Hey Trelja........

Bryn Mawr Stereo is Tweeter Etc. under a different nameplate. Same corporate parent, same products for sale.
A lot of their salespeople are clueless IMHO.

Quite correct Sugarbrie. In fact, they will be officially changing their name in the Philadelphia area to Tweeter this spring. They drill it into your head in these horrendously irritating radio commercials("the wise guys, with wise buys..."). Along with their "assertions" of how great Bose speakers are. The fact that they advertise SO heavily, on so many area radio stations should answer the questions of anyone wondering about the place.

Tralja,I kept a parasound CDP 1000 over the cambridge CD6.I was not impressed with the CD6.If you get a chance to try a CDP 1000 give it a try.Its a real sleeper.I had no problems with mine though I have heard the Transports can be sticky at times the D/A is far better than the $ it sold for would suggest.Parrasound missed their price point on this player.Its a good as any up to 1k player i have heard.

Thanks for filling in the gaps. While i haven't listened to all of those that you did comparisons with, i can agree with the basic statements that you made about the MF gear. It is very clean, clear, detailed, etc.... but just doesn't have any "body" or "warmth" to it. If it was slightly fuller sounding and had a little more "soul", i would LOVE it. As to the NAD cd players, i too agree that they are not the most revealing, etc... but my experience is that they were "quite" smooth and that's what made them "better" than many other "cheapies". Instead of giving you inexpensive "digital hash", they gave you something that had "rounded edges" and sounded relatively warm and in-offensive. Nothing to rave about in terms of absolute performance but something that i would rather live with instead of the typical "abrasiveness" that many other players seem to deliver. In other words, the NAD CD players have the same basic "sonic signature" that the rest of their line offers. As to the Sony SCD-1, my experience is pretty limited. Nonetheless, it was demo'd in a system that probably sold for appr. $100,000 and i was NOT impressed. I thought that the Electrocompaniet blew it out of the water when tested within the same system. Once again, these are all personal opinions and even these might change given different systems and circumstances. Sean
>

I had the Parasound 1000 before acquiring the Cambridge about the same time as Trelja. The Parasound was nice but VERY rolled off in terms of resolution of inner detail and imaging. Some would say that lended an analog-like quality to the Parasound but directly comparing CD to vinyl versions of recordings shows that much detail is missing from the CD without the warmth and imaging of the vinyl. The Cambridge, OTOH, gives you all of the spatial cues of the venue, the "air" between the instruments, and for the most part, the correct timbre and overtones of them;for example, trumpets have "bite" and can be discerned from cornets and a wooden flute can be told from metal. It is also enjoyable to listen to, allowing you to forget all those components of recorded sound and simply participate as listener which is what the high end is all about.It is better at that than the AR Complete and the best NAD which I auditioned against. You're missing a great deal of the music, Sean.