SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

Durham, I think you need to try newer sacd players. I have had five sacd players since my SCD-1. Each was substantially better than the Sony. I know there are mods to the SCD-1 which can substantially improve it also.
In my experience the DVD-A at best was a failed experiment, with the industry so undercutting it performance in their concern with copying as to make it unlistenable.

Wow, "Industry reports" from a "Sony webiste". Getting news from a Sony website is like reading the National Enquirer.

Sony has never grossly inflated numbers before right people?........... :yawn:

As for those Sales numbers again very misleading. The Sales numbers are purchase orders from dealerships for past and present orders(and knowing Sony, probably future orders that may or may not be filled), not the actual people who own a SACD player. I bet the number of actual people who own a SACD player numbers is in the 10's of thousands at best.

Want real info on how well SACD does? Check out the Wall Street Journal and other trade publishings. Your going to get a better picture of the real story.

People here should be rooting for DVD-A anyway. Its potential is so much greater vs. the crippled SACD format.

No... I would say that a lot of the dribble posted in this thread is more akin to National Enquier whith no basis in reality whatsoever.

Anyone who claims or thinks that DVD-A is even close in sales......is wrong by a long shot.

BTW..I find DVD-A to sound too sterile as compared to the natural sounding SACD format.

I would love to see some dvd-a #'s from anywhere that back up any claims made in this thread, and whith Warner selling its music division, who will be the major backer of DVD-A besides Merridian?

I believe DVD-A is all but done and the format is a major money loser and the Wall Street Journal is not required to know this...just common sense.

How many hi end dvd-a players are there exactly.....two as far as I know and that says a lot.

Jackcob I wonder if these arent't same people who cannot hear the difference between 'lamp cord' and hi-end speaker cable???

Ritteri it is obvious from your writing that you are not a very bright person. That may not be your fault. Perhaps you come from poor stock, or you attended the public school and never rose above the quality of your education, or maybe you just chose not to exercise the muscle between your ears. I have no way of knowing the real reason for this distinct lack of understanding, but it is evidenced in your posts. This is not intended as an insult, just a point of reference!

1) There are millions of people who buy music which includes lyrics that are not recording in their erste sprach, or original language! I personally own dozens of recordings in languages other than English (which actually was not my first language) including German, Spanish, French, Hebrew, and Japanese. Some of them I actually bought because of the alternate language! Am I a better person because I own these recordings? No, but... I would never discount the quality of a particular recording because of the language, regardless of whether I even speak that language!

2) If all you listen to is pop music, it's not even worth entering into a dialog with you! How pathetic is top 40 music!?! Did you get the latest Brittany Spears CD?

3) How can a 44.1 kHz recording contain as much information as a 96+ kHz? By definition there is less information on a lower sampled disc! What is the point of spending $5,000-12,000 on a "edge of the art" CDP to get less info from your disc? I have DSOTM and have listened to both formats, or should I say, all three formats since I have the LP also. The LP sounds better than both digital formats. Of the two digital, SACD is better. We could get into a big debate about the Nyquist Theorum, but I'm not sure anyone wants to sit through that!!! If you cannot hear the differnce, refer to my comment to Jackcob!

4) Though digital playback has been around for 20+ years SACD is still in it's infancy, and cannot be compared to a mature technology for the quality of tweaks and improvement. It has always been the companies like Sony who come up with the technology, but it's been the small high end companies who make them worth owning. When high-end companies begin making really good SACDPs then they can be compared to the best of the current CDPs.

5) It wasn't a good thing then, and it's still not now!
If people were forced fed SACD like they were Redbook CD this would not be an issue, but I think the fact that people are given a choice by Sony/Philips shows that they beleive in the medium.

6) How can you take offense at someone questioning a terrible example on your part, and reduce yourself to Ad Hominom attacks. It only calls into question your own intelligence!

7) The problem isn't that people are missing your point about SACD not being as good as Redbook CD, this issue is that you are wrong! I realize (at least I think I do) that your scientific background is poor, and therefore you are not aware of the lack of substance in your generalizations, but news flash: believing something does not make it true!

I hope we can set aside this fruitless arguement now. Perhaps you can go and do some studying with your spare time, or maybe the solution is as simple as having your hearing checked. Doctors say that most people already experience serious hearing loss before they become aware of the problem. Give it a try!

Hey Ritteri what do they call a person who can speak two languages? A: Bi Lingual
What do they call a person who can speak several languages? A: Multi Lingual
What do they call a person who can speak one language? A: American!

Durham42, comparing a Sony with the Linn is not a fair test, the Linn is arguably the best one-box player out there, at least to my ears, and the Burmester is a top of the line DAC, while the stock Sony is comparable to a Wadia 830/850 level player at best. What was your impression when you listened to both redbook and SACD through the Sony's output stage? That's really the appropriate test.

This thread is too long for me to digest everything said, but I'll throw in my two cents on at least one aspect of the question. As I hinted above, one of the limiting factors in comparing SACD (or DVD-A, for that matter) to redbook CD has been that the best of the high end manufacturers, as well as the recording industry, have spent the last 20 years trying to make redbook CD sound the best it can, but SACD and DVD-A are still in their comparative infancy, and the best of the designers (save Meridian, Ed Meitner and dCS) have not really been willing to throw a lot of money into R&D for formats which might not make it in the marketplace. To some extent the hi-rez situation reminds me of the early days of CD, where there were a lot of modifiers out there who would take major manufacturers' cost-compromised offerings (principally Philips/Magnavox units then, as they were the easiest to work with) and come up with modded units that were far better than the originals but certainly no match for today's players. I see the same going on with hi-rez units (I've had a lot of the mods made to my Sony SACD player). The question is whether the formats will take hold enough for talented designers to devote the time and effort they did to CD; if they do, then you might see the promise both of these formats hold be realized.