sacd vs xrcd

You can answer the question this month directly for about $70. The imported SACD of the RCA Gaite Parisienne is due out, and so is the XRCD. My own impression is that SACD through my Classe Omega slightly beats out upconverted CD (including XRCD) through my dCS Purcell and Elgar, while XRCD definitely beats out even gold Cd's of RCA Living stereo material. But until there is a direct comparison, it's all apples and oranges. And anyway, I bet the vinyl still wins.

thanks every body for their input. I did not have the chance to listen to the same recording on the same rig in XRCD and SACD format-anybody had that experience?-[ there are some available from FIM as exemple] but all my XRCDs seem to be superior to the SACD that I remember...also, I have the benefit of a superior sound that can be played on any of my 5 cdps[ car stereo, walkman and so on...]and can be copyied any time. The XRCDs can be make out of any recording- some of them are RCA 1950's and still sound great. if the cost of making one is, divided to a couple of hundred thousands-like a J.Lo album, the result will be a much better sound for a couple of cents per album....

czbbcl and Rcprince, what XRCDs and SACDs you compared?

I have had the opportunity to listen to a few FIM discs in both SACD and XRCD and the SACD sounds better on the same system. I stand by my assertion that the SACD medium has much greater potential, to say nothing of multichannel. ;-)

Dandreescu, in answer to your question, I've now heard the Pines/Fountains of Rome, Sheherezade, and Heifietz Mendelssohn Violin Concerto XRCDs on my system, and will probably get some more, as they are very good, giving up some ultimate ease and bloom to the Classic Records reissues on vinyl but not much more. Easily some of the best CDs I've ever heard, far better than the major labels' efforts. But following them up with the new Linn Poulenc Organ Concerto SACD, the SACD was much better in the retrieval of ambience and analog-like ease of presentation, and easily more than a match dynamically (keep in mind that my Sony has been modified and is far better than the stock version; stock ones are decent, but really can be improved in the analog stages). And the SFO Mahler 6 is better in similar ways. Mgottlieb's post is interesting; if only I liked that title better. And I agree with him, the vinyl is better, that's why I've been holding off on buying many xrcds.

On my system (Sony SCD555ES TAP9000 Adcom 7400 Dynaudio Contour1.8II with Nordost Solarwind cabling) I find the SACD XRCD to be a push. I'll take either one. Old Jazz chestnuts sound great on both. Rock and Roll SACDs don't seem to sound to much better than Redbook CD's for the most part.

Haven't heard the new Stones SACD's yet.

I agree that the mastering is the key for the XRCDs, along with care to reduce jitter throughout the process.

BTW Music Direct has an XRCD sale on a whole pile of titles, buy 5 or more for $20 each. I plan on stocking up, plus grabbing some Stone's SACDs. There goes my slush fund for October.