So long as they get around to releasing the Moody Blues on SACD before closing shop:-) |
No, The Dead have yet to be remastered on SACD. It's the best redbook I can afford from here on out.... |
well you kjust wasted a ton of money and if you want to ad to your SACD let me know i have about 12 you can have they stink |
Tbg yes it was :-)
I actually don't think it's anything to do with,it's an outlook, a philosophy even.
There is more to current music than the chart stuff-indeed I spend as much time discovering music from all era's as well as keeping an eye on the current trends. |
Ben, it is old age. It is anti-rap and girl singers who cannot sing. I don't like bebop either so I guess I lose some others also. It was rather gratuitous wasn't it. |
Tbg-interesting post until you made this statement... "I have more cds, sacds, hdcds, and LPs than I could ever listen to in the remainder of my life and given the quality of new pop music, I care little whether it is ever available in hi-res."
It surprises me how somehow so switched on and open could make such a close minded and imho inaccurate statement. |
I have always thought that way too much is made of the decline of high end, of vinyl, and now of sacd and dvda. Technology is now more advanced and people have many ways to spend their entertainment dollars. I would grant that there were quality kits available in the past from Heath and Dyna as well as American manufactured equipment, such as Marantz and Fisher, but it was not cheaper than today if you adjust for inflation. And then as today the young with less money built the kits while the old bought councils with record changers and tuners.
There is no question that parts quality is much superior today and that the circuits being built today rest in the main on those that were conceived in the 20s and 30s. My sound reproduction today far surpasses anything that I could have achieved in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. I am very happy about this.
Similarly, sacds may be dying as vinyl was supposed to be dying, but I am spending more each year on newly available sacds. I have more cds, sacds, hdcds, and LPs than I could ever listen to in the remainder of my life and given the quality of new pop music, I care little whether it is ever available in hi-res.
Vinyl is another example. I have nearly doubled the size of my record collection in these last several years. Fortunately I only half believed those who said in the 70s that vinyl was dead. I almost considered selling all of my 4000 records but did not. Now I am hearing LPs reproducted unlike anything that was available in the 60s and 70s.
I do remember when the record companies ruined LPs by recording them on crapy solid state gear and pressing them on inferior, reprocessed vinyl. No one can ever say that those making decisions for recording companies have a clue about good recording. The advent of the MBA degree has also resulted in a greater focus on the bottom line to the exclusion of everything else. Book publishers haven't a clue about what is a good book, movie companies on a great movie, television networks on a great news show, universities on what is a good education, wine companies on a great wine, etc. MBAs make all decisions. There are a few people across all of these, who do their best to provide what is great. Fine them and enjoy. It can be done. |
Based on the comments from Bigtee and Eldartford, it makes me wonder if the current state of [b]commercial[/b] high-end is just a generational anomaly? It seems that high-end may be retreating its [b]DIY roots[/b]. Which isn't really a bad thing. I can't afford to go to a B&M store and plunk down $4k or more on a component. I value competent designs, good sonic performance, good value, and good reliability.
SACD is likely still born unless you are looking for analog replacements with unamplified acoustic music (Read: Classical, Jazz, and Folk/Ethnic). Or reissues of rock/pop past recordings targeted to "baby boomers" as analog replacements. SACD has always been dead as far as new electronic music recordings are concerned.
Except for new classical recordings, the future or current and new recordings will likely hold new 1. redbook, 2. mp3 (and/or DVD or its replacement), and (in some cases) 3. vinyl LP. It's a shame, since I would purchase ALL of my digital on SACD (single player or hybrid, doesn't matter) if I could. But I can't. Grrr.
What really gets me is when "they" overprocess a redbook CD and sqash the life/purity/dynamics out of it. That's very sad. something is wrong people when 320kbps (equivalent) mp3, 16/44.1 redbook CD, and a (compressed) Dolby Digital 5.1 recording all sound the same. In lots of cases we aren't getting the full resolution capabilities of 16/44.1!! It's more like a mp3 "upsampled" to redbook. So sad. |
Bigtee...Yep. I also am "sentimental to those great years of audio" when I, as a college student could afford a SOTA system. The equipment was often built, not in someone's garage, but on our own kitchen tables. |
Still deader than disco,not referring to quality,just everything else associated,software,hardware,marketing[read price]and especially availability.Anyone deep into music needs 10,000 to crop 100.Thats 1 out of 100,thats me at the store,YMMV,Bob |
Tbg, I totally agree with your video and computer driven assesment, especially video(the more direct effect on audio at this time.) Here again, everyone wants that convinence of an all-in-one system.
