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
joe_coherent OP
130 posts
 
My point is that newer XRCDs, HDCDs or even some great quality regular CDs like Reference Recordings and others sound as satisfying to me as many Audio DVDs. However in most cases comparing a regular CD to its DAD or SACD version is unfair since the regular CDs in most cases were mastered several years ago. You'd have to compare a recent issue CD with its Audio DVD or SACD counterpart, which I haven't done yet.
rcprince
3,068 posts
 
Joe: I do agree with you on the best quality CDs being musically satisfying, but listen to the Telarc Dukas disc, the Delos Mahler 2 or the dmp Gaudeamus-Sacred Feast discs--all recent, very good CDs and hybrid SACDs. It's tough for me to explain the difference except to say there's more of an ease when I'm listening to the SACD; I don't know if you'll necessarily notice it in an A/B comparison.
simontju
257 posts
 
Telarc Dukas SACD and CD are the best if not the best sounding records, rspectfully (however, not performance). There is HUGE difference between CD (or DVD) sound and SACD sound. Everyone, who listen to live acoustic music, particularly orchestral one will admit, that SACD is much closer to the live music then vinil, DVD-A, 24/96, upsample 16/44.1, tape 8-track etc. Joe_Coherent, we discussed playback comparison with live acoustics on other forum. Just listen. There is another factor, however. SACD produces the best dynamic range, truthfull bottom, realistic (take it least unrealistic) soundstage then anything else (except again a live music) that your amp/speakers etc is under pressure to re-produce it.
dondeanni7b24
5 posts
 
Anyone picked up the latest Ultimate Audio (Winter 2001) issue? Great review of the Muse Model Nine Signature DVD Player titled- "A Better Musical Envelope".
moskowitaaf0
3 posts
 
Whenever someone says that a recording or piece of equipment sounds "dry and clinical" I go out and listen to it right away, and often end up buying it! They said it about the wonderful Bruel & Kjaer 1" measurement mics, they said it about DAT, they said it about Scan Speak 2905-series tweeters and about Meridian CD players. I've heard it said about B&W 80x-series loudspeakers. In all cases, they sounded accurate, transparent and involving to my ears. I guess it's time to put SACD on my "want" list!
More to discover