SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

Jackcob I wonder if these arent't same people who cannot hear the difference between 'lamp cord' and hi-end speaker cable???

Ritteri it is obvious from your writing that you are not a very bright person. That may not be your fault. Perhaps you come from poor stock, or you attended the public school and never rose above the quality of your education, or maybe you just chose not to exercise the muscle between your ears. I have no way of knowing the real reason for this distinct lack of understanding, but it is evidenced in your posts. This is not intended as an insult, just a point of reference!

1) There are millions of people who buy music which includes lyrics that are not recording in their erste sprach, or original language! I personally own dozens of recordings in languages other than English (which actually was not my first language) including German, Spanish, French, Hebrew, and Japanese. Some of them I actually bought because of the alternate language! Am I a better person because I own these recordings? No, but... I would never discount the quality of a particular recording because of the language, regardless of whether I even speak that language!

2) If all you listen to is pop music, it's not even worth entering into a dialog with you! How pathetic is top 40 music!?! Did you get the latest Brittany Spears CD?

3) How can a 44.1 kHz recording contain as much information as a 96+ kHz? By definition there is less information on a lower sampled disc! What is the point of spending $5,000-12,000 on a "edge of the art" CDP to get less info from your disc? I have DSOTM and have listened to both formats, or should I say, all three formats since I have the LP also. The LP sounds better than both digital formats. Of the two digital, SACD is better. We could get into a big debate about the Nyquist Theorum, but I'm not sure anyone wants to sit through that!!! If you cannot hear the differnce, refer to my comment to Jackcob!

4) Though digital playback has been around for 20+ years SACD is still in it's infancy, and cannot be compared to a mature technology for the quality of tweaks and improvement. It has always been the companies like Sony who come up with the technology, but it's been the small high end companies who make them worth owning. When high-end companies begin making really good SACDPs then they can be compared to the best of the current CDPs.

5) It wasn't a good thing then, and it's still not now!
If people were forced fed SACD like they were Redbook CD this would not be an issue, but I think the fact that people are given a choice by Sony/Philips shows that they beleive in the medium.

6) How can you take offense at someone questioning a terrible example on your part, and reduce yourself to Ad Hominom attacks. It only calls into question your own intelligence!

7) The problem isn't that people are missing your point about SACD not being as good as Redbook CD, this issue is that you are wrong! I realize (at least I think I do) that your scientific background is poor, and therefore you are not aware of the lack of substance in your generalizations, but news flash: believing something does not make it true!

I hope we can set aside this fruitless arguement now. Perhaps you can go and do some studying with your spare time, or maybe the solution is as simple as having your hearing checked. Doctors say that most people already experience serious hearing loss before they become aware of the problem. Give it a try!

Hey Ritteri what do they call a person who can speak two languages? A: Bi Lingual
What do they call a person who can speak several languages? A: Multi Lingual
What do they call a person who can speak one language? A: American!

Durham42, comparing a Sony with the Linn is not a fair test, the Linn is arguably the best one-box player out there, at least to my ears, and the Burmester is a top of the line DAC, while the stock Sony is comparable to a Wadia 830/850 level player at best. What was your impression when you listened to both redbook and SACD through the Sony's output stage? That's really the appropriate test.

This thread is too long for me to digest everything said, but I'll throw in my two cents on at least one aspect of the question. As I hinted above, one of the limiting factors in comparing SACD (or DVD-A, for that matter) to redbook CD has been that the best of the high end manufacturers, as well as the recording industry, have spent the last 20 years trying to make redbook CD sound the best it can, but SACD and DVD-A are still in their comparative infancy, and the best of the designers (save Meridian, Ed Meitner and dCS) have not really been willing to throw a lot of money into R&D for formats which might not make it in the marketplace. To some extent the hi-rez situation reminds me of the early days of CD, where there were a lot of modifiers out there who would take major manufacturers' cost-compromised offerings (principally Philips/Magnavox units then, as they were the easiest to work with) and come up with modded units that were far better than the originals but certainly no match for today's players. I see the same going on with hi-rez units (I've had a lot of the mods made to my Sony SACD player). The question is whether the formats will take hold enough for talented designers to devote the time and effort they did to CD; if they do, then you might see the promise both of these formats hold be realized.

Ears I wonder how many of those European players are stand alone SACD/CD machines?
I would think the majority are low end Sony DVD players and indeed the entry level universal machines.
Sure this doesn't mean that the owners won't become SACD supporters but I wouldn't bet on it.
Similarly I would imagine a very large proportion of SACD disc sales this year will be down to the major hybrid releases.
The format clearly has potential to enter into the mainstream in terms of being the dominant format but I doubt that it will happen.
Can you name me one serious SACD machine released this year for a European audiophile to consider in the £2-£3.5k margin?
Believe me I know what is available in the UK better than some sales figures,there was next to nothing to consider to match the Ayre CX-7 I had heard.
There's a real gap in the market from the early high end Sony machines,the early Marantz and indeed the new high end players such as Linn and Krell which have just been released.
Even these real high end players are meeting with mediocre reviews but even avoiding that issue and their incredible price-it would appear from a strategic point of view SACD players are coming out(mainly)on two levels-low cost universal machines and real ultra-high end machines.
I'm answering this because your points are clearly aimed at this European Audiogoner.
I think Rcprince makes some good points above and indeed there is some worthwhile debate on both sides of the fence,if only people could leave out the need to insult each other out.
I'd also like to add despite my so-called anti-SACD tag I do not agree with everything negative written about the format.

Tbg name the 5 players you say best the Sony SCD-1 please?

Tbg/Rcprince: You state that comparing a Sony SACD player is not a fair comparison with a machine such as the Linn Sondek CD12. Why wouldn't this be a fair comparison? The SACD format from reading all of the posts up above is supposed to be superior to redbook. So reagrdless of how good my cd player can play redbook cd's, shouldn't it still be a step down from even an average SACD player? This in itself I thought was the actual argument.

Through all the useless babble and arguing I feel Rittori did hit on quite a few good points. What is too bad is that there haven't been too many good rebuttals to these points that were made.

A few points I felt were valid on Ritteri's and others behalf include,

1. SACD's poor high frequency reproduction ability
2. Poor linear noise floor throughout the audible range and beyond
3. Future potential
4. Current lack of sound quality improvements over Redbook
5. Lack of good software

I added in #3 because personally 96khz is in reality not a very big jump up from standard 44.1khz. DVD-A intrigues me with its 192khz sampling rate which has alot more potential than SACD and its very low linear noise floor, there is alot more potential here, whether it ever takes off is anyone's guess.

As for my SACD player not being a current high end model, I don't doubt it. But the Accuphase DP-77 did nothing more to further my current findings, and this is considered to be a very high quality unit which I also had on loan for a few weeks last month.

If I had the choice over again, I would not have purchased the SACD unit. I would rather spend a few thousand more on an excellent redbook player which already has a huge software base with proven sound over a next generation SACD player with lots of question marks about its future and sound potential.