2. digital
  3. 1068906354

SACD my thoughts at this time.....................

I have been on other threads accused of being consistantly negative on SACD as a format.
I'll put my full thoughts on the format here so those members with differing views can express their issues with my opinions.
Hopefully it can be archived and new posters can be directed to this thread.
I also don't claim to know all the answers so others can offer more information or contradictory evidence.

It's long been my contention SACD will probably survive as a niche Audiophille format.
I do not see it breaking into the mainstream nor do I see a time when the majority of releases make it onto SACD.
Of course I could be totally wrong and this is guesswork at this stage in the game.

Also as a music nut with an interest in audio replay I do not rule out further down the line owning a main replay machine that gives me SACD capability to go along with my higher end Redbook capability at this stage.

I'll break my points into main headings.

1.SOFTWARE QUALITY AND LACK OF NEW RELEASES/NEW MUSIC.
Clearly the number of SACD's available are increasing but is it enough?
Sales have risen also.
My opinion is that the large rise in sales is related directly to the large reissue sets of Dylan,The Stones,The Police and the mega-selling DSOTM by Pink Floyd.
These hybrid releases will tie in strongly with my argument on my second and sixth headings.
But the success of these releases lies in their ability to be played in most CD players.
Even pro-SACD members do seem at times to be worried by the quality of some SACD remasters or releases.
A major boo boo in trying to break the format.
Most importantly for me also is the close to complete lack of releases that are new and indeed non-Audiophile related.
Surely another boo boo.
The movement on software in general terms has been too slow.
Whilst no doubt some will cite CD quality and early problems however SACD does not offer the new intial convienance over vinyl CD did.

2.CHEAP MACHINE SYNDROME.
I bought my DVPSN900 on the reviews stating that it was a good audio machine as well which highlighted SACD superiority over Redbook.
It is but the difference between the Redbook and SACD replay is not noticeable to my ears nor others who have heard it.
Surely this is catastrophic for the format?
A dip in the water buying machines such as these will leave potential SACD progressive adopters unimpressed.
Sony has clearly introduced many cheaper SACD players over the last few years.

3.AVAILABILITY OF PLAYERS.
This one will sound daft to most Americans but when I was considering a higher end SACD machine to hear,there was nothing in my price range available in Glasgow,a major city in the UK and probably the biggest hi-fi city outside of London.
None of the big Audio stockists in the city have had much success in selling players.
I wouldn't doubt in a lot of European cities this is similar.
I've also not heard a single UK dealer rave about the format,maybe for the same reasons,my local dealer constantly turns down SCD-1's for trade in because he's had difficulty moving them.
American Audiophiles maybe don't realise that their market is a lot more vibrant despite the economic gloom.
Seems here in the UK after the intial burst of SACD there is a large gap in the availability market which hasn't been filled.

4.NEW PLAYERS
Outside the elite world of the likes of Emm Labs etc it seems the new players have been indifferent.
Doesn't the mediocre reviews/feedback of such big boys as Linn and Krell not bring another problem.
This month's Hi-fi+ reviews the new Classe Omega (£12K!)and describes it's Redbook playback as mediocre.
Shouldn't we by this stage seeing the technology drift down and be wowed by the new players?
Will the new Sony make a difference?
5.OTHER FORMATS
Clearly another big issue is the likes of DVDA.
With new generations adopting different types of software,is there any place for SACD?
Even the humble CD seems to have a reasonable future at this stage purely as the dominant format to buy new music on.
Of course it too is under threat but does anybody really think SACD will bypass CD?
6.HYBRID DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD.
Imagine you are reasonably interested in sonic reproduction but have a moderate to low-end system and you've just bought a newly remastered SACD hybrid of some classic.
If you notice a big jump in the CD quality will that intrigue you on SACD quality or will you think I'm not going to spend x$ on a new SACD player when I'm getting benefits where I am.
If you read a bit about it you might consider those who have heard the differences on older recordings to be very slight.
SACD worth the investment?