I have talked to local dealers and without the video side and all that, they would be dead as a business.
You know, 2-ch was really developed in small garages and small niche businesses. It was about the product then. Maybe as this segment retreats, we can go back to the true designers who are in it for the sound and get away from this integration crap. It is depressing to me. I'm old school with those old school values. I guess I'm just sentimental to those great years of audio. |
Jayctoy-I'm not anti-SACD-I have a SACD player,the Sony NS900V.My music reviews site also has a SACD section.
You are right I haven't heard a great SACD machine in detail.My Sony which cost $900 new did get decent reviews.There are plenty on here who agree with my sonic experience of SACD.I did hear the Linn Unidisk-on a quick listen I wasn't that impressed.
Anybody making this arguement seems to forget the damage mediocre players and bad pressings have done to the format amongst those interested in audio reproduction.
I have said it before if I could afford the Emm Labs/Meitner stuff I'd be in there.
I am perhaps different in that your 100 SACD collection I would probably buy that in a 8-10 month period-of all the records I enjoyed last year ONE was released on SACD.
That's what kills me.
I enjoyed my debates with Rsbeck but without being arrogant my stance that SACD would only survive as an Audiophile niche product is looking more and more likely. |
yes, I guess that is just the pace of technology today. The new Sony Playstation which will also play music, but only off a limited capacity chip is now a threat to the iPod. I expect cds will be with us for a long time, but that the blu-ray will also last for only 5-6 years once it is here.
Nevertheless, I continue to enjoy my many new sacds. |
Dead as a doornail, practically/unfortunately. Thanks to Sony, et. al. (yeah, they had lots of help) it's almost all over but the shouting. They just haven't announced the time of the wake...
The first thing to remember is that it's a business - it's not really about the sound, it's all about selling units to consumers. The business plan and execution never made great sense, but the Sony name (along w/ some others) carried things pretty far, considering how much money was or wasn't changing hands. And with the relatively tiny numbers for SACD (and DVD-A) the only real hope is that a niche market survives. That will cater to the relatively few enthusiasts, but it will likely never reach the mass market numbers needed to make a real lasting go of it.
Like the comments earlier, it's the convenience that's #1. CDs went so far & fast because of the convenience - the fact that the sound was better than cassettes was an added bonus. And that's the bigger hint of why SACD is dead - you simply can't use 'em in your car. You can't play pure SACDs or the hi-rez level on hybrids, and anyway why would you want to (if you can't hear the difference at 60mph and your Yugo doesn't have 5-channel surround)? MP3 quality (no oxymoron jokes here, please) doesn't matter at 60mph, it's perceived as convenient, and so 99%+ of the population prefers MP3s to SACD. Add in the licensing greed/insanity, and you had a recipe for almost guaranteed demise.
The hottest consumer item around is the iPod (and similar MP3 players). Adequate quality for the 99% (that kinda defines a mass market ;~) in a convenient package, w/ great marketing - and everyone wants one. Can you buy a portable SACD player? A SACD burner? SACD iPod? Sorry, but SACDs (and their megabuck players) will be fading away as the unfortunate but logical outcome of a lot of lousy business decisions. |
Bigtee, I agree. But I think video and the computer industry are what is driving everything. If there is improved sound with the blu-ray or hdvd, it will be entirely incidental. Both always need more storage capacity. I also think we will not regress to MP3 but only to cds, and given the vast improvement in the last several years in redbook reproduction, this is not too bad. |
I don't think these formats wars really have anything to do with sound. If you look at the general buying public, do they care about a hi-rez format? No, they care about convinence. When the 8-track came out, it was convinence. Then the cassette tape-convinence over reel to reel and records.
Now look at CD (the perfect sound forever) and it was the convinence of the format that drove it to what it is. (We could also say the same about VHS to DVD.)
