SACD Players

Myles, thank you very much for your detailed analysis with my observations. Regarding SACD vs vinil; you are correct that SACD has better "bass dynamic". I love symphonic music and therefore this "bass dynamic" makes me to say "this listening experience is second to the live acoustic music only". Regarding piano, I also cannot argue with you. Its sound ranges wildly from "Italian Co, Glenn Gould" to terrible Volodis. Kavi Alexandr recording may be his worst, again I am not arguing, my point is only that I am very familiar with hall ambience, orchestra and our esteem maesto Sawallich. so I can use it as reference (in CD, 24/96 or SACD mode) Now, you said something EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, if I understood you correctly, SACD signals are converted in PCM format in 9000ES in SACD mode (and from PCM must be converted, finally to analog). Wow, theoretically it should negate all advantages of SACD. Ed Meidtner (spelling?) designer of some SACD machines, said in writing that actually PCM initially is recorded in something very similar to SACD, and he illustered many errors coming with it (e.g. Gibbs artifucts and many others). Thus 9000ES, I hope I misunderstood you!, perform in poor PCM? PLEASE, clarify - Simon

The 9000ES has digital out (coaxial and optical) for DVD, CD, and 96/24. My son and I compared the CD digital out going into my Rotel 985 with the Sony CD D/A conversion and analog into the Rotel. We agreed the both approaches had similar sound quality. I slightly preferred the digital path, while my 22 year old son preferred the analog. Frankly, the diference was very, very small. I could not reliably pick the digital approach.

Rcprince, have you listened to the Accuphase? If so did you compare it to the Sony's or the Marantz? Simon, I seem to recall an item in Stereophile recently (I don't remember which issue, but I could find it) in the industry update indicating that SACD is recorded and mastered in PCM and is only stored and read as DSD. I may be wrong on this but it is what I remember. I don't know if this helps, maybe Myles can shed some light.

Myles, Doug: FRAUD or FROG? DSD->PCM or vice versa. As far as I know: many many years ago digital recording became single bit (in most but not all studious) x64 or x128 oversampling. Lets count, 44.1 kHz x 64 = few MHz. in other words its very similar (if not mathematically identical) to... SACD. For Red book CDs these single bit signals are converted into PCM (24/192 is only "hot rod" of 16/44.1 PCM. I am not distinquish them here due to their identical mathematical principals). This is what you probably read, Doug. Myles, you claim actual FRAUD in Sony 9000ES by stating, as I, and apperently, Doug understood you that "they" take "pure" DSD signal and then convert them into the "dirty" PCM (here is not A/D but D/A so you must imply mode called by Sony in this machine as "SACD"). PCM converted from DSP has huge amount of artifacts, as discussed by Ed Meidnter (spelling?) as oppose to PCM created directly from the sound waves in A/D process. Not that SACD is without a problem... BUT that you are saying is a fraud by Sony. Are you sure about that? It is hard to swallow, really - PLEASE respond - Simon

Doug, I know what you read. Multi-channel SACD is said by "experts" in Stereophile (in the issue where Scull reviewed Technics A10 DVD-A Player) can be done only by using PCM process, if it is so in Sony/Phillips units or not we, really, don't know. But its entirely different from Myles statement that on 2-channel SACD part of 9000ES Sony Player SACD signals are converted into PCM format. If he is corrrect and I wish him to respond VERY MUCH then sound quality is compromized, indeed. It is very serious matter for me, I own 9000ES and send it to modify analog stage, however, if digital part is "dirty" it will not help much and it is huge waste (emotional at least).