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
ben_campbell OP
1,169 posts
 
Bluefin-it's interesting what your saying my friend was saying his biggest disappointmet with SACD was the LACK of dynamics.
As you explained he thought the potential was there for a big improvement over CD-he expected to be blown away.
He simply can't hear any improvement and he has a reasonably serious system.
All the theory in the world is great but if you can't hear it,you can't hear it.
The only difference we both can hear on SACD at this stage is a smoother sound which shouldn't be dismissed but dynamics,detail and even realism?
Not yet.
treyhoss
287 posts
 
Tbadder brings up an excellent point about the hybrid discs. I don't have SACD but bought 2 SACD/CD of the Rolling Stones recently. I was so impressed with the sound I was thinking how much better could it be on SACD? Some of the tracks were better than others and I did notice more clarity and greater dynamics. I was dissapointed with "Sympathy for the Devil" which had a thin sounding bass line (and I love that bass line too!) but most of the tracks are great! I too think that all SACD's should be hybrid discs because after I own enough of them, I'd probably buy an SACD player. The other thing Sony needs to do is put out some more "popular" re-releases - i.e., albums that have a high sales track record. DVD-A is all over Sony on this aspect, with a bunch of great releases, including the release of Pink Floyd's Dark side...Moon later this month. Suprising we haven't seen Sony scrambling to put out the Beatles on SACD.
tbg
5,263 posts
 
My experiences with initially the Sony SCD-1, then the Marantz SA-1, and now the Lindemann D680 would suggest that Ben's problem is the Sony DVP 900. Initially with the SCD-1 I could hear some improvement of the sacd layer over the cd layer--more extended highs and better sound staging, etc. The Marantz proved superior in these regards and proved to be a far superior cd transport, allowing me to sell my CEC TL0 Mk II. But the Lindemann has blown away any contest from the cd layer. The realism is uncanny and the dynamic scary. This is not to say that the Lindemann is a poor performer on cds as it is probably the best I have heard.

I think that like cd players technology will ultimately allow quality low cost sacd players, but I do not think that time is here yet. In an age of MP3 and cheap computer sound boards, I can only be hopeful that sacds will flurish, as it is clearly superior to cds. I can also hope that the current rash of new sacds will continue allowing me to switch to mainly listening to sacds rather than LPs and cds.
ben_campbell OP
1,169 posts
 
Tbg-I don't doubt you are right but consider you have now changed players three times(or audtioned) to get a difference of a large magnitude.
My point is that the lower end players do not show a marked difference on performance-to me this is key in breaking the format.
Of course it is very early days in the development of SACD but when I hear some people describe the difference on the SCD-1 as marginal I do worry.
The good news is SACD releases is picking up momentum and this will help.
twl
3,251 posts
 
My 6 month experience with SACD was with the Sony 9000ES. I would say that the well-recorded SACD's were significantly better than well-recorded CD's. I feel that there is definitely an improvement over CD. However, I felt very limited by the availability of titles, and could only find about a dozen that I really even wanted. While the convenience of digital was nice, eventually the lure of vinyl took over, and now I have better sound and all the titles I want, for less money. I do hope that SACD makes more titles available, and has some success, because it is better sounding, if only a certain percentage, and if this doesn't go over, the manufacturers may just forget about high end sound, and go for MP-3 type formats. This would be very bad for you digital guys. If they see no support coming from the high end, it spells disaster for audiophile digital sound.
More to discover