SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel


Are they the same? Is one superior? Are they system dependent?
matchstikman
"Sorry, but I have yet to hear ANY SACD player put out a better musical signal than a competently built "redbook" player"

So, you just admitted that you have VERY little experience to SACD. It's common for the unlearned to proclaim absolute knowledge based on limited actual experience. Absolutes only come from the unlearned in this hobby, or the arrogant and self-loving, neither of which types are a useful source of information in my experience.

"thank the sound engineer who recorded the disc, not the disc itself"

Does this make any sense to anyone? It doesn't to me. Poor argument, I won't even bother with it unless it can be expanded upon greatly. Though it's nowhere as inane as this comment:

"Ever check out one of those old Sony recievers with all the differnt modes of ambiance? Like "Hall", "Stadium","Live" etc etc?? Basically thats whats done to the SACD in simple terms"

What a load! You've clearly not had adequate exposure to the format, as anyone with a halfway decent SACD player can easily see from your writing, despite what you'll no doubt claim shortly. I suppose all remastered redbook albums are pure as the new fallen snow, however, right?

"So why dont redbook cd's get remastered?"

Uh, they do. Do your homework, most CD layers of the hybrid SACD get the exact same DSD mastering technology used on them, the DSD is down-converted to PCM, yet oddly enough 99.9% of listeners will prefer the SACD layer of their hybrids. Go figure.

"How many people do you think in the general population care about remastering obscure CD's such as the ones listed?"

How about tens of thousands, of people, millions of coppies sold overall. Again, do your homework, look at the sales stats for those "obscure" and "dated" recordings, don't just spew negativity about.

"If SACD was such a grand stepping stone...and had a profitable future then alot more mfg. would be jumping on the bandwagon to produce SACD players."

Uh, they are! Again, you've not done your homework or you would notice a trend of aftermarket players taking over for mass market players in the industry. Sony and Philips have backed off and the likes of Bel Canto, Linn, McCormack, Esoteric, EMM Labs, dCS and a dozen other companies have taken over the reigns on the hardware side, with more players coming.

Again, do your homework, don't be so blindly pessimistic and negative all the time, you might learn something.

"One word: BETAMAX. SACD is already heading down the same path."

You base this on what exactly? Pretty weak or I'm pretty dumb. Given the second as true, please explain this one to me as well.

"And one last thing tireguy, for every cd you listed that may sound better on SACD from your opinion, Im sure I could pull up just as many(and many more) that sound as good or better on a regular cd."

Please, by all means, give me a list of CD's you have that sound better then their SACD counterpart. I'm sure EVERYONE here would like to know about them.

Ritteri, from what you've written, just like Ben, it's clear that you heard a single, low-fi or unproperly setup SACD player, playing some of the worst offerings software wise on said machine next to a stupidly expensive Redbook setup, then decided to start a crusade to call ALL SACD players and software inferior redbook, point blank. Surely, if a $10K redbook player sounds better then your $500 SACD player unproperly setup and playing junk titles then it is very logical to conclude that ALL CD players sound better then SACD players, same with the titels of course....I hope that I'm not the only one that can read between the lines here....
Little Milton I don't think yout inclusion of myself back into this argument is merited and it reads like a whole lot of quotes I never made.
Ritteri,
In the past, people at Audiogon who have argued their positions in the same way as you are here, have lost all credibility among the community. Your comments are very elementary in nature and for the most part hardly defendable. The simple statement about remastered redbook to redbook is evidence of your weak position here. Old recordings have been remastered for years. Not to SACD but to redbook for the simple reason of improving the master along with the technology. These remastered cd's have sold millions of copies to the masses, not just the audiophile. Please drop your position before you embarrass yourself any further and get tagged as a simple flamer.
Now for a comment on your system. You have an excellent cd player, not my personal taste, but a great player non-the-less. I would suggest finding a comparable SACD player for your comparisons. That may be very difficult to do in that your running your volume from your digital player and you would need a pre-amp to run SACD. Now you would be comparing apples and peas. Not even the same family! My guess is you have never made a direct comparison redbook to SACD on your system using all fruit.
I'm sure you'll have some comment to defend yourself, remember your reputation will stick for a long time.
First off, I have had TOO MUCH experience with SACD players. I sold them for 3 years since they were formally intruduced to the USA at MY STORE back in 99'/00'

I have also owned about a half dozen players including the SCD-1 by Sony. They have all long since been sold off over the last year.

As for listening to improperly setup equipment, I always take note of a product if it is setup improperly.

As for companies getting on the SACD bandwagon, after 4 years since its introduction there are probably still less than 3-4 dozen players total. MOST are from Sony and Philips, and that is a poor sign.WHy dont you do your homework first? Do you know how many companies had CD players out 4 years after the introduction of CD???? HUNDREDS. Its well known that SACD isnt going anywhere. If anything should take off its going to be DVD-A which I feel is a better format to grow for future sound improvements.

As for my "Betamax" analogy, its based on the fact that your not going to get many SACD's released. After 4 years how many SACD's are there? A few hundred.WHo released most of em? Sony. Thats not going to get me hopping up and down, and alot of them dont garner better sound. For every company you can name that has made one, I can name another 10 companies that wont be making a SACD player. But this isnt really my argument here.

What disc's you say sound better on redbook? Here is a small starter list:

Dark side of the Moon: Pink Floyd(would you care to hear Roger Waters take on SACD?)
Ambassador Satch: Louis Armstrong( if you think SACD sounds better, time to upgrade your speakers and CDP)
Jazz at the Plaza: Miles Davis (imaging and seperation are far superior on Redbook)SACD sounds really compressed.
Couldnt Stand the weather: Stevie Ray Vaughn
Reflections: BB King

These are just a few.But my point is, there shouldnt be ANY that sound better. If SACD was truely at this point in time a step better than regular ol cd's there wouldnt be ANY ARGUMENT from anyone, but there is because presently SACD hasnt shown what is supposedly capable of. There are a few SACD's that did sound better, but like I stated, alot of that is the recording process.
Jade: Let my comments stick. Let the record show that I have also had quite a few different high end CDP's and DAC/Transports to do direct comarison with SACD players.

Doing comparisons with SACD players were done through 2 preamps I owned at the time last summer including the Adcom GFP-750 and the Pass Labs X2. Neither of these preamps color the sound in any way. And if your stating that a good quality preamp can change the test results for the SACD players I had vs. a few cd players(some used digital volume control, some actually went through the same Preamp), then you are simply driving my point home further.

SACD has yet to really seperate itself as being "better sounding" than redbook. And this is the whole point. THen you add to the fact how lethargic the format is evolving, add the very limited library available and you have a doomed format. As for universal players some people speak about. I would be open to one, but I have yet to find many(maybe one or 2)that perform excellent on all formats.