably due to the DAC.
Comparison with a reference audiophile CD player, the $3,495 Audio Research CD2, yielded interesting results. Admittedly, the CD2 sounded better overall than the modified Sony, however the Sony did not disgrace itself in such esteemed company. Often described as the "Switzerland of CD players" the CD2 is well known for it's low level resolution and absolute clarity and neutrality, yet the modified Sony managed to demonstrate a tighter control of bass frequencies.
In conclusion, the standard Sony XB920E is a fine, balanced sounding player that when partnered with the right speakers can give any budget conscious audiophile an analytical insight into high quality recorded music. The £150 modifications to the analogue output stage increase and expand on the standard players strengths, elevating the XB920E to true audiophile standards of definition and clarity that would be hard to beat this side of £1000.
Thanks to Dave Payne for the XB920E modifications, and without whom this review would have been impossible.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Alex_UK
