SACD?????

Hi, I own a SACD player (Marantz SA1) but mostly play regular CDs on it with GREAT satisfaction! Super musical, incredible detail, etc. The few SACDs I have don't sound all that much better, if any, to my ear. But I love the Marantz player because it plays all my discs so well. My recommendation would be to buy a good CD player and all the JVC XRCD recordings you can find (these are mostly jazz recordings, but there are some pop titles too). The XRCD's sound so good on all my CD players that I listen to them over and over. They cost about the same as SACD's but are WORTH it. You won't hear better sounding CDs, and I include HDCD recordings in that claim.

I bought a 333 when the price dropped and I am extremely pleased with it as a CD player, and the SACD brings the player into the $5000 sound category. At the current price, the SACD capability is free. I disagree with the previous postings. I think SACD is in its infancy. There are more titles everyday (although the retailers haven't figured out what to do about them). Check out the hirez forum on AudioAsylum.com for lists and updates on availability. The big shoe for sacd and dvd-a is just beginning to drop. The companies believe for a mass market, they need to offer something besides better sound, and that something is discrete multichannel. If you want to keep your options open, the replacement for the 9000 is about to hit the market , at $1000, with multichannel. The prices will be dropping on the software, to about the current level for new releases on CD. CD will become the low cost medium of the future, like cassettes. And LP's- I'm sorry, but I am more convinced than ever that it will continue to shrink, and become more and more a "collector's" market. The sound quality of SACD, to my ears, is better(read: more accurate to the recording, not necessarily "better" sounding) than Lp ever was. These changes are in part a response to MP3s. If the companies are going to be able to charge for a product, higher quality and new features are the only way to go for them. BTW, I have been a very active audiophile for 35 years, and have had hundreds of front ends of all types. Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.

I think that vinyls will still last longer than SACD.
So instead of SACD player the turntable might be the better option.
Right now for the digital it is the best to buy used high quality CD-player or CD + DAC combo and enjoy. The favorable SONY 9000es sucks on regular CDs!

I bought the 9000ES, but primarily because I wanted a better picture quality for DVD movies. It definitely delivered. The sound quality (digital out on 5.1 and DTS soundtracks) is also superb. As to SACD, I agree with many of the above posts. It is pretty stagnant at this point in time, when it should be releasing thousands of titles by the month at this point. I've bought only 3 SACDs, and I think that's all I will buy for the time being. The SACD sound quality from 9000ES does not equal my vinyl.

Bottom line: don't by the 9000ES for SACD. If you need a great quality DVD for movies--it's worth it and you get SACD as bonus. I also agree that regular CD's are pretty poor off the Sony.

Thanks for all the responses. I appreciate the input.