SACD/CD Question

I don't have this recording so I can't speak about it specifically. However, I would add that Sony is rather inconsistent with their productions. Just look at the packaging. Depending on when they were produced, many CD's and SACD's have different labeling although they are the same recordings. I never cared for Sony in this regard. Blame the mastering and the engineering, not the medium. I have hundreds of hybrid SACD's that sound just fine on my "high-quality" CD-based stereo rig.

Like the previous poster, I don't own this specific recording on SACD, but I do have a number of SACDs in my collection. I'm fortunate enough to have both a dedicated CD player as well as an SACD player and to be quite honest, if you have a high quality CD player you don't need an SACD player. That I found out via direct comparison between the two players (in 2-channel mode) using the same hybrid SACD in both, using electrostatic speakers by Martin Logan (which I believe are best suited for such comparisons as they bring out details that most mid-priced cone speakers are unable to deliver).
In your case I belive it is the recording that suffered not your system and I don't think an SACD player can save it.
For your own information, I found the SACD hype to be just that, more hype than fact. I find slightly better air present with SACD players, better feel for the size of the room where the recording took place but the music is the same, especially orchestral music (I own Beethoven's symphonies 1-9 on SACD and the CD player sounds just as good). For vocals there is slightly (slight is too big, less than that) more natural timbre but that depends on the player you use, as said already a good CD player will correct all that (try Audio Aero products to see what I mean, I use an Audio Refinement CD player which is nowhere near the Audio Aero Prima Cd player and it already matches my Marantz-8300 SACD player).

Good luck.

The acoustics for Berlin recordings are sometimes problematic. For a blazing Tchaikovsky #1 in great sound consider Argerich with Chailly. She sometimes drives the music too hard, but excells with Russian composers. Look for the older edition on Phillips with Rachmaninov #3. I believe the newly remastered version of Rach #3 on Philips 50 has deleted the Tchaikovsky #1.

I also like Pletnev on Virgin, which contains all the Tchaikovsky piano concertos. There's others to consider, but these have great sound. Sell your Volodos on Amazon marketplace.

Also, if you want to get the best out of your redbook CDs, consider Walker Audio Vivid Enhancer.

Rob

I disagree with those who say don't buy a sacd hybrid unless you are going to buy a sacd player in the near future. From my experience so far, the cd layer on a hybrid is the best sounding version of the performance (when comparing it to other cd versions). They also can be had for not much more or less than than a regular cd. I bought the Stones hybrids for $ 9.99, the others for prices ranging from $11.99 to $18. Examples of good sounding hybrids, Stones, Dylan, Who, Junior Wells, Coltrane/Monk, and the Animals retrospective. Why would you buy the cd only version of these when the hybrid sounds better, for pretty much the same price? In addition, if you ever decide you want an sacd player, you've already got a start on your collection. I don't understand what the downside is if you don't buy an sacd player? I do understand why you wouldn't want to buy the sacd ONLY version. Then you have to have a sacd player.

Well said Wildoats. I'm currently doing the same in purchasing new music. If there is a hybrid SACD version of the same music, I would choose the hybrid if it means spending $1 or $3 more.