SACD sounds worse or CD sounds better or ....?


I have been going through a rather substantial system upgrade over the past few months. The only thing that hasn't changed (yet) is my source: a Bel Canto PL-1A UDP.

Everything sounds better with the new system and I am very pleased.

BUT one thing is puzzling me. Whereas before, with my less capable system, SACDs always sounded substantially better than Redbook CDs. Now the difference between the two formats is not as substantial. And the source hasn't changed. And I was running PL-1A analog out before as well.

The only thing that has changed at the source is that my new pre-amp has balanced inputs, and so I am using the balanced outputs from the PL-1A whereas before I was using the RCA outs.

Does this make any sense? Any thoughts as to why a system that is generally better in every sense (more extension in both directions, better resolved, better balanced, fuller, etc), would end up have less of an apparent difference between CDs and SACDs?

Thanks for your thoughts.

--dan
dgaylin
SACD stomps cd when the original performance was recorded (or mastered?) in DSD. My experience with SACD's that were reissues of cd's - or simply recorded for cd with SACD as an afterthought - is that the differences are FAR more difficult to discern.
Art
Did the upgrade involve preamp? I just remembered that when I got a tubed preamp the CD sound from Unidisk improved quite a bit. Digital glare and digititis almost disappeared. SACD still sounded good, but there was no digititis on SACD to begin with. So yeah, it's possible that an upgrade could improve CD playback more than SACD.
Jylee -- THAT indeed makes sense. Yes, a preamp upgrade was a key part of the upgrade. Not tubed, but the most musical pre-amp I have ever owned.
If this is nonsense, please don't flame me - I'm just throwing it out there. What if your hitting the performance ceiling of some equipment down the line. Before, neither the SACD nor the cd were hitting it but now just the SACD is.