How many people in this country participate in this little hobby of audio? How many people country wide have equipment that will let them know the difference?
When SCAD came out, it did not offer any convinence over what was already available. Look at this post at the number of people who say they can't hear a difference (which is mind boggling to me personally.)
This relegates SACD to a niche product for us anal rententive audiophiles. Will it continue to die, probably if manufacturers are basing its success on sales. Maybe it will go as the record, there will be limited production.
I don't think DVD-A will be any more successful for the same reasons. How much is this smallest segment of the population (audiophiles) worth to big business?
I think we should be worried if 2-ch will survive myself! |
Never bought a SACD player, DVD-A player, nor any software in either format. Never will. Like Plinko, I'm happy with my Njoe Tjoeb. I'll trade my BetaMax for your redbook CD's. Wanna? Wanna? Please... |
Jayctoy, I don't have experience with more expensive players but I have a Pioneer 563. It is hard to tell a difference between this player and my Njoe Tjoeb. |
I noticed the Bill Evans sacds must no longer be in production. They are approx $28 on Amazon. I can not find them anywhere in the brick and mortar stores, most importantly, my local cd/record shop that always has everything. |
I ran out to Best Buy today, and picked up about 15 SACD's at dirt cheap prices. Both the SACD and DVD-A sections seem to be on closeout.
Soundwise, SACD is much easier to listen to than redbook on my rig. Although the meitner is very very good on redbook, SACD, when mastered correctly, to my ears, is on a different level. |
Ben, the sonic difference of SACD converted me long
time ago to SACD,I even spend close to 2k, to mod
my SonyDVP9000es,I just read your arguments between
Rsbeck, that was two years ago,I totally agree with
Him,obviously up to now, you have not heard a good
SACD player,I want you to read the thread of AVguru
Is there any CDP Significantly Better than The DV50.
Are you Anti SACD? If you are, I respect that.But
you cannot convince me that SACD is not better than
Redbook.Try to listen to Mark Levinson DSD, SACD cd. If
you still cant hear the difference,you need an EENT.
I have collection of 100SACD, thats more than enough
for me.Go to Music Direct store, and you will see
How much SACD they have on their cd rack.
Lastly I own the NJOE Tjoeb with upsampler, very
musical player, but no match with my Sony9000es SACD
mod.It takes 3 days before I can go back and listen
to my AH, after listening to the Sony.Listening to
SACD, its like listening to vynil.
If ever you come to Chicago, you are more than welcome
to stop by my house to listen, I will pay the taxi, or
pick you up. |
prompted by this thread and an email exchange with one of the site members who began doing mods to the samsung/toshiba machines i have purchased the toshiba for a paltry $80 from amazon.
having lived without a CD player for many a moon now, happily subsisting on vinyl and the local FM airwaves, i now see a reason to re-embrace the technology on a sensible level :-) i've always loved how my one and only DSD recording, tony williams "young at heart" sounds on redbook players, and it's worth the price of admission to hear this one and only disc as it was meant to be heard (post-mods of course). my thanks to the individual who initiated this thread. |
Trelja: I look forward to your upcoming review of this player in both unmodded and modded form. |
Thank you for the kind words, Pardales.
This has become a pretty heated thread, and while I often enjoy those, this one doesn't need to be.
In the "put your money where your mouth is", I just returned from Best Buy with one of the $99 Samsung HD841 players which Sean described above as a closeout. I have been thinking about it for a few weeks now, since the thread was active regarding how the modded Toshiba 4960 ($700 for player and mods) equalled the $11K Linn Unidisk. I saw one last week in Tweeter, and was quite impressed with the look and build. While I have seen them on ebay in the $89 - $130 area, Sean's news put me over the top. The 30 day return policy appealed to me should the unit be defective.
I am going to give it a listen, break it in, and then compare it to my Granite 657 CD player. At some point, I will be shipping it out to a modder for the royal treatment. At that point, look for me to initiate a thread here on Audiogon on how the machine compares to what I consider a top drawer audiophile CD player.
