2. tech-talk
  3. 974903783

SACD vs. DVD-A and Audio DVDs

My experience so far using Muse DVD equipment is that the best redbook CDs sound as good as the best Audio DVDs from Chesky or Classic Records. It would seem that the recording and mastering process has more impact on the final sound than the medium. It reminds me of the notice on early CDs which stated that the CD's resolution "could show the limitations in the source recording" or something like that. Does anyone else think that well executed redbook can be almost indistinguishable from 24/96 Audio or even SACD ? By the way, my experience with SACD has been that the sound is very dry and clinical, and I am wondering whether SACD will fare the same way as CDs, namely that it will take years before the recording and manufacturing process are up to par with the technology. This was evident in redbook CDs. The sound of the best conventional CDs has improved dramatically since four or five years ago.
joe_coherent
darrell's avatar
darrell
70 posts
 
I also have a Muse 9S DVD/CD player and notice also that the newer cds do sound much better than they used to. I'm sure part of that is the upsampler in our Muse players and the fact that the cds are mastered better. I did hear the Sony SACD player ($5000) playing a SACD and will have to admit the sound was much more open, smooth and natural sounding than the same music played on a standard cd player, but when a regular cd is played on the $5000 Sony player the sound is not as good as when it is played on a Muse 9S DVD/CD player.
phild
603 posts
 
I only have 3 Classic DADs, but they do sound better than the originals. More subtle details, and they're mastered much better...I actually get to use my volume knob! I think that's their big advantage. Most modern CDs are mastered too loud, and that's a form of compression. Most labels do it because they want their CD to sound "louder" than the next. Properly mastered CDs will sound smoother and less fatiguing than CDs that are mastered too loud. I do think that remasterd 20/24 bit CDs are a big improvement over the originals. They are more detailed, but the DADs still sound a bit more natural to me. They seem to reproduce the details in a much more organic way.
jtinn
1,124 posts
 
There is a HUGE difference between SACD and CD. It is like listening to live music vs. a car stereo. It is easily the best I have ever heard. I personally have not heard DVD-A as of yet, but I find it hard to believe that it could be as good as SACD.
lapaix
45 posts
 
The response by "Jtinn" conforms with my experience. SACDs are simply qualitatively better than CDs. To me, SACDs have all of the virtues of analog and none of the flaws. The sony SACD 777ES, at $1500 or so, is simply a phenomenal "bargain" by the standards of highend audio. A $20K CD system cannot compete with the sound of the Sony on SACDs, although top flight DAC/transport systems sound better thand CDs on the far less expensive player. Even then the differences do not seem to me to make up for the 10 fold difference in price.
joe_coherent OP
130 posts
 
Darrell, the Muse Model 9 does not upsample. Muse does not believe in upsampling (neither do I) and there is a very good white paper on their site explaining why.
More to discover