7.REDBOOK QUALITY ON SACD PLAYER.
Is this an issue?
I think this is key where Audiophiles are concerned.
Will a $3k SACD machine match a Redbook only player in Redbook replay.
It was this issue which ultimately led me away from trying to kill two birds with one stone.
A problem for me here in here the UK but what about in America where the overall selection is better?

8.COMBINATION EFFECT
It's my contention that SACD has too many different issues and unknowns at this stage to make anyone think that it's future is certain.
I'm sure I will hear a lot about Sony's investment and their copyright worries but will that matter if the format does not sell or grow sales?

Let's here your views-those who await further developments before investing in SACD,those who have early adopted and got out of the format and those who love it,embrace and believe it has a long future.
ben_campbell
Post removed 
rsbeck
887 posts
 
It took the microwave oven 20 years to catch on as a mainstream
appliance. There were automobiles long before there were roads or gas stations. Foretelling the future of SACD is beyond our capability -- there are no Kreskins here. So, the point is that high-rez digital sounds better and anyone who is in search of better sound should be ENCOURAGED to explore high-rez, either DVD-A, SACD, or both.

I have a problem with a poster like Ben who admits that he traded up to a high end CD player, an Ayre, without auditioning high end players with SACD capability because they were *UNAVAILABLE* in his area -- and then seeing him trying to discourage others from exploring SACD. Sort of like missing your flight and then bashing
Hawaii.

Further, I find it ironic that on this forum, *ANY* piece of equipment
or software -- either digital or vinyl -- should be criticized because it
happens to be esoteric. SACD will only live on as a toy for Audiophiles? LOL. Look around, folks -- how many of your friends
own Tube amps? Still listen to vinyl? How many of them
have even heard of the companies that make most of your equipment?

The people who should be complaining about high-rez are the
mainstream consumers -- not audiophiles. The industry is
luring them in through the backdoor by releasing hybrid SACD's with a remastered CD layer. IMO, this "Trojan Horse" strategy should be applauded by the audiophile community -- because
we are the winners in this analogy.

I also find it ironic that on this forum SACD should be singled out
as somehow unique in that it sounds better on high end equipment. What are we saying? That redbook CD sounds
peachy on low end players? IMO, redbook CD only sounds
TOLERABLE on a higher end player and only begins to sound great at the high end.

It only stands to reason that EVERY format will sound better on higher end equipment. Mr. Campbell didn't stick with a low-end player. To get more out of redbook CD, he upgraded to a high end redbook player. So, his comments regarding the need for a higher end player to enjoy SACD ring particularly hollow. For better or worse, this is an expensive hobby and most of us are constantly
upgrading. So, it only makes sense that -- as one upgrades, it would be wise to at least explore players with SACD capability.

Unfortunately, due to circumstances, when Mr. Campbell went shopping, he did not have the opportunity to explore higher end
players with SACD capability, and I am epathetic to his situation, but others do have the opportunity and -- this is my opinion -- those that do should only be encouraged.
ben_campbell OP
1,169 posts
 
I've enjoyed the comments so far,thanks.
I particularly enjoyed Nrchy's comments because he clearly disagrees with much of what I had to say but has stuck to the broader issues and done it in an adult,respectful manner.
This is what debate should be about.
Others have chosen to personalise much of what they've written around myself my personal experience(or lack of) with SACD players.
Of course I voiced these wider issues to help get away from that aspect because it wasn't the only issue I had with SACD.
I wish to state this for the record a final time,I have in every thread surrounding SACD ENCOURAGED the poster to go listen for themselves to whatever SACD player they are considering.
I am probably unique,but most of us are pretty unique people and Rsbeck is right to point out what we do is a marginal hobby.
However I do not stay in a backwater,I had one of Europe's top Audio dealers on my doorstep and a handful of other good to decent dealers close by.
The fact that there was close to no (The MF Nu-vista was available but out of my price range)SACD players available to demo-may well indeed be my loss but it is the reality of my situation-hardly great work on behalf of Sony and their related manufacturers.
My best friend in Audiophile terms also invested heavily in a Levinson 390s this year despite having tried SACD-again some will turn their noses up at this because he never heard SACD at a higher level-the fact remains some of us are investing our money outside of SACD because of many the issues listed above but also the damaging first impressions entry level machines have done.

