For best CD playback is SACD needed?

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.

An article by Kal Rubinson in the current Stereophile suggests HDMI may be a solution to multichannel without the mass of cables. Adding 3 more cables has been holding me back. I enjoy mostly classical, baroque, and jazz, and an occasional large orchestral work, especially Mahler, and find a ready supply of superb SACDs.

db

If you primarily plan to listen to CDs, then you don't need an SACD player. Any time one makes a machine capable of playing multiple formats, COMPROMISES to both have to be made. The idea of upsampling CD to DSD as an improvement is dubious.

I used to own a Sony SCD-1 (I gave it away to a friend) and replaced it with a very, very good CD player. Given the vastly greater availability of CD material, really topnotch CD reproduction was much more important to me (the better SACD and DVD-A machines did not do much for me as CD players). But, I actually find that a surprising amount of good classical releases are on double layer SACDs, so, a classical listener can find quite a bit on SACD (I've actually bought more SACDs during the time I did not own an SACD machine than during the time I had the Sony).

As for whether the difference between the two can be heard, to me, the difference is easy to hear on machines with dual capability and usually in favor of SACD. But, when a really good SACD player is matched against a really good dedicated CD player, the strengths of the particular CD player can outweigh the inherent advantages of the SACD format.

But, when a really good SACD player is matched against a really good dedicated CD player, the strengths of the particular CD player can outweigh the inherent advantages of the SACD format.
Larryi

Well I would have to disagree with this statement. I will admit that one could tweak, or alter a analog output stage to tailor the sound that one person may find more suitable. Just as one may find an amplifier that suits one's taste. However, when you start with a superior format in SACD, you will need to do some real magic in the rest of the player to make up for the poor start, because you are squarely behind the 8-ball when starting with redbook cd's.
Yes, if you are comparing a stock Japanese SACD player to a highly tweaked redbook cd player, the analog stage of the redbook cd player may be tweaked in such a way that it can hide the inherent flaws of the medium and sound better. However, if you were to use a similar analog stage, the SACD player will sound better.

If you did not use the words "really good" in front of "SACD player", I would find your statement more believeable. Yes, I will admit that a "really good" redbook player can sound better than a SACD player, but not better than a "really good" SACD player.

I still feel that many inexpensive stock SACD players using a SACD disc will out perform a much more expensive redbook only cd player. I will admit that it is possible (and costly) to find a redbook player that can outperform a SACD player, I just haven't heard one yet. I can't say that I've listened to many $10K+ redbook only players though.

FWIW, I went in the other direction. I sold my $8000 redbook cd player for a SACD player that sold for less than half the price. On redbook I would say the older $8000 cd player had a slight edge, on SACD's the cheaper unit far surpassed anything the more expensive redbook player was capable of.

Now I've never been a big digital proponent. I much prefer vinyl, but I find that SACD makes it much easier for me to listen to digital without grinding my teeth.

Cheers,
John

I have a good CD/SACD player (Trivista) and they key is how few SACD's are released as you mentioned. I have plenty of good redbook CD's that sound better than almost all of my SACD's. It goes back to the recording itself and how well it was done not its final format.

ET