Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › see my test results !!!!!!! SACD vs. CD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

see my test results !!!!!!! SACD vs. CD

post #1 of 32
Thread Starter 
they are;

out of 10 males, 30 songs were played. 3 songs per person
90% of the time males heard a difference!
and out of the 90%, 48% chose SACD over CD as the prefered format.
in total 43% of the time SACD was prefered

out of 10 females, 30 songs were played 3 songs per person
80% of the time females heared a difference!
and out of the 80%, 54% chose SACD over CD as the prefered format.
in total 43% of the time SACD was prefered!

and 17 out of the 20 total test subjects were "Joe Consumers"
and the only one who chose SACD all three songs was a 5th grade teacher, she beat the audiophiles!

post #2 of 32
So, were they listening on a $10 boombox or what? Seriously, what equipment did you use?
post #3 of 32
Thread Starter 
there were only 3 audiophiles (not including my father)
post #4 of 32
Thread Starter 
used a SCD-CE775 5-disc SACD player and three SACD titles;
1) Train, drop of Jupiter (CD version and SACD version)
2) Rolling Stones, 12x5 (Hybrid)
3) Berlioz symphony (Hybrid)
and beyerdynamic DT 990
post #5 of 32
Thread Starter 
probably not the best SACD player but hey it's not like Joe Consumer is getting anything better a BestBuy
post #6 of 32
where you using a headphone amp?
post #7 of 32
Those are very interesting results. FYI, if you don't have a background in statistics, if you combine the sexes, your results are statistically no different from a coin toss, given your sample size.

This will make for a very interesting project writeup; congratulations!
post #8 of 32
And how did you conduct the test? Did you do anything to remove listener's and tester's bias?
post #9 of 32
great results
post #10 of 32
please don't tell me you did the redbook from a comprimised SACD player!

You need to get an SACD player and a different all-redbook player of similar price to do a fair comparison. You also have to use the same recording on two different formats. I.e. one SACD, and one redbook cd.

Double-blind wouldn't hurt either
post #11 of 32
Tim, if he did use the SACD player for Redbook, his results are still valid. (Redbook would be "handicapped" -- you'd expect Redbook performance to be even worse with such a player. Yet his results are the exact opposite, that Redbook is essentially as good as SACD.) Plus, using the same player would eliminate the transport and time-domain jitter as variables.
post #12 of 32
I own both the Train Drops of Jupiter SACD and CD, and I have to admit I wouldn't be able to reliably tell the difference between the two. Relative to the CD, I don't find the SACD version impressive. I ran both tonight after reading your post, and, again, will admit that this isn't an easy one to differentiate at all.

I own the Berlioz hybrid SACD you also used. In the next day or two, I'm going to ask my wife to help me do the comparison with this disc (between the layers), as I tried it today on my own (of course, this is was certainly not blind), and could hear the improvements of the SACD layer quite clearly. On this disc, the difference between the layers is significant. I also want to try the Time Out (Brubeck) SACD (single layer) versus the CD, and maybe more hybrid disc layer-switching if we get the chance.

Thanks for posting your results, Ferari550.
post #13 of 32
So, if I'm reading your results correctly, 50% of the people preferred SACD 50% of the time. If that is indeed the case, it seems that one format is no better than the other. At least not with your set up and your limited sample.
post #14 of 32
I wonder if SACD or DVD-A will actually become the choice format of the future.,,

I personally think that it will be mp3 (sadly) I hope SACD does catch on though. I like the idea of having entire albums rather than collections of songs.
post #15 of 32
If ever a difference was perceived, 51% of the the music was preferred from SACD. It would be interesting to know if there was any preference for the CD, and if so, in which proportion – to see the real relations! To perceive a difference doesn't automatically mean to prefer one thing over the other.

You haven't mentioned the test equipment and the test environment. Or is the SCD-CE775 and the Beyerdynamic DT 990 the whole equipment? I don't rate this as a too revealing setup. Without knowing the SCD-CE775, its price of $180 leads to the assumption that its sound quality is positioned on the lowest end of SACD. And although the DT 990 isn't a bad headphone, I mistrust its resolution abilities – from my own experience with it.
17 out of the 20 total test subjects were "Joe Consumers".
For me that's a disqualification of this test. SACD isn't a format for Joe Consumer, but for an audiophile public which requires a higher sound quality or at least is susceptible for it. Joe consumer with its average, untrained ears doesn't attach importance to better sound and probably won't appreciate or even notice it. I think what is interesting for us audiophiles isn't if Joe Average likes SACD better than CD, but if to our (oh-so-sophisticated) ears it's worth the upgrade.

What I'd like to know: did the teacher with the golden ears always prefer the SACD sound?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › see my test results !!!!!!! SACD vs. CD