SACD vs. Vinyl

If your buying music that is not available on vinyl then for me at least, SACD is worth it. If you can get it on vinyl why wouldn't you.
Heard a Diana Krall cd then heard the SACD, it was worth the upgrade to me. YMMV

SACD will always have an advantage over any PCM digital; no matter the resolution (even 352/32). 2X DSD is even better than regular DSD (SACD). i have lots of high rez PCM files (many 192/24) which i do enjoy. but better SACD's are better. and 2X DSD that i have heard is better yet.

all the math that PCM subjects the music to exacts it's cost on the music.

this is assuming you have a sufficiently high performance SACD player.

generalizing about how analog compares to any digital presumes very high quality digital and analog sources. at the top of the heap of analog and digital that i have heard vinyl surpasses any digital and RTR is superior to vinyl. but again; at source quality below the top it's a mixed bag.

Although I am amazed at how good vinyl can sound for so little money ..... I got back into it with a used Thorens td166mkII. a musical fidelity v-lps and a denon dl103r cartridge along with a spin clean and assorted brushes all for about six hundred bucks and it sounds amazing ....

I have an original release of Sting (Dream of Blue Turtles) and it is extremely clean and dynamic sounding. Same with my Pink FLoyd pressings of The Wall and DSOTM and a couple of Led Zeppelin discs.... Great Stuff indeed ....

Mikelavigne - SACD looks pretty much like output of sigma delta converter before filtering (1-bit). SACD is equivalent to about 20/96 and it supposed to sound better than redbook layer. Problem is that many people dislike sound of any form or PWM (Sigma-Delta converters, class D amplifiers) - they might not like SACD as well.

I've never considered SACD since it was initially too expensive with very few titles and no option to make backup-copy (of very dense disk) not to mention that my music resides on Hard Drive (server).

New standards should be promoted. It should be advertised. SACD should be, initially at least, cheaper than CD - since it doesn't cost more to print and being impossible to copy, prevents piracy that cost industry a fortune. Unfortunately greed took over and they started selling SACDs over $30 a piece killing pretty much any interest (including mine). I remember seeing similar failures with Sony Beta, Iomega Zip drive, Sony Mini-Disc, HDCD, DVD-Audio and few others.

Assuming that you are interested in RBCD, you will get more by retiring the Sony for a RBCD player capable of giving the Marantz/Benz(and whatever phono stage) serious competition.