Looking to compare SACD sound with redbook

I would not underestimate the musical information and listening pleasure that can be extracted from the redbook formatted cds.

But if it makes you nervous, you might consider an excellent cd player that just so happens to do SACD as well.

-IMO

I find that the largest benefit of SACD is not in the format so much as in the recording (new albums)or remastering process (Dylan) used when the material is giong to go onto SACD. It is an audiophile format and the engineers know that it is going to be picked apart. The 16 bit layer of dual layer SACD's sounds spectatcular most of the time.

As long as your current system makes you happy I wouldn't start selling it just yet. It's always fun to audition new gear though.

If you have an extensive CD collection, you can't replace it with SACD, because the SACD versions of 95% of it don't exist, and never will. I second Big's comment that the major difference is in the remastering, not the higher resolution. And remember that in the vast majority of hybrids, the SACD and Redbook layers use different masters, so when you compare them you're comparing the mastering, not the bits.

Thanks to Stehno, Bignerd100, pabelson and Tvad for your comments -t is helping me get a better feel for what is going on.
Stehno, do you have a player in mind that does this (emphasizes high quality rebook play, yet play SACD for less than 2K)
Sound like the ocnsensus so far is that if you stuck to very carefully done redbooks, they would near SACD quality, but human nature being what it is we can expect good improvements such as Pink Floyd's on reissues because of the extra care given to SACD.
Gammajo