Again, I like the flexibility of being able to run CD, DVD-A, SACD, DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, MP3, ABC, 123, whatever in the machine. Hopefully, after this plays out, I can sit back and enjoy the music until if/when whatever the whiz bang thing downloaded, hard disk, BluRay, whoever takes serious root as something better. |
SACD?
No thanks.I got burned once with the Laserdisks.Bought the top Pioneer Elite player and too many titles back in 1989-1990.Haven't used it much and the format is long gone now.
I see the same with the SACD,DVD-A.
Best
George |
Trelja: I think you have communicated a vey sensible perspective on this. |
If you picked up 50 SACDs that you loved, would it not be worth it considering Sean's post that the very highly regarded Samsung HD841 is now selling at BestBuy for $99? Theoretically, you could have these 50 discs to listen to for 10 or 20 years. That's more than enough reason for me to invest in things.
Interestingly enough, there was a recent post here where the Toshiba 4960 (as Sean pointed out, same player as the Samsung - different cosmetics/badge) modded by Reference Audio Mods with a total investment of $700 equalled the $11K Linn Unidisk. A good sounding universal player will allow one to throw just about any silver disc into it and sit back and enjoy. Does it make ANY sense whatsoever for an audiophile running digital who can't lay down for a DCS rig NOT to go this route?!?
Long term, the future will probably not be on disk, but are many of us going to throw away the music that we have collected and loved over the years if it provides us enjoyment? I think not. So, why worry that the sky is falling?
And, again, I see a lot of evidence of smaller labels embracing DSD/SACD. Just pick up any catalog from the audiophile oriented sellers. And, in the pro audio magazines that get sent to me in the mail, more and more studios are recording in DSD.
Just because Sony does their usual trick of walking away from something they poured millions upon millions of dollars into doesn't necessarily mean the format will die. Remember when the prevailing thought was that since smaller outfits couldn't produce CDs they would be out of business? Well, eventually we all got the capability of being able to burn CDs, and it became a boon to everyone. So long as these smaller labels are having audiophiles buy their SACDs, they will keep making them - not to mention expanding their catalogs. |
One of the best places to look for SACD's online is to visit
http://www.sa-cd.net/
Just scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will find links to
Top Recomendations
Top Sellers
Recent Additions
Upcoming titles
DSD Recordings
A regular visit to this site will keep you uptodate. |
I just visited Acoustic Sounds on line and they
had 918 SACD titles. Most of them in stock. |
I was looking for some newer "redbook" releases that just came out this week, nothing fancy. Sean
> |
Sean...Why did you look for discs in Best Buy? Go to acousticsounds.com, elusivediscs.com, or the other places that do carry a good selection. |
Went to Best Buy today to pick up a few discs. Not only did i buy a couple of discs, but also picked up a Samsung DVD-HD841 that was on close-out. These are "universal" machines that play SACD, DVD-A, DVD's, CD's, etc.. This is basically the same machine as the Toshiba SD-4960 with the addition of DVI outputs. As many of you know, these machines have gotten pretty decent reviews in stock form and are said to be a phenomenal bang for the buck with some basic mods performed to them. These are going for $99 in sealed box form. The store that i was at didn't have any "brand new" models, so i ended up picking up an open box model for $69 with full warranty and return privileges. Refurbs are available on Ebay for about $85 plus shipping on "Buy It Now".
After picking this unit up, i wandered over to the SACD / DVD-A section. That is, i went where the SACD / DVD-A section WAS located at. After recently expanding this section and adding many newer titles, they've now condensed both formats into one very small section and cut the amount of titles available drastically down. There were more SACD's than DVD-A's here, but that was always the case in the past too.
My guess is that they've received a tip neither format is doing well and as such, are cutting potential losses by reducing stock on both formats. With the introduction of the dual disc and yet another format i.e. "blue ray" technology around the corner, both SACD and DVD-A formats could pretty much become a format of the past overnight. Blue ray uses blue lasers, which enable one to DRASTICALLY increase the amount of information and / or resolution that a single CD / DVD sized disc could handle. In effect, there would be no need for "dual discs" ( as they are now ), because one could literally fit both sides of the disc onto one side of a "blue ray" disc AND have gobs of room to spare for even more "data".
