2 channel SACD: worth it? what player should I get?

[Jimbo]

I do not disagree with you regarding Jitter, it is measurable but apparently most of the measured amounts are not audible but undoubtably DACs do differ in how they sound which maybe attributed to other parts of their topology, implementation and design.

Unfortunately I differ from you regarding SQ. If a record is poorly recordered, mastered or just sounds crap it doesn't get played. Waste of money in my book. If I like the music enough I will either listen too it on Spotify or watch Youtube performances by the artist which are often better than the recorded album. In fact I have a friend who loves one artist but cannot listen to any of their recordings as he finds major issues with them but loves her live or studio recordings via Youtube. How lucky are we to have all these options in this day and age?

I cannot live with poor recordings they are a distraction from the music. Likewise I have been to many live concerts and because the mixing desk has screwed up the sound it has simply ruined the live experience for me on a number of occasions.

[Macca]

I probably should have been more precise in what I said.

I've never, ever bought a recording because it has good production values. If it does that's just a bonus. I've always bought based on liking the music.

Likewise have always aimed to have a system that will play anything. Any system where you have to resort to showcase recordings for it to sound good is fundamentally flawed.

My gauge of a good system is how well it does with 'difficult' recordings. I am the opposite of many people who will play Yello or Diana Krall to show how 'good' the system is - you get this a lot at shows. It tells you nothing.

(Although at least Yello is demanding in some respects. But plinky plonk jazz or those sparse recordings where a woman sings and they are hitting block of wood with a stick, with the whole thing drenched in artificial reverb - forget it).

One demo I was at of some very expensive multi-way horn speakers and equally nonsense-money valve power amps this was all they played, to great approval from the punters (including one very well known magazine reviewer). Finally someone asked for Black Sabbath first album - it sounded terrible. Everyone present was muttering 'Bad recording'. Err... no. The system is complete crap and that just showed it up.

Agree Youtube can sound very good.

[Barry]

Some wise words there Martin.

Audio shows are where one can hear expensive yet awful sounding systems. Quite often because they are held in hotels and little, if any, attention is paid to the acoustics of the room.

[Pigmy Pony]

Some wise words there Martin.

Audio shows are where one can hear expensive yet awful sounding systems. Quite often because they are held in hotels and little, if any, attention is paid to the acoustics of the room.

Yes, we have found this time and again. It's as though the exhibitors just think their mega-bucks set up will transcend poor acoustics. There was one particular exhibitor at this year's NW audio show which had three or four different super-expensive systems going simultaneously in various corners of the same big space. How they thought that could sound good enough to justify the price tags I don't know.

[Macca]

Some wise words there Martin.

Audio shows are where one can hear expensive yet awful sounding systems. Quite often because they are held in hotels and little, if any, attention is paid to the acoustics of the room.

true but that particular system was in a large room with very high ceilings that was originally a 19th century country house. Sabbath sounded rubbish because the amps and speakers were rubbish. There's no excuses.

[struth]

true but that particular system was in a large room with very high ceilings that was originally a 19th century country house. Sabbath sounded rubbish because the amps and speakers were rubbish. There's no excuses.

and the answer is... dont play sabbath, play krall

[Pigmy Pony]

true but that particular system was in a large room with very high ceilings that was originally a 19th century country house. Sabbath sounded rubbish because the amps and speakers were rubbish. There's no excuses.

Yes but I think the sq of these 50-odd year old recordings have to take some of the blame.

This is what I was playing my Black Sabbath, Led Zep etc on in the early 70s:



and it all sounded perfectly fine.

Playing these albums now, although they do sound better (as they should), they are often way behind much of what is being produced these days. Good job the actual music is so much better than most new stuff

[Macca]

It's a fairly simple recording - they made it in 3 days. It certainly doesn't sound crap though unless the system is mangling it to death.

Fact is any sort of rock music, or any demanding programme, played on that system would have sounded just as bad.

It made plinky plonk jazz sound 'live'. That was what it did, that was all it did. For about £150K not counting whatever ludicrously priced cabling they were using.

We're way off topic. My fault probably.

[Pigmy Pony]

It's a fairly simple recording - they made it in 3 days. It certainly doesn't sound crap though unless the system is mangling it to death.

Fact is any sort of rock music, or any demanding programme, played on that system would have sounded just as bad.

It made plinky plonk jazz sound 'live'. That was what it did, that was all it did. For about £150K not counting whatever ludicrously priced cabling they were using.

We're way off topic. My fault probably.

I hadn't noticed

Oh yes, SACD: if you've a shitload of discs, yes. Otherwise no. Just my two bob's worth.