Odd Ebay Occurrence

[bluecrab]

For years, now, I have wanted to get my hands on a Sony MDS-JA333ES MD deck. They are hard to find in any event and even moreso in the U.S. Nevertheless, I have had it on my Ebay watch list for years. Quite a few years. Once in a while I'd get a hit, but it would usually be for a manual, brochure, or ad. The real item proved as elusive as I thought it would be. I think one actual 333 deck did show up on Ebay a couple of years ago, but the seller wanted 1200 or 1300 USD for it - and he got it.

I left it on my Watch List anyway and not long ago, one of the units came up, and with a reasonable B-I-N price, certainly far less than 1200 USD. I bit. I now have the unit. Haven't checked it out completely, but it at least plays. It looks like a distant relative - in a good way - of any other MD deck I have or have had. It's very large and weighs a lot. And it sounds better than I could have imagined. So...so far, all is well.

Now here's the weird part. After all these years, only days after I grab my 333, another one pops up on Ebay! Is that crazy or what? What, did someone dump a few of these rare units?

Here's link to to the 333 page on minidisc.org: http://www.minidisc.org/part_Sony_MDS-JA333ES.html

The pic hardly does it justice. I still am gawking at the thing. I hope, of course, that it holds up for a while, but just being in its presence is a near-spiritual experience. If I could, I would have an all-ES system to go along with this monster, just for the sheer visual impact. Anyway, this weekend I will test the unit more thoroughly, see if it records and so forth. Havin' fun, anyway!

[md user]

For years, now, I have wanted to get my hands on a Sony MDS-JA333ES MD deck. .... Anyway, this weekend I will test the unit more thoroughly, see if it records and so forth. Havin' fun, anyway!

Look forward to reading about your impressions! Especially as you already have some nice decks/players &c.!

Regards,

mdmad.

BTW - I reckon models come in groups because people see what one fetches on ebay and then decide to sell theirs as well ... reasonable guess? e.g. I was looking for a particular md portable, about 5 came up over one month - since then I haven't seen ANY for 4 months! OK, otherwise it must be just pure statistical chance ...

[bluecrab]

Look forward to reading about your impressions! Especially as you already have some nice decks/players &c.!

Regards,

mdmad.

BTW - I reckon models come in groups because people see what one fetches on ebay and then decide to sell theirs as well ... reasonable guess? e.g. I was looking for a particular md portable, about 5 came up over one month - since then I haven't seen ANY for 4 months! OK, otherwise it must be just pure statistical chance ...

I like your thinking about the models appearing in groups, mdmad. The JA333ES that went on Ebay just after the one I bought sold for a few more USDs than I paid, but not significantly more. In fact, I have seen lesser models go for more money!

I wasted little time trying the 333. The front-panel configuration on the unit is somewhat different from the JB line, and much different from the JEs. There's just a lot more there, including not just separate D/A level knobs - some other decks have that, too - but also a separate AMS/Function knob. There's also a 4-setting "filter," which seems to be a kind of EQ that acts digitally on the analog output.

First thing I did was play some MDs, of course. These sounded different - better - to me than when played on the 940 I intended to replace with the 333. In fact, after some thought it seemed to me that I should put the 333 not in the basement system that I listen to while working out or while on my treadmill, but in the better system upstairs. Problem was, the rack on the better system was completely full. Nonetheless, I did the old "gear shuffle" and made space for it. Now when I played an MD on it, it sounded spectacular. Great, happy with that. Time to record via optical in.

The 333 has two optical ins, and I set it for OPT1, via an SCMS-killer, with the source being the CD section of my MXD-D400. Plainly the 333 was getting the signal, but it would not actually record. I began to fret. When the disc wouldn't eject from the 333 and when none of the controls would work, I really began to fret! The 333 would not even power off. I pulled the plug and powered back up in Check/Service mode. That re-init'ed the unit and got the disc to eject. I went through this procedure several times with the same result and started to put together a list of problems to email to the seller.

Then for the heck of it, I tried to record via the OPT2 input and that worked fine. Did it again. Still fine. Went back to OPT1 and that too, now was working. It all seemed very strange. Tried recording again the following day with no problem. All very odd, IMO and I will be watching it. I am not that concerned with recording via analog, although I may give the coax in a try.

The unit is heavy and big, much bigger than the 940 (depth). And the sound is the best I've yet heard from MD, although I may want to compare MXD-D400 Type S LP2 with the 333's Type R LP2. Despite the 333's having only Type R, it does a fine job playing LP2. Perhaps the "filters" help? Right now, I am just hoping it keeps working as it should. If anything interesting about the 333 turns up, I will report on it.

Best,

bluecrab

[Azureal]

bluecrab,

That is one sweet machine, the 333ES, I tried to snatch it early this morning but was only willing to go to $250 and got beat out with 6 seconds left ... Oh well, I mostly use SP and my 20ES does a pretty darned good job of that. I was amazed at how low it went for, amazing ...

[sfbp]

Sorry if am guilty of sounding like a broken record, but have you tried the optical output of the 333ES and comparing with optical output of something more lowly?

