That’s very deep.... I quite like it
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Location: Melksham, Wiltshire
Posts: 731
I'm Peter.
That’s very deep.... I quite like it
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days
Posts: 4,779
I'm Shaun.
I have experienced both and can say that SACD is quite different to CD but when my last SACD player went bang I didn't replace it. Happy to keep on with CD.
Thanks guys, you’ve set my mind at ease. I don’t feel like I’ve missed out or am missing anything from SACD’s. I already own a few hundred CD’s accumulated during the years it was impossible to find new vinyl, and most of my present CD purchases are used. I’ve bought several new vinyl albums of late, and a lot of used ones. So not embracing yet another standard that is even more expensive is OK by me.
And honestly, if Super hi-fi is your goal, these days high resolution downloads are the way to go, I mean digital. In my system as it stands nothing beats a new 180 gram vinyl for reaching that emotional content. Although, since I’ve added the Cary CD player, it gives it a nice run for its money. I certainly don’t mind hearing a CD instead of a vinyl album.
Something to be said for a machine that put all of its eggs in one basket. A CD only player, in theory, concentrates on the best playback for CD’s without wasting any money on other parts that play other mediums. In reality, that may not play out? But, it makes sense to some degree. At least that’s what the sales literature says! If it’s to be believed. At any rate, I feel renewed confidence in my decision to buy a CD only player.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I get that I'm perhaps trying to cover all my bases here --- I don't subscribe to the idea that only single-layer discs sound good, or even that they're any better than hybrid discs. I love that the Japanese have embraced the format, but I think a lot of what they suggest is audiophile tomfoolery (like adherence to single-layer for SACD - never mind silliness like SHM and blu-spec CDs).
I also don't feel that you need a lofty high-end transport or player to feel the benefit. The difference (small as it is IMO) can be heard even on my lowly system. My experience of a dCS player is similar. For me, there's a sense of air and ease on the best discs that rivals the best vinyl (although it is a different sound, as you might expect).
The choice of music on SACD is disappointing in many genres of course, and Japanese imports are prohibitively expensive. I'd hate to think I had only one horse in the race, so to speak. I enjoy that I can play SACD. The nicest ones are some of the finest recordings I own. I won't lose sleep if I can't get my favourite album in an SACD version. Ambivalent enthusiasm?
Technics SL1210 MkII / SME 309 / Timestep PSU / Achromat / Denon DL-304
Phono stage PS Audio NuWave Phono Converter
Lossless / MP3 / Tidal > Roon > Bryston BDP-1USB > Marantz NA-11S1
Marantz UD7007 SACD/Blu-ray/DVD-V/DVD-A
Toshiba BDX1200 Blu-ray player (Zone A & Region 1)
Audiolab 8200AP pre-amp/processor
Power amp: Arcam P7
B&W 804S stereo (bi-amped), HTM4S centre, CDMSNT surrounds (5.0)
Sennheiser HD 700 headphones
Panasonic PT-AT6000 projector
I was under the impression that there was quite a big catalogue of Classical SACD available, and new ones still coming out?
I can see the appeal of it if you want surround sound.
As to the sound I don't know if it is maybe 'smoother' sounding than CD, sometimes I think so, sometimes I think it is my imagination. This could be down to the character of the typical SACD DAC rather than the medium, though. Wise not to make assumptions about what is responsible for the character of the sound you hear, especially with digital.
Current Lash Up:
TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.
I hear the difference and have two SACD front ends, an Esoteric P5, D5 combo and a Marantz SA7.
Regards Neil
"Today scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
Its now a conspiracy theory to believe that the Immune system is capable of doing the job it was designed to do.
A fish is only as healthy as the water its swimming in ! [Dr Robert Young]
www.tubedistinctions.co.uk
Matthew 5:10
The different mastering is pretty easy to hear, and this is what convinces people that SACD is night and day better than CD. It fooled me when I first heard it. It is any difference beyond that, in the character of the sound, that I struggle with.
I did use to think that it was worth having for the improved sound quality of the re-mastering (and re-mixing in some cases) but I've changed my stance on that in the last year or so. I'd rather have the original now.
Current Lash Up:
TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.
I've got a few because I had a Cambridge universal player now an OPPO 205 which does sound excellent with SACD's , there is so much re-mastering going on these days what sounds better , God knows.
I play DVD-As , Blu-Ray-As , SACDs , CDs , FLACs I no longer analyse just enjoy the music.
One maybe interesting note I have a Japanese SACD (not hybrid) of Wishbone Ash's Argus , its the most expensive disc I have ever bought , I never played it because compared to my remastered CD it sounded flat and dull, I read on I think Steve Hoffman's forum that my CD was a terrible remastering and that the best or one of the best was my SACD , a bit more researching and the SACD needed quite a bit more volume , well blow me , it had been shoved at the back all these years , great recording , blows the CD away