Are You Happy With 2 Channel SACD?

digital output doesn't work for sacd 2 or multi-channel. you need analog ic's and analog pass through if using receiver.

i prefer 2 channel for almost all sacd, although i must say that pink floyd dsotm is awesome in multi channel. most multi channel sacd's use rears for ambience. some use it for gimmicks that distract me more than impress.

aloha keith

I also prefer two channel even though I have a mutli-channel unit (modded philips SA963).

I bought my two channel Sony SCD-C333ES at a fantastic price, due to the fact that it had been replaced by the multichannel 555. I had and still have absolutely no interest in multichannel sound, so the whole thing has worked out splendidly for me.

And not to get back into the whole argument, but SACD is definitely a good thing. My only problem(huge problem, actually) with the format is lack of software.

I hope Sony is reading this thread and realease more high end 2-ch SACD player instead of putting money in multi channel. I am hanging on to my Sony SCD-777ES for a few more years.

I have a multi-channel SACD player. I bought it because EMM Labs released their multi-channel players first and I wanted mine sooner rather than later.
But, I listen to it in two-channel. I have 100+ SACD's and I listen to them all
in two channel whether they have a multi-channel layer, or not. I am as happy as a clam with SACD in two channel. IMO, two channels are enough to experience the difference between redbook and SACD. I listen to SACD's for days in a row. When I throw on a redbook CD, even super duper remasters, I can tell something is missing compared to SACD and I'm eager to get back to my SACD's. If I were buying today and I had my choice between the two-channel Emm Labs player and the multi-channel, I'd go with the two-channel.