Hybrid SACD/CD better than remastered CD's
May 16, 2004 at 6:42 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 4

Trogdor

Reviewer: Metal-Fi
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Posts
4,141
Likes
419
I don't have a surround system. I probably won't until I buy a house. With that said, I was wondering if the remastered SACD/CD's sounded better on a 2-channel system compared to a run of the mill redbook CD?

For an example, is Pink Floyd's Hybrid SACD/CD of DotM better than the digitally remastered version?

Thanks!
 
May 16, 2004 at 8:48 PM Post #3 of 4

markl

Hangin' with the monkeys.
Member of the Trade: Lawton Audio
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Posts
9,130
Likes
44
A well-mastered Redbook CD will still sound better than a badly mastered SACD. But a well mastered SACD will sound better than a well mastered Redbook CD. There is nothing "special" about the Redbook layer of a hybrid SACD, it only has standard 16/44.1 capability like any normal CD. How good the Redbook layer sounds is utterly dependent on the quality of the remastering. It's entirely possible that a plain vanilla Redbook CD version of the same album will sound better than the Redbook layer contained on a given SACD hybrid.

Hi-rez isn't just about multi-channel. Not all SACDs/DVD-As have a multi-channel program, but all of them have a hi-rez stereo version.
 
May 17, 2004 at 1:42 AM Post #4 of 4

gort

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Posts
342
Likes
0
I think original poster was asking if hybrid SACD sounds better compared to RB on non-SACD player. There's no clear cut answer as like RB CDs, there's no guarantee re-mastered RB layer on hybrid will sound better than previous releases. But old RB DotM does sound better than RB layer on hybrid to me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top