SACD's to avoid due to poor remastering.


I have just purchased and played a copy of a SACD titled "The Ultimate Tony Bennett" CS63570 a Columbia release.. This would have to rank as one of the worst remastering"s I have ever heard. The sibilance is unbearable, the soundstage is congested and instrument tonality unbelievably poor. I dont think I have heard a CD that sounds worse let alone a SACD.
I thought compiling a list of such titles to avoid may be interesting.

Regards

FWIW I have a Playback Designs MPS-5 which to my ears is the most analog sounding digital player to date. This therefore reinforces my criticism of the remastering of the disc.
ecka
An example of an excellent sounding SACD (stereo layer) is Elton John's Captain Fantastic. If this disc sounds bad on your SACD player, it will be difficult for your to accurately assess the merits of any SACD you play. This SACD is availble at Amazon or for under $10.00 at YourMusic.

In addition to all the lousy quality back catalog released by Sony (much of it fawned over by early adopters), most of the early SACD players sounded pretty bad. These players and discs are not representative of what SACD can do.
Gandme, I think the Norah Jones SACD sucks, and I am not alone. I didn't know anything about the remastering/recording controversy. I just know on every disc player I have ever had the CD version sounded better. I no longer have a reference level disc player, but it's even more pronounced to me on my current disc player (Oppo BP83), especially if I put the CD output through my Bryston DAC.

I won't even get into comparing the SACD to the vinyl on that recording, which is no contest at all.

I have hundreds of SACD's and DVD-Audio discs like many on Audiogon, and it was a great format. The Elton John SACD's, all of them are truly sublime in both stereo and surround (I never really listen to that anymore), and I spent the last couple of years collecting them as the format died. But, for many reasons, including poorly executed pressings, such as the mentioned Norah Jones, it is going the way of the 8-track and Betamax.
I'm glad you are not alone...there a many SACD's recorded in the same manner using analog masters including Elton John's. I'm sure they are engineered differently (DSD mix etc.). You do not like the SACD format and have your best results with vinyl... fair enough. The Norah Jones SACD is still better to my ears on my system. I will continue listening to SACD's that "suck"...
Gandme,

I love SACD, it just didn't make it. I have hundreds of discs that as the technology continues to move forward I am sure I will be able to place easily onto my music server and play the files through my DAC (or one to come). So I'm invested for good, but as the question on this thread was poorly realized SACD transfers, I lended my voice. Below is an article on the crappy, rotten, awful, terrible, and wholly reprehensible Norah Jones disc that no audiophile, especially after reading the attached Stereophile article would ever admit to listening to, so don't even mention owning it.

http://www.stereophile.com/thefifthelement/1104fifth/
Wow....I have read the artical. I just do not believe everything I read... you think it sucks, I think it is better than the very good redbook recording...let's call it good without the insults!