If the quality and availability of SACD software is not the fault of the format and their manufacturers as Ears suggests then I do not know where the fault lies.

Let me finally say as a guy who has bought somewhere in the region of 120-140 CD's this year-do you not think if the vast majority of this software was available on SACD (rather than the 21 hybrids I've bought) I wouldn't be even more interested in hearing what the format could do?
Even amongst those 21 discs there is some debate amongst pro-SACD members as to the quality difference.

I've read enough on Audiogon to convince me,as I have believed for some time that at a price point SACD probably does outperform CD.
I also imagine somewhere up that ladder I will get Redbook performance to match my Ayre CX-7.
However I do not have a firm idea what player would do this nor do I have the motivation with all the other issues surrounding SACD at this time to pursue it any further.
A lottery win could change that though and hopefully Rsbeck could offer advice with the Emm labs equipment I would consider buying.
However in the meantime I'm too busy buying and exploring music.

ears
341 posts
 
If the quality and availability of SACD software is not the fault of the format and there manufactuers as Ears suggests, then I do not know where the fault lies.

Ben, I do not suggest that there is a fault whith SACD, and do not agree that the differences can't be heard on meager 500.00 players, as I clearly hear the benifits on all players even though none are the caliber of my other gear whith redbook and/or SACD except the modified players.

Quite frankly, you are the only poster that I have ever seen suggest that redbook on a cheaper player sounds better or equal to sacd.
When I say that the only players out of seven to do justice to both formats, I am talking about the redbook performance and not sacd.

All mentioned players clearly show SACD's superior sonics over redbook whithout question.

It is common knowledge that [most] universals or sacd/ cd players are not up to snuff on redbook until you get into the 4k and up range and/or have them modified.

If you take a turd of a recording, no format is going to make it sound great and I do not see why anyone would single out SACD for this, so please enlighten us Ben?

As far as the software, I live in a metro area of only a little more than 1 million people and can buy Sacd at no less than 10 stores that I know of and as much time as some of us spend online, why not buy sacd's off the net where they are plentiful from many sources.
To say theres not much available locally, is a cop out as not only can they be bought online, but you can hear others opinions of different recordings before purchasing.

Ben, do you think that the Stones remasters redbook layer sounds as good on your Ayre as more recent recordings?

If not, is this the fault of redbook or Ayre.... or is it because the original recording was a turd to begin whith and no player or format can make it sound near as good as a newer Recording?

Why can't I buy an Ayre locallly...is it bad marketing on Ayres behalf?
This is about how much sense your argument makes to me.

If I could buy the Ayre locally, you can bet that for everyone sold there would be at least 500 players sold whith sacd capability for every Ayre sold.
People seem to forget that hi end redbook only players make up a very small segment of the audiophool market and that more and more Audiophools are buying modified universals or higher end universals whith or whitout a dac for redbook.

Joe average is into free music and could care less about
any of this.

Ben, I am not picking on you, but rather trying to make sense of what seems to be a campaign against an obviously superior format.

Why not pick on dvd-a for having odd sized cases, no redbook layer and having to turn on my projector to set it up when using it?
Has anyone heard Neil Youngs Harvest on dvd-a....yikes it must be that dvd-a is not what it is cracked up to be...or is it the original recording thats at fault.
I blame the original turd of a recording and not the format.
Even though it has all these faults, I still support it and whith more and more music that is less than redbook quality[mp3 ect] audiophools should be supporting any format that offers superior sonics and not hold out for some future format, which may or may not even happen, and even if it does, old turd recordings are not likely to benifit any more than the two current hi rez formats can offer imo.
mejames
986 posts
 
Ears has an excellent point as he says "turd" original recordings have no business ever being released in any high resolution format[SACD,DVD-A].I can't understand why these are being released but they are on a regular basis. Heard many red book disks beat the SACD of the same title on my previously owned modified Sony SCD-1.
More to discover