SHMCD : Second thought on buying SACD player

SHM-CD is still 16bit CD format we know since 1982 that will play on your old CD player...it's just clearer plastic used on CD :] even remasters are the same remasters that are already available on the market.

in Decemember Sony will release Blu-spec CD which will compete with SHM-CD on this lucrative audio voodoo red book market :)

SACD is totally different story, no audio voodoo just higher quality (resolution) audio format

I’ve done extensive comparisons with SHM-CDs, and personally I’d NEVER abandon SACD for it. As for the quality of SHM itself, it’s title-dependent. Some are quite good (though IMO not worth the premium over the normal CD), while others are pure rubbish. They’re reportedly going ga-ga for it over in Japan, but to my ears, it’s not a huge cause for rejoicing. I’ve bought a few out of curiosity, but I’m certainly not going to replace my normal CDs with their SHM counterparts. No way.

I own a number of SHM-CDs and I agree that it's a title dependent proposition. As I posted in other threads when they first came out, if the original sounds excellent then the SHM gives it just a bit more refinement, especially in the high end. So the best ones are very good. If sound quality is important to you AND you're committed to redbook then these are worth seeking out IMHO. The SHM cannot turn a sows ear into a silk purse. To me, SHM is not revolutionary but more subtle in effect. As always, I would suggest checking a few out and forming your own opinion.

Agree with Hooper that the prices on these are a little out of line but then CDs in general are more costly in Japan. So adding the SHM premium onto already higher prices makes them around US$25-$27 not including shipping which is also high. So US suppliers have to ask somewhere in the mid $30s or more. And of course, exchange rates come into play.

As far as purchasing a SACD player or not, the existence of SHM-CD would not affect my decision one way or another.

i own two smh cds. these are jazz and classical samplers. i have compared many selections on both cds and prefer the original masters, usually produced in the 90's.

the problem with the smh cds is they master they use may be of poor quality because of age.

as i recall, some of the early sacds--not hybrids were of dubious quality.

the only way to definitively judge the merits of smh cd is to make a recording, not remaster, and create copies using conventional materials and smh blanks. as far as i am aware, this has not yet been done.

MrTennis,
I own several (actually more than several) Japanese CDs, latest release and latest release in SHM. I believe they are identical (same mastering) except for the Super High Material.

The differences I note are a very slight increase in clarity and a slight increase in high end refinement. As I mentioned, if the sound of the CD is not very good to begin with the SHM is probably not worth the effort. However, the SHM can make an excellent sounding CD sound just a bit better. Again, not by leaps and bounds, but by a more subtle magnitude.

Whether that subtle difference is important enough to seek out or pay a premium price for is an individual decision. As far as the original post, definitely don't see these replacing SACDs.

On a related note I have heard several of the new HQCDs and IMO they sounded rather good. I believe these were produced in response to the SHM-CDs. I also have several Miles Davis Blu-spec CDs on order which should arrive around the first of the year.