2. digital
  3. 1037037271

SACD- my intial thoughts....

Having now given my Sony DVP 900 close to 350 hours break in I thought I would report back with my findings.
First off cleary this Sony machine is not at the top end of Sony SACD players but from what I can gather it's fair to consider it a mid-range player.
As an aside it's a great machine in terms of build,picture quality and seems to have a very good transport.
As a CD player it's decent.
From my limited listening experience on SACD I have came to the conclusion that it is a format that has potential but does not exhibit sonic differences that blow you away.
The presentation on SACD is smoother, less edgy but to my ears doesn't offer much more detail.
In some ways it is preferable to CD however I do find on some tracks CD sounds better wether that's because I'm used to CD sound or due to something else isn't clear to me.
The latest Stones CD/SACD hybrids show the effect up clearly,to my ears there really isn't much to choose between the layers in any sonic aspect.
The CD layer has a bit more spikiness or edge.
I have had two friends remark that the CD layer is actually slighty more suited to the Stones sound.
I concede perhaps the Stones aren't the best band to show off sound reproduction but there is the odd really well recorded track where SACD doesn't really come through superior on any aspect of it.
Whilst I have only heard about 25 different artist's on SACD and some dozen or so discs, to me the key to any new format is early on recognising this is clearly an improvement from what I've heard before.
Perhaps my expectations are too high but to me SACD has major problems in surviving and growing.......
ben_campbell
czbbcl's avatar
czbbcl
1,752 posts
 
On my Sony SCD-1 SACD's are simply superior by a fairly significant margin to redbook. The sound staging and detail are simply outstanding. This is not to say redbook is bad on the Sony, quite the opposite in fact, as I have compared this player to some very highend units.
I am sure the lower level SACD machines are not up to the standard of the SCD-1 on either redbook or SACD. But if SACD does not make it then I would consider giving up this hobby and buying a Bose accoustic wave radio. After hearing what I have heard with SACD I simply can not go back to redbook only and going vinyl is simply out of the question.
jwmazur
190 posts
 
Sony is not doing itself any justice with the lower price units. I heard what SACD had to offer on the cheap NS500V that I bought for $199. While it didn't blow me away, it got my interest to where I picked up a used Sony SCD-1 and found out what this had to offer. Now, I have found out that these machines, as well as the lower end units, can be modified to hear what all the fuss is about. The SCD-1 sounds positively great, from what I have read, and the lower priced units have a significant improvement over the stock units, within their capabilities.

So, don't throw the baby out with the bath water. This format has yet to get started and get some high end SACD players going. I have heard that Shanling, with their fantastic looking Redbook player, has come out with an SACD player that looks just like the aforementioned unit.
fishinfool
32 posts
 
I think this thread has already yielded some excellent comments on SACD, especially those relating to how SACD is just getting started. For example, consider the unbelievable improvement in CD's and CD players over the last 5 years, let alone almost 25 years. I have only heard SACD in unfamiliar situations (shows, friends house), so I can't really comment critically on SACD, but it seems to hold some promise. Today's best redbook CD players probably, IMO, get to 80-90% of the sound of a good analog setup, BUT I can't afford these players ($2000 - 3000+). If SACD players can be improved to give me this 80-90% "LP level" and, at lower price than todays top redbook players, then I will purchase a SACD and embrace the format. Until then, I'm sticking with vinyl!
tsrart
79 posts
 
A different question . . . . has anyone heard much in the way of SACDs of NEW recordings? Almost everything that I have seen has been repackagings of older (pre-1990) albums. It seems to me that many (if not all) of these could be remastered on Redbook CD and STILL sound much better, just due to the remastering. So on the Stones SACDs, for example, how much of the improvement is the SACD format, and how much is the remastering?
czbbcl's avatar
czbbcl
1,752 posts
 
Tsrart

I have a couple of pure DSD recordings if that is what you are talking about. They due sound noticeably cleaner than the remasters i.e. no tape hiss and are very dynamic.
More to discover