As such, if one is a "fan" of SACD / DVD-A and wanted to buy specific discs on either of these formats, you might want to grab them while you can. This isn't to say that they won't be available on a newer format in the near future, and possibly even better quality, but that i don't see production going much further when there is no source to market these products within the mainstream. We all know that "audiophiles" are pretty much the only ones supporting these formats and even they aren't buying discs in the quantity expected. As such, continuing to produce discs for an ever shrinking market would seem to be a losing proposition for any company. On the other hand, vinyl is in much the same boat, but the small but growing market seems to be gaining some strength, making it a more viable marketing option. While 5% of the music market ( as sold on vinyl ) isn't much, it is still more than the sales of SACD and DVD-A combined. Sean
>
John Mayall & friends: Along For The Ride on SACD
|
Fatparrot...I don't think you need to worry about 16 bit masters. Recording and mixing has been done using at least 24 bits for as long as I remember...back to the digitally mastered LP times. |
It's not dead...yet, just terminally ill, along with DVD-A. The early adopters who bought into sacd will keep it on life support for a while, but I wouldn't hold out any hope of it becomming a niche market for audiophiles. Eventually there will be one hi rez format that will establish itself.
Unfortunately, the hi rez war between the two competing formats resulted in MAD (mutually assured destruction). Maybe blu-ray is the "ray of hope" for all of us looking to make the move to hi rez digital. |
Now everyone tells me that SACD is dead. I just recently purchased 41 SACDs to join my collection.
Oh no, wait a minute, I've been reading that for a couple of years now in here and in the Asylum.
You know what? For the little extra money that it costs over and above a standard CD, I have no issues putting that money into the software as that is where the music starts. At least in my system. |
There are two factors that also trouble me about SACD [besides the limited number of titles, and idiots who release titles as a single layer, with no redbook CD layer].
1) What type of master tapes are used for the SACD titles? If the masters are 16 bit, and not analog or DSD bitstream, then dude, you've got nothing more than an upsampling CD player. I don't believe that SACD's list their master tape source, but I may be wrong.
2) Does the manufacturer use a mediocre DAC for their redbook section? I have heard that many SACD players have a vastly inferior CD section when compared to a high end reference redbook only CD player. And most SACD owners will play far more redbook CD's than SACD's. |
Not dead, but not mainstream. It is morphing into a niche market for audiophiles only--just like vinyl. With universal machines proliferating, those who are willing to pay will get SACDs. Sadly, few people are willing to pay for sound quality, so we are going to see a lot more MP3's and even less SACDs. I like vinyl, but I really do prefer a well recorded SACD. Unfortunately the blinkin record companies, looking for the fast buck, don't often make an effort to make a decent SACD. A good example is Norah Jones 1st album, the SACD is awful. I just wish people would be willing to pay for fidelity. SAd thing is a lot of "audiophiles" won't pay extra. |
Cinematic Systems said:
"Since my two channel system easily surpasses yours Danlib, you may want to think about why I listen too 2 channel CD's in surround
PS: Don't bring a knife to a gunfight."
First of all, it's not Danlib- it's Danlib1.
Second- it's listen to- not listen TOO.
Third- Personal digs about another's music system are really not necessary. I could not care less how big your penis is- oops I mean how much your system surpasses mine. I stated my opinion in the post. That's all.
Fourth- "Knife to a gunfight"? Dude- what grade are you in? |
Cinematic, i gotta say i really enjoy yer posts. I think yer full of hot air, but it is always entertaining to see you put yer foot in yer mouth and try to find a way to smooth things over.
Keep posting! |
Anything Redbook can do, DVDA can do better. Because it's the same darned PCM format but with more bits and faster sampling. This is not to say that every DVDA is recorded and mastered well enough for the improvement to be evident. SACD comparison is a lot more difficult because the format is so very different. Theoretically, it should also be better. |
Having posted before you got back in Cinematic your claim of 70 CD's bought in the last three weeks contradicts most of your argument.
Now why didn't you buy 70 DVD-A's? |
Cinematic but what music are you actually buying?
Ooops none..you are too busy selling gear.
Take the recent DVD-A REM releases-have you ACTUALLY LISTENED to the stereo 24/96 mixes?The one I heard was worse than the CD version in the same sleeve-wake up and listen please before posting.