I, as you know, possess an MDS-JE640 and an MXD-D400 both of which do MDLP. I am listening to an opera recorded this morning at LP2 on the (earlier, ?cheaper) 640, using the 640's optical out to my receiver.

I took a look at the schematic, the optical out of the 640 goes absolutely STRAIGHT to the Toslink connector (give or take 1 component it needs to generate the right signal). I don't have a schematic of the D400 but if there is any possibility that it does Type-S conversion on the signal before sending to optical, then my choice would NOW be the 640. It may be my imagination but the 640 actually seems to sound better with A/B comparison. For analog out it was most definitely the pits on LP2.

Before I had an amp with opti-in then the Type-S on the D400 was definitely worth having. Now I'm not so sure. (of course that deck is terrific for the ability to copy CD to MDSP but that's another whole issue).

I guess you don't have a recent receiver because I think I mentioned this before (my apologies again) and I suspect you woulda jumped on it....

Stephen

[bluecrab]

Sorry if am guilty of sounding like a broken record, but have you tried the optical output of the 333ES and comparing with optical output of something more lowly?

I, as you know, possess an MDS-JE640 and an MXD-D400 both of which do MDLP. I am listening to an opera recorded this morning at LP2 on the (earlier, ?cheaper) 640, using the 640's optical out to my receiver.

I took a look at the schematic, the optical out of the 640 goes absolutely STRAIGHT to the Toslink connector (give or take 1 component it needs to generate the right signal). I don't have a schematic of the D400 but if there is any possibility that it does Type-S conversion on the signal before sending to optical, then my choice would NOW be the 640. It may be my imagination but the 640 actually seems to sound better with A/B comparison. For analog out it was most definitely the pits on LP2.

Before I had an amp with opti-in then the Type-S on the D400 was definitely worth having. Now I'm not so sure. (of course that deck is terrific for the ability to copy CD to MDSP but that's another whole issue).

I guess you don't have a recent receiver because I think I mentioned this before (my apologies again) and I suspect you woulda jumped on it....

Stephen

I think you are saying, Stephen, is that the Type S on the D400 doesn't sound so great when going through analog out. Do I have that right? It really doesn't matter to me right now, because the 333 sounds better in any mode, anyway. My NAD C372 integrated amp is not the latest model, but it is fairly recent - I think c.2006 - although it doesn't have digital input. I'm simply going by my aural impressions, and those impressions favor the 333 right now. Let's just say that for now, the main use of the D400 will be to copy, which as you note, it does so well, even at 4x CD>LP2.

The 333 represents my first foray into Sony's MD ES-line decks, but it may not be my last. I had no idea. I just wish I'd gone there sooner.

Bruce

[sfbp]

I think you are saying, Stephen, is that the Type S on the D400 doesn't sound so great when going through analog out. Do I have that right? It really doesn't matter to me right now, because the 333 sounds better in any mode, anyway. My NAD C372 integrated amp is not the latest model, but it is fairly recent - I think c.2006 - although it doesn't have digital input. I'm simply going by my aural impressions, and those impressions favor the 333 right now. Let's just say that for now, the main use of the D400 will be to copy, which as you note, it does so well, even at 4x CD>LP2.

The 333 represents my first foray into Sony's MD ES-line decks, but it may not be my last. I had no idea. I just wish I'd gone there sooner.

Bruce

Actually no, I am saying that the Type-S affects the ANALOG output in a very positive way. But that if you go digital you may not care. I think there is an effect on the soundstage when I go out optical, but I actually prefer the 640 based on a short test I just did.

Similarly I am wondering if you may not even see the difference with the ES series if you spend some money on an amp with optical inputs.

[bluecrab]

Actually no, I am saying that the Type-S affects the ANALOG output in a very positive way. But that if you go digital you may not care. I think there is an effect on the soundstage when I go out optical, but I actually prefer the 640 based on a short test I just did.

Similarly I am wondering if you may not even see the difference with the ES series if you spend some money on an amp with optical inputs.

Yeah, maybe. But then what reason would I have to accumulate more MD decks! ;-)

Whatever, I think Type S is amazing no matter how you play it. What a feat of engineering!

The difference between my old MZ-R500 portable and my newer Type-S MZ-N430D makes the more difficult-to-use 430 worth the annoyance.

[md user]

Sorry to be ignoramus ... but what ACTUALLY is Type S? [Yes, I know its application to improve LP on Sony's]

Is it an EQ profile?

Just wondered.

mdmad.

[bluecrab]

Sorry to be ignoramus ... but what ACTUALLY is Type S? [Yes, I know its application to improve LP on Sony's]

Is it an EQ profile?

Just wondered.

mdmad.

Completely legitimate question. Type S is simply a kind of DSP.

Here's a little info:

http://www.minidisc.org/part_Sony_MDS-JB980.html

And good ol' Wiki has a nice page on ATRAC that includes some type S stuff:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Transform_Acoustic_Coding

More still...

http://en.allexperts.com/e/a/at/atrac.htm

You can always poke around on the web, where you will find about as much DSP arcana as you could hope to see.

Or maybe someone else right here can explain it better, for all our benefit.

[Arr-Nine-Hundred]

Summary of differences between Type-R and Type-S: http://opticalgarbage.com/minidisc/type-sr.html