SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

Ears-I apologise if I took your comments personally.
I think the points you make against me have been made many times by yourself and a few others and I think I've answered your particular comments in my thread SACD-my thoughts at this time-it's all there for those who are wish to read it and also my comments above.
It is simply not accurate what you say EARS and I have explained that many many times,I have NEVER made any comparison between my Ayre CX-7 and my Sony SACD player as I've stated before that wouldn't be fair.
I've been over that ad nauseam.
What I have enjoyed seeing is that those who put me forward as the only dissenter on SACD on Audiogon have found that it is simply not the case,there are varying degrees of opinion on the format.

Mejames, The Marantz SA-1, the Lindemann d680, the EMM DAC6, the Exemplar/Denon 2900, and the A. Wright Sony 9000.

Durham, I am sorry, I thought this was about what you heard, not what you read or think. I see none of your points as really relevant even were they true.

1. SACD's poor high frequency reproduction ability

I do not know whether this has some basis, but it certainly is not true relative to what I hear.

2. Poor linear noise floor throughout the audible range and beyond

Again, not to the hearing even if true.

3. Future potential

I do not know where you get the 96 kHz limit on sacds. There is no future beyond 4 or 5 years for any of the digital formats.

4. Current lack of sound quality improvements over Redbook

I thought you said no one had dealt with any of these?

5. Lack of good software

I hope the rate of releases slows up. Buying ten or twenty a month is expensive

Rcprince: Actually I didn't make any points, I just brought up good points that I feel have some merit to this enjoyable conversation we are all having and nothing more. As to people agreeing or disagreeing to them, the ball is in his or her court to decide that for themselves. But in the end, its all about the music. And yes my CD12 does a great job of letting me enjoy the music. Many times I feel as if I am truely listening to an LP. To me it's that good. I have been looking closely at another cd player too, hopefully I will be able to take a test drive of it before the big holiday arrives. This is all part of the fun in the hobby for me as I am sure it is for many.

Tbg:It is actually very much about the music. Read above.As for the rest of your comments, I am having a bit of difficulty following along except for the software comment. This could be taken as varied opinion no doubt. One person may think the software is lacking, while another party may find the opposite. I personally find it lacking presently. But one thing I will say is that I personally feel that the next generation digital format should be a large step above redbook in terms of sound quality where there isn't this whole "which is better" debate.Everyone should be "moved" by the music from the next format, especially considering how far our technological advancements have come. The fact that this debate exists on this board and many,many others I feel is an argument in itself about how SACD really isn't living up to the hype it had 4-5 years ago in many ways.

Durham: Having been through the LP revolution and the cd revolution, I expect that I never thought the hype for either DVD-A or SACD would hold true. My other comments merely center on my not thinking theoretical criticism of the format has anything to do with its sound. At one time there was an article saying sacd could not work?? I hear what I hear, that is all that matters to me.

High end CD players. If you're looking at the top CD players,
you're talking about the $20,000 Linn, the $40,000 Burmeister, etc.
The redbook playback on the Meitner Emm Labs Dac6 is competitive with those players and many people find the redbook
playback on the Emm Labs to be superior. Still, the SACD playback is even better than the CD playback. It is absolutely false
that high end CD players can beat SACD due to the maturity of
redbook technology or for any other reason. Further, why would a
high end CD player out-perform a low end SACD player? The answer is that, though SACD DOES sample at a rate exponentially
higher than CD, this isn't the ONLY issue with digital playback.
Other issues are; The quality of the transport, jitter, power supply,
quality of the DAC, etc. etc. etc. Anyone who bypasses SACD because a low end SACD player didn't illustrate the advantages of thne medium or because a low end SACD player didn't surpass the playback of a high end CD player with all the attendant advantages of a high end digital player -- is seriously misguided. You don;t want to go around saying that on an audio site -- you need to become informed. An analogy might be hooking up Wilson Watt Puppies to your Sears audio system and then complaining that you don't hear all the detail and air you were promised in the review. You've got to spend some money if you want to enjoy your Watt Puppies and you have to spend some money to hear the advantages of SACD, but if you are in search of
better sound, you aren't going to stick with that Sears audio system
and you aren't going to be happy with CD when you know higher resolution is out there waiting. It would be silly to upgrade your amps, speakers, interconnects, get dedicated circuits, power conditioning, and then say, "but, I am happy with the lower sample
rate and digital gaps of redbook CD, I don't want to spend another grand or two to get a better SACD player." It doesn't make sense. You're spending all that money to get HIGHER resolution. Finally -- again -- I don't know why anyone bothers to try to fortell the future of SACD -- you might as well go into business selling miracle disease cures over the internet -- you'll have a better chance of getting people to believe you have the power to cure Alopecia through a few visits to your web-site to put one's hand on the image of the magic monkey than you will of getting someone to believe you can fortell the future of a new technology. The only issues are -- is SACD superior to CD? Of course it is. Exponentially higher sample rates and more information on the software is better. Is there a SACD player in your price range that gives you the type of CD playback you also find satisfactory? If yes, then get it for the redbook playback and dabble in SACD. I bought the Meitner because it has the best CD playback, the SACD playback is just a great bonus. Are there enough SACD titles to interest you? If no, then avoid the medium until more software comes out, but don't bother preaching to those who are busy listening to some of the 1500+ titles available and enjoying their high end or modified SACD players -- you're wasting your breath. Saying, "I have decided to avoid SACD and that spells death for the medium" is not exactly persuasive. Other technologies have taken off without your help, it stands to reason, so can SACD.