Is SACD really this lousy?

David......Diana Krall and Natalie Cole sound different from each other, but one is not "better or worse" than the other-- personally I like them both-- as I do good vinyl and good digital music. Whether either of us likes it or not, in the early 80s there was a "war" between analog and digital music formats and analog lost badly. "to the victor goes the spoils". Vinyl will continue to hang on by its fingernails for years because of its perceived superior sound quality by a few afficionados such as yourself and my friend (and I'm glad it will be around). My friend has a $15K analog front end, and also an excellent CD system. I've asked him which he listens to most, and he said he preferred vinyl, but listened to CDs 90% of the time because of their quick and easy use and music availability. I responded to your "vinyl vs analog" error with sarcasm-- sorry. AudiogoN can be an enjoyable chat room so I propose a truce-- there's room for both of us. Cheers. Craig

Garfish,the "war"you refer to between analog vs digital in the early 80's was TOTALLY irrevelant to which sounded better.The mass public couldn't care less and were just waiting for something more convienent to stick in their $300.00 Sony "stereos" and boom boxes.If your friend prefers the sound of analog but listens to CD's 90 % of the time because they are 'quick and easy"then he couldn't care less either. Me? I care!!!

Craig, it doesn't cost any more to have a great vinyl front end, versus a CD one. Just get what I've got. Also, there is no point in arguing over this, because we're all a stubborn lot.......................David, just telling someone how great vinyl is can be meaningless, if they aren't receptive to it. If someone starts a thread about SACD, they definitely don't want to hear about vinyl, because SACD represents the "newest toy" they can buy. They don't care that there are only a handful of titles, and that the entire software catalog is owned/licensed by Sony. They don't care that the ENTIRE OUTPUT STAGE USES CHEAP OP AMPS (and NOT just the ones used to derive the fake "balanced" outputs, either). They only care about what's NEW. They're exactly the kind of customer a dealer likes to see come in the door....................."Excuse me, hello, I'd like to buy whatever is the "latest and greatest" technology in existence, and would like it RIGHT NOW. Please don't make me wait another minute"...................And when the general public decides they aren't interested in SACD in a year or two (as they are now), Sony will still be trickling out titles from their catalog...the way they're still refusing to admit that MD is not a viable format. The point is, if you love Sony products, nobody will ever be able to convince you that buying an SCD-1 isn't better than dying and going to Heaven...whatever the "realities" are...............And I've said it before, I'll say it again, if you think the SCD-1 is better at playing CD's than any old "CD player", bring yours by my system sometime. I'm open minded, and I hope you are.

David; My friend works long and hard to make a living and quite frankly doesn't usually have the time to fool around with vinyl, but he can get some listening time in with CDs. Other than this comment, I now give up. You win. Have a nice day. Craig.

Hi Carl; Again we were posting at the same time. I appreciate your stepping in as "mediator". I certainly have nothing against vinyl, but I've chosen digital-- and as of now it's sounding pretty darn good (I just got an ML transport and DAC-- used of course). I surely do agree with you about SACD, and in fact I recently read in some hi-end mag. (don't remember where) that Sony considers the format a "flop". Cheers. Craig