As for reality-well in the record shops I frequent everybody is walking out with CD's not DVD-A's.And where does downloading/compressed formats feature in your half-arsed view?DVD-A players are crushing iPod sales no doubt.
Knife to a gun fight?
I get up too early in the morning for you sonny.
:-)
Take it from me DVD-A's future is no brighter (actually less so)than SACD. |
Guys!
1. I know CD sounds great, my CD's sound awesome love them, bought about 70 CD's in the last three weeks.
2. When I say DVD-A what I mean is audio on a DVD, 2 channel, or multi-channel.
3. Danlib has an excellent system, F30 dollar for dollar one of the best full range speakers on the market. But my example was about considering the potential of surround if my two channel system surpasses his. If you can't imagine, then you must investigate.
4.I'm a dealer
5. Car Stereo's use DVD drives now soon all transports will be DVD compatible.
6. 24/96 established as the current bit/oversample rate.
7. Copy protection issues limiting DVD-A development and market proliferation, sad story of corporate greed.
8. DVD-A does not mean multichannel to me, it means 24/96 audio
9. Sup Pabelson, thank for the additional info
10. I need a girlfriend, cause I have too much time to post here.
Later guys. |
Cinematic, All several of us are suggesting is that newer units have made normal redbook much better and that we are sad to see sacd go, if indeed it goes. I suspect that universal players will be with us for many years even if sacd dwindles.
I don't think, "mine is bigger than yours" talk helps much, and I think you should get real and get accustomed to others not sharing your opinion. For example I have many dvdv on one side and dvdas on the other. Frequently I much prefer the dvdv side. And very frequently I prefer the cd version to the dvda version, probably because of the copy protection.
I cannot imagine any reason to have sound surround, and frankly cannot afford to have the quality in speakers, amps, and preamps in the additional channels even were I impressed with mc. |
Never died...was stillborn! Cinematic_systems, you might also have mentioned that you're a dealer, so your posts should be taken with a HUGE caveat...although you did give me a hearty laugh! |
If it isn't it should be.
What a total joke SACD is.
Sounds like CD's version of Dolby Noise Reduction.
Just a total joke and i owned 4 players with a range of 350.00 to 6000.00 and my Resolution Audio Opus 21 blows them all away'
Jordi |
Why am I always forced to explain the obvious!
What is a DVD? Its a CD that holds more. DO YOU OWN A COMPUTER?
CDrom or DVDrom?
And Danlib what kind of transport does your universal player have?
You guys are funny, try thinking a little about the world not your little world.
CD's will not need to coexist with DVD's much longer, as DVD transports will be the only available transport. So why stay at 16/44.1 with redbook's slightly flawed allocation of bits? Are you going to tell me now that 24/96 PCM 2 channel is going to be inferior to 16/44.1?
My name has nothing to do with my ability to discern sound and quality of systems. Nor does it reflect any limitation to my desire to have the best sound at my house.
Since my two channel system easily surpasses yours Danlib, you may want to think about why I listen too 2 channel CD's in surround
PS: Don't bring a knife to a gunfight. |
I've listened to highend SACD Players, High End DVD-Audio, and CD- all in my system. For Stereo listening, my Exemplar 2900 in CD mode is still preferred for most listening. Is SACD good? Yes. DVD-A? Sometimes good. Does DVD-A outperform CD? Not at my house.
For surround music- well, I believe surround is best left to movie soundtracks. I've NEVER heard music in surround that equalled- much less bettered- my stereo rig. That's why my Stereo is upstairs, and my Home Theater is downstairs.
Of course, Cinematic may disagree- but his moniker is Cinematic Systems, after all :)
|
Oh! and by the way, the improvement in the formats had nothing to do with expanding bits, but expanding channels. Also, improved mastering. Arguably the greatest contribution SACD has made is to give record companies a reason/excuse to remaster their earlier, sonically poor efforts. And those same remastering jobs are now starting to show up on Redbook CDs. See, for example, the Dylan releases. |
Cinematic Systems if you were actually switched onto music rather than gear you'd realise how silly your CD has had it's day theory.
Do you actually buy any music? |
