SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

For the near term most SACD releases will not have been recorded in the DSD format, but will instead have been converted from analog or PCM sources. Very, very few recording studios have DSD recorders and even fewer (possibly less than 10 in the U.S.) have DSD processors (EQ, compressors, etc.) or editors. It is this lack of DSD processors that makes pure DSD recorders impractical for standard pop/rock recordings.

Most studios have only recently, if at all, upgraded to 88/96kHz PCM and they see little to no demand for DSD capabilites. With mastering studios the situation is different. DSD has firmly established itself with the top echelon of mastering houses. Artists typically send analog or PCM final mixes to be mastered and it's during this stage that the final consumer available format is determined.

Multi-format playback machines will make someones preference for PCM or SACD fairly irrelevant. I suspect that the situation will evovle in a way that mirrors the current movie distribution model. Larger budget films are distributed to theaters in multiple SDDS, dts and DD formats.

Ritteri, I'll do no such things that you ask. There is a popular saying that aetheists like to throw around in the heat of a philosophical battle, namely that "the burden of proof lies in the believer." Same applies here, it's actually a well established logical principle found in any introductory textbook. I don't have to disprove what you can't prove in the first place! Face it, you have no evidence to back up your posts. Anyways, thank you for playing, and have a nice day....

My wife doesn't know squat about audio and doesn't want to but even she thinks SACD sounds better than redbook!

Properly implemented Redbook 2 Channel I more musical and more interesting then SACD 2 Channel. It is not the fundamental advantage but the implemental. The properly done 16-bit is fairly rare (most of the people in here never heard it and never will) but it exists. The properly done SACD is not available yet and I do not know if it ever will be.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Little_milton: Thats a pretty obvious copout for an answer.

So you want proof? Here are the majority of SACD players available: http://www.avguide.com/players_recorders/sacd_players.jsp

Why dont you try and list 2-3 dozen more SACD players for us?How about just 1 more dozen? It shouldnt be hard to name off 12 more SACD players the way your talking so go right ahead. That would basically be half of my claim of only 3-4 dozen SACD players in existance or under current production. Its not gonna happen, youll probably put up another " i dont have to prove anything" post.Thats normally what people do when they dont have anything intelligent to post.Your user name fits you to date. I bet your foot tastes good though.

Oh thats right, lets go on the list of available SACD's, I claimed how many? 3-400 maybe?? OK here some more links:http://www.buy.com/retail/music/searchresults.asp?search_store=6&querytype=music&qu=sacd&loc=109&dclksa=1

Here is another:http://www.nextag.com/serv/main/buyer/outpdir.jsp?OVRAW=sacd%20&OVKEY=sacd&OVMTC=standard&doSearch=y&search=sacd

The above links are the 2 places that have the most titles.

Sony stated they would have over 2000 titles in 2001. Were almost in 2004. I dont think there are even close to 500 out. And alot of those 500 arent even worth purchasing.

So I need to face what? I got no what?Proof? :eyes rolling: "THe burden of proof lies in the believer" Ill have to remember that line. I bet you use that one alot when you have that size 12 stuck between your gums.

"thanks for playing".............