SACD- my intial thoughts....

Ben,

I believe some of SACD are remastered of old master tapes.
If CD was done in earlier days while master tape still in its prime. Then, there may be some CD sounds better than SACD version, plus recording/remaster engineer's ear has to do with his/her capability of remastering tape to a digital source.

On the other hand, dynamic range has a very rigorous scientific definition. I believe SONY's gives the exact number in dB in its introduction paper of every SACD. The advantage is definitely there, and scientifically measurable (For sure, this part is not just simple mental effect). A well recorded SACD is for sure having a more dynamic sound than CD. However, a good LP setup still has a larger dynamic range than SACD. If your friend is referring to LP, I agree, analog is still the best in this regard. I am not sure how your friend compares SACD and CD. But remember the trick in my privous post, enough punch yet resolution. In real life a drummer does punch its drum exactly the same twice. In CD, lots of drumming sounds single toned, but in LP or good SACD not only can sound louder also more expressions because of beter resolution. You can hear the difference of differnt beat. Drum is easy to hear, actually the same applies to all other instrument. (That's why I still like pi-li-pi-li LP).
Piano is another good instrument to hear. Hear all bass/cello in an orchestra winding up and down. I don't think you can hear more music on CD than a LP or SACD.

Also digital processing and coding technology today is much better than old days. Actually, you will gain more than 6 bits of information (or I should say music or expressioins), considering coding/deciding is more advanced now.

Bluefin-I am not dismissing anybody's findings-I truly accept those who find SACD to be noticeably superior to CD.
They have no reason to say otherwise.
Clearly there are reasons why it should be better on a technical basis.
I can accept that my $750(list price) DVD/SACD player must be limited in comparison to other players,likewise my friends all-format Pioneer must too be limited,maybe why his comparisons with CD do not show the differences they should.
His sits in an approx $10K system and mine in a $6k system.
My point is merely this,in Audiogon terms our systems are pretty small fry but in the "real" world our systems are way above average-my fears lie with the lower and casual audio fan who imho has a likely chance of dismissing SACD as no better than CD.
Also I am struck by the amount of SACD players available on Audiogon and some learned 'goners who do not hear "big" differences between SACD/CD.
I am at the very early stages of assessing SACD and the format clearly is in it's infant stages hopefully over time the differences become clearer to me.
Having discussed this offline too I am told (rightly or wrongly) that the 900 is a moderate SACD machine,close to the Philips 1000 and a bit behind the 9000es.

Ben,

Yes! thanks for reading and understanding my post.
TWL would be happy to hear people like LP (I need your suggestion in the end).
I believe some new audiophiles can gain something if I explain it clear enough.

One suggestion for other audiophile's listening.
The output of a CD or SACD are not exactly the same.
Some from recorinding and coding, and some from output CKT design. If your CD player output has a slightly higher voltage or output impedance is different, by setting pre-amp at the same position, that CD player would sound louder than other CD or SACD players. Some may take it as more dynamic, but actually it is simply louder not more dynamic.
Some modify CD player's output (higher) to use a passive pre-amp, that's for different purpose.

We can always turn up the volume to sqeeze your power amp for extra dB's. However, a dynamic sound in SACD can tell the difference of 50 and 50.1 dB (just for example). But a CD may only give your the difference 50 and 50.2 (e.g. 50.1 is compressed to either 50 or 50.2 dB).

TWL, I have an old Oracle with Grace arm. I used BPS or Grado Platinum and it sound very good with ARC PH3. Since my PH3 can certainly take higher output than that, you think what should be my next step up? I am not rich, so please give some suggestions, which I can save money to finish. Can Grace handle MC well (which?) or I should save for years to get another arm or table?

Thanks!

My wife and I first heard a SACD while auditioning some Vandersteen 2ce at a local high-end, single owner shop back in 2000. It was an intimate setting as there was only one other person in the shop and the phone wasn't ringing! He had some CD's for us to browse while he hooked up the speakers. It was all to be hooked up to a McCormack amp and preamp (model?) We chose Natalie Merchant's Tiger Lilly - the NON-SACD version - as I was very familiar with the recording on my home system. The CD player he used was the Sony SCD-1. Natalie sounded fantastic! The soundstage at the end of "Carnival" sounded like I was standing on a sidewalk in Central Park - very impressive. I wasn't sure if this was the player, speaker, associated equipment or all of the above. I asked a couple of questions about the player and he said it was a Sony - their new "SACD" player. I asked if what we just heard was an SACD and he said no although he had an SACD sampler disc he could bring out. For grins he replaced the Sony with Parasound's flagship CD player at the time (don't rememer the model but was selling for around $1900). I currently own a Parasound DAC and have owned other Parasound equipment in the past. Parasound is capable of making excellent equipment IMO. Anyway, I auditioned "Carnival" one more time over the same system only with the Parasound in place of the Sony. There was something missing with the Parasound, a realism and simbilance that the Sony did very well. The Parasound, while sounding very good, did not convey the realism of the Sony. The soundstage was lush with the Sony and very layered with a clarity that was remarkable. This is just comparing the redbook source! Needless to say I was truly able to see the impact of the machine on the whole system. I was really taken with the Sony while the sound with the Parasound in the chain sounded close to my current home system. When John brought out the SACD sample CD, I was ready to hear it - even my wife was excited! He played only one track from it (I don't remember the title) but there was a drummer right in front of me (sonically) using a brush on the cymbals. It sounded scary REAL. The prices I have seen these sell for recently (used) are right in line with what the Parasound was retailing for 2 years ago! I wish I had the $$$ for one, even at today's prices! :-( BTW: My wife loved every second of our visit - a testament to the equipment and the kind of shop and owner where this can be done! Tony

I just heard "kind of blue" on SACD , then redbook on the musical fidelity trivista. I have been very curioius for a long time... The SACD sounded more "detailed" and multilayered, but also more fractured, and less like music, kind of like a recording where you can hear the splices. I was missing the flow and organicism of the performance. When we put the redbook in, it was such a relief. It just sounded more like music.