[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wower /img/forum/go_quote.gif My Lord, what kind of comment is this??!?! Small players don't suck, sitting there bored with no tunes sucks. You're actually right though, sound isn't important, music is. There are many reasons someone might want a small SACD player and many reasons to help a fellow head-fi'er. Do you have helpful info other than to suggest a $20,000 Ayre>Norst>ES-1 system for the OP's office desk? Does it make your blood boil that some people on Head-fi have bought phones just for good comfort? You don't need to answer, but I'm sure everyone in the thread knows corners will have to be cut.

It's an honest comment is what it is. I could understand if hes said he just wanted a small CD player, but he said he wanted a small SACD player. The only reason why a person would want to "dip his foot into the world of SACDs" is because of higher fidelity and higher quality sound. If you buy something like that cheapy Onkyo, you will get neither. A comparable redbook player like a vintage PCDP or a digital source will provide equal or higher quality sound than a cheap unversal like that. Just because something plays SACDs doesn't mean it'll sound any better than a regular redbook player, it's the implementation that counts. It's like sticking premium gas in a Hyundai, yes it'll be able to use it but it's still a Hyundai.

The only cheap SACD players that are decent that I know of, is the Sony SCD-CE595, a couple of Pioneers, and one or two Samsung universals, none of which are 5"x5"x1". Hell, most good PCDPs are bigger than that, so finding a cheap, decent, SACD player that size is next to impossible.

If size is that much of a constraint, I would just stick with a portable audio player as a source. If you can go a little bigger, there're quite a few decent, half-rack, redbook players out there. Of course full size players will offer you the most value for your money as they are the most common, and will also allow you to get into good SACD for cheap, but if you can't fit them, you can't fit them.

 

[johnniewalker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Check this thread: http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165371 Usually, the best price is in there somewhere. The Onyko deck looks slick, but I wonder what the sound quality is like.

Thanks, got one coming for ~$66

 

[wower]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyline889 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's an honest comment is what it is. I could understand if hes said he just wanted a small CD player, but he said he wanted a small SACD player. The only reason why a person would want to "dip his foot into the world of SACDs" is because of higher fidelity and higher quality sound. If you buy something like that cheapy Onkyo, you will get neither. A comparable redbook player like a vintage PCDP or a digital source will provide equal or higher quality sound than a cheap unversal like that. Just because something plays SACDs doesn't mean it'll sound any better than a regular redbook player, it's the implementation that counts. It's like sticking premium gas in a Hyundai, yes it'll be able to use it but it's still a Hyundai.

I can see your point of view. I can see you are trying to help the OP save some money. Fair enough. It's good advice. But again, it's these blanket statements that I just can't take seriously. How many times do we read posts were people tell you what you are hearing? It's easy if not careful to force one's own assumtions, priorities and values onto every poduct on the market. We forget this board does not represent reality. Here everyone worships to the God of SQ. In fact, we know it only represents the tinest of slices, and most people will never appricate our headphone set-ups. We know this because we talk to our family and friends and in return they give us strange looks (especially when listening to said headphones).

I am not going to argue that corners don't get cut on mid-fi gear, that's just common sense. But I look at my own reasons for wanting a small SACD unit and both of you are so far off. The mere existance of a compact SACD players suggests that SQ can't possibly be "the only reason" to adopt SACD. The counter-argument is sitting right at a electronic store near you. And trust me, I'm as puzzled as you why someone would want to by an SACD mini-system. It should be noted that no one has tried the SACD performance of said unit.

 

[labmat]

Wow I didn't think my question would spark such controversy.

I appreciate all of the suggestions I have recieved thus far. I guess I should have clarified that what I really want is a SACD player that doesn't take up all of my desk and make everyone laugh at me; not that they don't already do that now.

The dimensions I threw up were just an example and are by no means a requirement I just wanted to give you an idea on what I thought small was. I am inexperianced on what kind of equipment is available and therefore have no idea what is truely a small player.

My only requirements are.

