SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

Perhaps it would have been prudent to ask Matchstikman his budget and his system.
There are others who think based on what they've heard on SACD that it DOESN'T make a very big difference on playback quality at all especially down at the entry level to moderate level of things.
There are some of us who have heard inferior SACD discs in comparison to their Redbook versions.
It is also rich imho to make such statements when some of the above have already admitted that on certain hybrids the Redbook layer is better.
It also depends how you determine "superior"-are we talking technically,sonically or as a format?
Redbook is still the superior format in my book since if I want to buy new music I can actually buy it and listen to it on Redbook.
There's no doubt technically SACD is superior,I also respect those who have heard the improvements SACD brings to them on their systems-again other haven't.
But it is a pretty complicated issue-I found SACD inferior as a format for several reasons and sold all my SACD discs but kept my hybrids for the Redbook layer.

The SACD data format is completely different from the PCM redbook format, so that theoretical comparisons are not easy. There is an argument, posted elsewhere, that SACD resolution for signals above 8000 Hz is actually inferior.

To my ears, and depending on the particular disc, SACD is better than CD. Perhaps this is because the frequency range below 8000 Hz is most important.

On the other hand DVD-A is easy to compare to CD. It's the same PCM code except with 24 bits instead of 16, and 96KHz instead of 44.1 KHz. It's what they would have done thirty years ago if the technology had been available.

No question that SACD brings stereo to a whole new level. There is no comparison, the difference is akin to the superiority of good vinyl over redbook and it's completely addicting once you appreciate it. To be honest, I have a heck of a time analyzing the SACD side of good sacd players (I've heard many good and great ones, a few bad ones). I can pick apart the redbook side of any player in a few tracks, but SA-CD, after only a few seconds of listening, makes it near impossible for me to think about the equiptment; I get lost in the music, the ease, that naturlness, realness, coherence and life of the music. When I do force myself to compare, to listen to a redbook layer of a SACD, I in general will find that SACD is smoother, its more open, its fuller, its vastly more extended up top, it has better detail and clarity with a lower noise floor, it's simply more like real music...but I quickly forget about all the fluff and realize there is beautiful, life-like music playing in my room when playing the DSD side.... Like every other format it of course is recording quality dependant, yet I've heard things with good SACDs that my best CD's are completely lacking.

Every person I've let hear SACD in my system (strictly 2ch), even nonaudiphiles who don't care in the least about this hobby, have had no trouble picking up on the very differences I hear wrt the superiority of SA-CD, and this without any prompting from me. That's what amazes me and give me hope for the format, along with the flood of new titles finnally making it to shore and Sony promising to open the flood gate in 2004.

It's also worth observing that, as far as I can tell, Ben_campbell is the only person on this board, out of hundreds or even thousands of members, actively crusading against SACD at every turn. He can't hear the difference, as stated a hundred times now, which is fine; we all hear differently and we value different things in sound reproduction. However, do note that the fans of the format hugely outnumber the unbiased detractors, and likewise, appreciate that when I say I'm a "Fan" that is short for "Fanatic!"

Here is what I found:
A well-engineered SACD sounds better than a well-engineered CD.
A well-engineered CD sounds better than a poorly engineered SACD.
A poorly engineered SACD sounds just as bad as a poorly engineered CD.
Percentagewise, 7 out of 10 SACDs I bought are well-engineered but only 1 out of 3 CDs are.

Socrates it is a nonsense to both say I am the only dissenting voice and that I am anti-SACD.
Try a search on the subject and see what it throws up.
Even better still try and work out the extensive amount of SACD players and software available 2nd hand.
I actively try to avoid the same old debate but apparently it is ok to make the same pro-SACD comments over and over again.
I drive to give a balanced viewpoint-I DO NOT say I am right-I explain what my experience is.
I ALWAYS state you should hear for yourself.
Say the original poster only has a limited amount of money to spend on a SACD machine?
Even those who are pro-SACD admit that at the lower end you will not hear a massive if any difference.
Is my experience not valid?
I actually saved a pro-SACD thread recently by making a post and getting the pro-SACD poster some answers.
For me it's about music and SACD limits very much my choices in listening to music.
I have to say I recently heard the Linn Unidisk playing SACD and I didn't hear anything to get excited about.
Disagree with me by all means but please do not misrepresent what I have said in the past.