SACD vs. Blu-Ray for audio quality/sonics

@elevick  You're probably right in most cases but there are folks with nice HT set-ups who use Blu-ray discs for audio only.  They simply raise their projector screen for audio only eliminating any concern of a large flat screen breaking up the soundscape.

No, my BD player plays cd's with the tv turned off. It has its own litle display, just like a cd player. The idea that you need your tv to be on is only true for modern budget BD players that no longer have analogue outputs. They output through hdmi and you then have to channel that to your amplifier.

I'm thinking of what i have to do with my oppo 105.  cds and sacds are easy to play.  dvda and blue rays either need the tv on so i can use the menus or i have to sit right in front of the tiny oppo display.  my old denon was the same way.

I wasnt even thinking about hdmi outputs...

The new Oppo UDP-205 does not require a TV at all. Download the app on your Android/Apple phone, and you are all set to play, configure, etc. You can even set the filters, audio settings etc, without the TV.

OP,
I feel, it all depends on the recordings. I have some "good old" Stockfish CDs that sound tons better than some SACDs.

It is not clear that SACD sounds better than Redbook CD using identical masterings/recordings.  There was a meta-analysis of available studies done a few years ago, and the statistics done were weakly significant.

So, if your question is about the formats (i.e. bit rate & depth) then the answer may well be no.

If B-ray is PCM it may be using some sort of super long ladder resistive network to decode(?)  It is already difficult to use these for CD w/out having all sorts of problems, and many modern players convert to DSD for the decode.  Not to mention that many studios record in DSD to begin with....

So... the bottom line would be:
... don't worry about this while you buy better speakers and build a better listening room