Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › SACDs RULE!!!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SACDs RULE!!!!!! - Page 5

post #61 of 77
Quote:
Originally posted by Beagle

But SCAD discs, wherefore art thou in Canada? Can't find any.
Same problem in most of the US outside of the large urban areas. Thank goodness for emusic direct. Locally I have only recently found some of the Sony SACD issues at Circuit City.
post #62 of 77
Thanks for the tip about amusic direct. As a recent convert to SACD, I've been scouring the usual suspects for SACD's. CDNow has them but you have to know the title. At Amazon you can get a list by searching for 'SACD'. But as far as I can tell SACD has to be in square brackets in the album title [SACD] for it to be a SACD. In regular brackets (SACD), it appears to mean something else (Any ideas anyone?)
crk
post #63 of 77
Thread Starter 
post #64 of 77
I tried the Marantz SACD player a couple of days ago when I got my speakers. They're quite fantastic. Bigger soundstage, airier (LOL) and of course more detailed. I compared between a normal redbook cd and a SACD of the same album and this was what I found.
post #65 of 77
umh,

"In fact, what I'm left with is a sense of DVD-Audio's potential- properly implemented, it could rock our audio world in a big way. In my opinion, that potential has not yet been reached. With Sony and Marantz supporting the Super Audio CD launch with true high-end audio hardware. SACD just wipes DVD-A's clock in
every important performance parameter." Nov 2000, Stereophile

I haven't heard any of them, so I don't know which format is better.
But I think LP is still better, and cheaper.
post #66 of 77
On Tuesday I will get my Sony SCD-333ES SACD player so I will be part of the SACD Team. I'm looking forward to hearing what all the fuss is about. My Toshiba DVD player has HDCD decoding but I don't really hear any big difference. I'm hoping that won't be the case with SACD titles.
post #67 of 77
Quote:
I haven't heard any of them, so I don't know which format is better.
But I think LP is still better, and cheaper.
You haven't heard any SACD players, but you still think LP is better?

P.S. Maybe the media is cheaper, but its a lot cheaper to get a good SACD hardware setup than a comparable LP hardware setup.

(I'm a big fan of the sound of vinyl, by the way.)
post #68 of 77
If you can't tell the difference immediately between CDs and SACDs, you're deaf, need to upgrade your system, or just don't care about audiophilia Well, a DSD recorded SACD, that is.
post #69 of 77
DSD recorded SACDS sound amazing! Anyway, just thought I'd post to say fedex pushed the delivery date of my 555 to tomorrow instead of today Second time they've pushed it back. Oh well, hopefully I'll get it tomorrow... WOW, the fedex guy just pulled up outside our building but it wasn't my cdp
post #70 of 77
Quote:
If you can't tell the difference immediately between CDs and SACDs, you're deaf, need to upgrade your system, or just don't care about audiophilia
I find LP way better sounding than CD. Can any vinyl lovers who have heard SACD perhaps post some comparisons in sound?
post #71 of 77
I love the sound of vinyl as well.

Here's my vote: SACDs have a bigger dynamic range and no inner groove distortion. Vinyl still sounds more lifelike, but a good DSD SACD comes pretty close. The difference is all in the small things: soundstage, "feel". Honestly, SACDs don't sound like CDs at all.
post #72 of 77
Quote:
Originally posted by Jon Beilin
If you can't tell the difference immediately between CDs and SACDs, you're deaf, need to upgrade your system, or just don't care about audiophilia Well, a DSD recorded SACD, that is.
The last part of this quote is the important point, which I made a couple times earlier in this thread. New DSD mastered SACDs are
mostly state of the art from sound quality perspective. However
older recordings made into SACD are a mixed bag and I have heard some where I think the remastered CD is superior, and I don't think I am deaf yet

Something to think about before you automatically begin replacing your older CDs with SACDs. Like any medium there are good recordings and poor recordings, I would not agree that SACD is superior in all cases.
post #73 of 77
I think I will buy an SACD player when all new CD releases are available in the format. And that won't happen because most labels are behind DVD-A. So you would need to have a good CD player, good SACD player and good DVD-A player, since one that plays all will probably suck.
post #74 of 77
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Like any medium there are good recordings and poor recordings, I would not agree that SACD is superior in all cases.
I have yet to hear an SACD that isn't superior to the CD variation, and I know I've bought some of the more "shoddy" SACDs out there already, such as the Jennifer Lopez - On the 6 one. I have the CD variation of this and the SACD version is just totally better. So far I've been buying SACDs that I have CD versions of just to see how this format is doing compared back to CDs, and I'm far from disappointed. I intend to continue supporting this new format, even if software just comes out in trickles.
post #75 of 77
Quote:
Originally posted by Beagle
I think I will buy an SACD player when all new CD releases are available in the format. And that won't happen because most labels are behind DVD-A. So you would need to have a good CD player, good SACD player and good DVD-A player, since one that plays all will probably suck.
Actually, Pioneer is coming out with one, and theirs don't usually suck. Admittedly, they don't have HDCD nor upsampling (I don't think), but they have everything else.

At least, that's what I just read in Hi-Fi Choice (magazine), but that's in the UK.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › SACDs RULE!!!!!!