Is SACD winning over DVD-A?

So maybe to take this to another aspect... is SACD really worth it of 2 channel? I have 2 differnt systems 1 tube base 2 channel... the room will not allow for a proper multi channel. And another set up for HT with a very good 7.1 setup... This fall I will pick up a universal of some sort for the HT room. My problem is that my 2 channel CD player is acting up and driving me crazy. Do I just buy a good redback player or is SACD worth it. Note: I don't upgrade very often but when I do I buy good stuff and keep it for some time. I'm likely to spend 2-3K for a 2 ch player. I was blown away my the MF SACD that I listened to on a really good system. It is still unclear if It was great SACD player I was hearing or was it just a great system (~$50K). Regardless the MF piece is way beyond what I'm willing to spend. I don't really think it is the best out there but I'm currently trying to decided between the Shanling T100 and T200. I can get a demo T100 for $1500 but a T200 will be another $1K. It may not be the *best* sounding but it is fairly good and it is one of the best looking..

Still no software I care to buy in either format....
So they are both still headed to being losers in my book...

My system is solely 2 channel. There is an obvious sonic difference between CD and some SACD releases. Not all SACD releases sound significantly better than CDs, but the ones that do are well worth it. I would not hold back on SACD simply because you don't have a multichannel setup.

This is why I bought a Sony SCD-1. The redbook playback is very good, it rivals, if not surpasses most of the CD only systems I have heard (Resolution Audio Opus 21, Linn Ikemi, Rega Jupiter, among others). But on SACD, it is at least equal to many of the quality turntable setups I have heard.

I only own around 10 or so SACDs, but it looks as if more and more or being released. With the SCD-1, even if they never release another SACD I am more than pleased with the redbook playback qualities, and I haven't even modded it or added a DAC.

Plus, an SCD-1 looks great, and can be had for 3k new shipped with a five year warranty.

I also have a two-channel SACD system (please see my "system" link for details). I'm very happy with it, and to be perfectly honest...9 out of 10 multichannel mixes that I've heard sound a little "gimmicky" to me. They have a tendency to throw random sounds around the room, almost as if the engineers were seeking the cheap thrill of multichannel for the sake of multichannel. I'm sure there are plenty of SACDs that use multichannel in a musically sound and proper manner, and I'm equally convinced that more high-quality multichannel SACDs are on the way. But for now, I think it's very much worth it to have a 2-channel SACD system, as even discs intended for a 5-channel mix (i.e., Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon) sound far more convincing and engaging on a 2-speaker SACD setup than on mere redbook.

--Brian

Hard to say at this stage which is winning and I think it's impossible to call the future at this present time.
I also think it depends what you've invested in-if you bought into SACD seriously then you'll be pro-SACD-if like me you have lightly invested in it -a Sony NPVS900 DVD/SACD player and decided against investing further in it-(I've just spent heavily on 2 channel stereo with an Ayre CX-7 and Ayre AX-7)-then like me you may harbour serious doubts about the format.
I have no interest (at this stage)in multi-channel though I have heard some great stuff already on both formats in a friend's system-I'm sure DSOM is truly excellent in 5 channel.
I think SACD may very well survive as a true Audiophile format but not in the mainstream-I think the discs available reflect this-much of which I have no interest in-other more interesting SACD releases by artists such as Bowie,Beck and Gabriel are probably individuals interested in both technology and audio reproduction and I would guess there's not too many of those around pushing the format -but I buy tons of music-I like to experiment-there's no new music out there on SACD or next to nothing.
Of course it's getting better but the hybrids are a double edge sword (no pun intended) because I can hear very little difference on either layer of The Stones,Police and indeed DSOM SACD's I own.
I'm sure if you have the MF or a high end Sony the superiority of SACD shines through but the lack of a noticeable difference at the mass market end is extremely damaging imho.
Also the hybrids are being remastered-guess what?- the CD layers sound improved to their previous releases-therefore proving more is available from CD-so why should you invest in a new player for the new formats?
The killer to me is that you (and I haven't heard it yet) need to spend serious bucks to hear what SACD can do.
The cheap universal players are damaging to the stereo aspects of both formats because I doubt very much if they exhibit any clear improvement on CD.
I also have SACD's which are not hybrids and the best of these Bowie's Heathen and In A Silent Way (M.Davis)were arguably slightly better in my system before I got the Ayre equipment-now on a quick listen to Bowie today it's quite a way back in comparison to the CD version-I need to check IASW at a later date.
Of course I'm not comparing like with like but that's because intially I was pro-SACD but the lack of players to audition and software to buy made my mind up to not invest further in it.
I wanted to believe in SACD but too many things were against it and I'm absolutely delighted with the descision I made.