XRCD vs. SACD

Brucegel: whether or not your count is accurate, your comment is irrelevant to the XRCD vs. SACD question asked, which is what I, at least, was attempting to respond to. The issue isn't whether anyone has to repurchase their collection, it's about what's going to happen going forward. If SACD is killed off because the "experts" tell everybody "no better than remastered CD", everyone loses. Not every current or future release is or will be a reissue, and LP is certainly the best of the formats, but there won't be a hell of a lot of new LP's coming out very soon (which aren't reissues, that is, which makes your comment even more perplexing).

Thanks for some insightful responses. All day today I have been auditioning my brand new Philips SACD 1000 player ($399.99 at Tweeter), comparing its sound on SACDs to my venerable $25,000. Jadis redbook cd rig. I must say that while the Jadis shows its considerable advantage over the Philips unit on redbook, the SACD player presents a sense of spaciousness and depth of soundfield I have never experienced. This is fresh out of the box! Why on Earth aren't more high-end manufacturers producing SACD players? Yeah, yeah, I've heard the nonsense about limited titles and concerns over viability of the format. Do you really think Conrad johnson or Audio Research would be able to keep up with the demand for a sub-$5,000. SACD/DVD-A player? How many of us would put down deposits right now, sight unseen ( or unheard)? If a $400. Philips player sounds this good, what could a CJ or ARC do with this format? Maybe I'm just in the midst of "new toy" euphoria and I will tire of SACD in a week, but I seriously doubt it. As long as this format sounds this analog-like, there will be enough audionuts to support its continued existence, even if it is rejected by the masses. Esoteric companies will make them, and MOFI-like companies will record them. I don't see SACD dying!

I think really good sacd played on even one of the very few good sacd players out there sounds as good as any vinyl you can throw at it. To hear people talk you would think every vinyl album out there sounds like gods gift to man,lets get real people. I like vinyl and it does sound good but there is just as many stinkers on vinyl as on anything else. I think xrcd is very good but not up there with the best sacds. I would not have said this a couple of years ago but sacd is hard to tell from the very best vinyl out there it is so lush and smooth sounding and redbook is falling behind fast on my play lists.

I agree with most of people above, what really matter is how the CD or SACD is being mastered. I have experienced before with CDs on the same title but mastered at different time or technology make a big different in sound quality. Attention to details is key to have good sound from the whateven media is being used, regardless of CD or SACD. "Garbage in garbage out" is still true. For obvious reason that SCAD technology will be better than red book CD, but if it is not done correctly then SACD will sound worse than red book CD. This is not the fault of the SACD technology but the human factor.

Folks for me it comes to the difference (and their is a difference)not being big enough,not the merits of the technology and the distribution isnt my problem nor yours.Having said this I think some clever people could revitalize everyones interest in vinyl again in a big way and I myself am considering putting my money where my mouth is and starting a tube based recording company that produces vinyl.Thats how legitimate the vinyl revival is for me.Chad Kassem was considered cookoo for starting his buisness now look at where he is.Acoustic Sounds is doing very well.