For best CD playback is SACD needed?

If you cannot hear much of a difference, then I would ask what are you listening through? Looking at your system link, my guess is that you are basing your conclusions from a $200 Onkyo receiver and MB quart speakers. Sorry to be blunt but I don't think that that gear will be able to show you the differences between SACD and CD.

Forget what the journals say - higher resolution sources will be clearly evident through better equipment and will go a long way to change your perspective. I recommend you audition different players and setups at a dealer and see for yourself.

Hiend Sony SACD is Stereophile Class A and can be brought to level with a $5-6K outlay with purchase and then modification from folks like Dan Wright that make the equivalent to $20K offerings from Linn,Meridian,etc.
Sony,Marantz,and Denon are all good stock performers at reasonable prices.And all three have a number of hot rodders.Now you have to think about some "HD" obsolescence.
But ones Red Book CD,and SACD's still sit thier so if your ready to go do it and it another type of discs sticks (SACD seems to be cooling off and may be dropped as have so many other formats.
Cheers
Chazz

Hi-end Sony SACD is Stereophile Class A and can be brought to level with a $5-6K outlay with purchase and then modification from folks like Dan Wright that make the equivalent to $20K offerings from Linn,Meridian,etc.
Sony,Marantz,and Denon are all good stock performers at reasonable prices.And all three have a number of hot rodders.Now you have to think about some "HD" obsolescence.
But ones Red Book CD,and SACD's still sit thier so if your ready to go do it and it another type of discs sticks (SACD seems to be cooling off and may be dropped as have so many other formats.
Cheers
Chazz

It sounds as if you want the answer to be no, SACD would not be practical. However, I would say yes to SACD for two reasons. First of all you say you want to significantly upgrade your stereo AND digital is your only source. Secondly, you listen primarily to Classical and Jazz.

Well it just so happens that SACD is sonically superior and the easy (re: cheap) way to significantly upgrade your stereo. By cheap I mean to say that a $500 SACD player will sound better on SACD than a $5000 redbook player will sound with the same RBCD. You can never recover information that isn't there in the first place. You can also choose to listen with your mind, and let the scientist/engineers tell you what you can and cannot hear, or you can listen with your soul and KNOW what you hear/feel.

Also, though SACD new releases are diminishing, Classical and Jazz represent roughly 73% of the current SACD catalog. I would also estimate that these two genres represent roughly 90% of the new releases.

Cheers,
John

BTW, vinyl is my preffered source, SACD second, and RBCD third.

I recommend SACD even at this date because even if you can't hear a difference between a Stereo SACD program and its redbook counterpart (I can hear a big difference, by the way), you surely can detect a monumental difference between a multichannel SACD program and a stereo redbook version, if you're willing to set up a multichannel playback system. Amazon.com has thousands of used SACDs available at a fraction of their list prices. I have bought hundreds of them and have enjoyed them immensely.