1. Must be a standalone SACD player.
2. Doesn't take up all of my desk space.
3. Doesn't cost more $200

The smaller the player the better; I really don't want anything thats much bigger than my macbook 13" x 9".

 

[wower]

No controversy. Everyone is looking out for you to make sure you get exactly what you want and save some $$$. Okay, some may want you to buy the a full german made audio system for your desk, but the rest of us want you to get a deal! And you're the lucky guy that gets to pick!

I'll get the pic today.

 

[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wower /img/forum/go_quote.gif Okay, some may want you to buy the a full german made audio system for your desk

Whoever said a good SACD had to be expensive? No one here. All we said was that there're no good small SACD players, unless you're looking to spend big bucks. I in fact have the $70 SCD-CE595 and think it's great for SACD however, I've tried the mini SACD player from Denon, the S-301 which costs quite a bit more than that Onkyo, and has better specs to boot as well, and honestly, it couldn't hold a candle next to the Sony. Were're not saying a cheap SACD player can't be good, we're saying that unless you're willing to dish out quite a bit more than $200, you're not going to find a good, small, SACD player.

P.S.-I'm curious what other purposes you think anyone would have other than SQ for purchasing an SACD player? The Onkyo and Denon half-racks are designed for consumers with limited space, and primarily billed as universal players rather than just stand-alone SACD players. The other half-rack SACD players are targeted at audiophiles with limited space, and usually start at around $1500.

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyline889 /img/forum/go_quote.gif DSD can't be output digitally unless you have something like the Esoteric P-01/D-01.

or gear by the three-lettered British D/A specialist dCS

 

[wower]

I'm sorry. I should have been clearer in my last post that I am done arguing for the the sake of arguing. This is about getting back to the OP. I don't mean to be glib when I say I'm not going to comb the forums for posts nor am I going to lay step by step common sense logic in front of you. I can respect you're just trying to save the OP some money. In fact, what I'm actually going to do now is listen to some tunes.

I'll just add: I feel I have made my point in regards to the initial "all small players suck" comment and consider the matter concluded. Back to the OP.

 

[rodentmacbeastie]

The Oppo HD-970 has very good cd/sacd performance for it's price and it does DVD Audio as well. On top of that you get one hell of a DVD player. I am thinking of a Zapfilter mod for mine.

 

[labmat]

Since it would seem that a good quality small SACD player is out of my price range can some one reccomed a good single disk player thats under $200. I just recieved two of my favorite disks (Jamie Cullum - Twentysomething & Keane - Hopes and Fears) in SACD from Tower and am itching to play them.

Thanks,

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wower /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm sorry. I should have been clearer in my last post that I am done arguing for the the sake of arguing..

That's good because it seems that is the only reason you are arguing... just to argue. You don't have any logical points. Music = organized sound, so SQ does matter. Otherwise what's the point of being here. Just grab some earbuds and call yourself a proud music lover and be done with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wower /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll just add: I feel I have made my point in regards to the initial "all small players suck" comment and consider the matter concluded. Back to the OP.

Tell me one that doesn't suck as far as SQ is concerned? Or just don't reply - that might be best for the OP.

 

[tkam]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif All the small players suck. If sound isn't important, then go for it.

Define small.

My Resolution Audio Opus 21 is a relatively small cdp where footprint is concerned and it certainly doesn't "suck".

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkam /img/forum/go_quote.gif Define small. My Resolution Audio Opus 21 is a relatively small cdp where footprint is concerned and it certainly doesn't "suck".

I didn't know the Opus 21 played SACD?

 

[tkam]

It doesn't but you seemed to be generalizing...

 

[robm321]

Considering the thread topic and my quote below, I thought it was obvious what I was referring to

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 All the small players suck. If sound isn't important, then go for it. But just because it's SACD and will have better resolution, doesn't guarantee that a cheap SACD player will be better than a decent redbook player KWIM?

but...I guess I will make it more clear and be more diplomatic:

Small footprinted SACD players don't have the best sound quality IMO