Marantz CD63 & CD67 mods list

CD63 has unregulated servo driver op-amps (not good, for one thing the +-10V rails are polluted and that same +10V rail feeds the main 7805 that feeds about 15-20 pins! CD67 has a dedicated reg for the servo, +5V only. The other thing is the separate servo and decoder on the 43/53/63. This means one can re-clock the servo separately in the CD63, which if all done properly leads to better sound than a cd67 can ultimately achieve all else being equal. The CD67's combined chip means when you re-clock the DAC the servo also gets a small upgrade, making the CD67 the better choice for a light level of mods. IMHO. There are other small improvements and/or cost-savings in the CD67 but I think those are the main things.
 
Hi Ricardo, my turntable is about as basic as you can get. It's a Pro-Ject Debut II with the default Ortofon OM-5E cartridge. The phono stage uses the same LM4562HA op-amp as my CD player and is similarly decked out with all Black Gate and silver mica caps. Signal from both sources is coupled with a pair of Mundorf Silver/Oils.
 
They're good entry level players. Very simple, which is a good thing considering the price point, as most of the money is in the cartridge. It does suffer a bit from this, however. It could definitely benefit from a heavier plinth, platter and better feet. It's extremely sensitive to vibration. It'll sound great provided that your floor is solid and you keep it on a rack or a seriously heavy table. If you don't support it properly, you'll get feedback, skipping, speaker cones moving violently if you dare walk about in the same room. You can get glossy acrylic platters for them and things to improve this, but unless you're like me and yours was a gift from your other half, you'll probably choose to replace it for something more serious in the long run.
 
Hi Simon,

This comparison is something I'm very interested in. I have several of my favourite records in both formats and frequently compare them. 'Archandroid' by Janelle Monae and 'In Rainbows' by Radiohead are good examples. I also sometimes subject my very long suffering wife and friends to blind A/B listening tests.

A lot depends on the quality of the record, but with a good recording the answer is no. On balance, if I listen to the music and not the equipment, I find that the turntable completely destroys the CDP. Sure it's not as detailed and has worse dynamic range, stereo separation, distortion, etc., but when the chips are down it's just more musical. This should not offend anyone here because my player is largely stock. I have not yet regulated or re-clocked anything. Black Gates and fast op-amps are nice but they haven't made my player sound analogue.

Edit: I should say, they used to sound a lot more similar. The HDAMs and FK blocking caps made the sound warm and fuzzy and covered much of the CD's advantages as well as it's flaws so you couldn't so easily pick one from the other. I think with recent changes it's moving in the right direction, but I am revealing more that needs fixing... you know the drill.

Cheers,

Ben
 
Last edited:
That's interesting, but it's not very surprising. The stock cd63se/ki is quite fuzzy with a soupy bass, and that is more or less what cheap vinyl seems to sound like, at least technically. Listening to the music and allowing it to envelop you and disregarding technical/objective parameters is different and I see why you'd prefer the TT. Vinyl is less likely to make your ears shut with bad HF. More likely there just isn't very much HF to begin with and that top end never seems to grate like CDs can so readily. But it also sounds very coherent I've noticed, even on cheap decks.
 
Member
Joined 2006
Paid Member
Hi Simon... you touched the correct note.... TT tend to sound very coherent.

There is a very important link in the analog chain (the head preamp with riaa eq). It is here that I got major benefits. You should try the Simplistic.... maybe I can help :)

Hi Ben
You might like to try a Denon DL160 instead of the Ortofon MM. It is inexpensive but can surely sing if used with a good Riaa preamp.
 
Member
Joined 2006
Paid Member
CD63 has unregulated servo driver op-amps (not good, for one thing the +-10V rails are polluted and that same +10V rail feeds the main 7805 that feeds about 15-20 pins! CD67 has a dedicated reg for the servo, +5V only. The other thing is the separate servo and decoder on the 43/53/63. This means one can re-clock the servo separately in the CD63, which if all done properly leads to better sound than a cd67 can ultimately achieve all else being equal. The CD67's combined chip means when you re-clock the DAC the servo also gets a small upgrade, making the CD67 the better choice for a light level of mods. IMHO. There are other small improvements and/or cost-savings in the CD67 but I think those are the main things.

Thank you ... that makes it clear.

I am starting again with a stock CD53 and will surely regulate the drivers.
 
Hi,

I've currently got Blackgate ACs on the DOS output in my 67.

With a budget of £20 is there any point replacing these and, if so, with what?

Regards

Pete

Hi Pete,

It's better not to use a cap that's suited for AC purposes, like speaker cross-over caps. The BG AC's are optimized for large current and are not the best choice for low-level applications.

There's a constant DC-voltage across the output cap, so any polarized cap can be used. I have very good experiences with BG N types, but a standard or FK also performs very well (if you can get them...). Then there's Elna Cerafine or Silmic, or Nichicon Muse, but I think the BG's sound better. The best upgrade is to get some MKP foil caps, like Auricap, Mundorf, Obbligato or ClarityCap. You should be able to get a pair of a few uF for £20. Go for low voltage and the bigger the better :)

Regards,

Ray
 
Hi,

Sorry to jump in off topic but is there a clock that can be built for the 63se that I don't need an oscilloscope to check the output waveform ? I have done many mod's to my machine, some taken from this thread and others of my own but have stopped at the re-clock as I believed that I would need a 'scope and don't want to waste my time etc. Thanks
 
Hi,

You could consider building a Flea. It uses a Tentlabs oscillator (or other third-party oscillator can) that won't need checking with a scope. As long as you make sure the correct supply-voltage is there, the oscillator will do it's work. You can check that simply with a DMM :)

Regards,

Ray

Cheers Ray,

The Flea ? Is that the one that uses the four-legged oscillator ? Yeah I was looking at that on your site. Can I make a clock that uses the original oscillator that is in the 63 though ? Just for now, until I can get the Flea.

I have read of circuits using C/R or L/C/R components but I would be unsure as to their stability over time and even if they were worth doing at all.

Thanks

Gareth
 
Yep, that's the one.

If you want to build something with the original crystal you could consider the CD-clock. It's a fairly simple J-FET oscillator that works quite well.

The long-term stability is less important by the way, it's o.k. if the clock doesn't give exactly 16.9344MHz (within limits of course). It's the short-term stability that matters: the signal should have low jitter.

Ray
 
Last edited: