[kelly]

Pepzhez
What is your normal redbook CD player?

 

[williamgoody]

Quote:

No one here has time to respond to every single statement. Am I selective? Out of necessity, yes. For example, Pepzhez has even more comments that I'd like to reply to, but I gotta go.

My how convenient, and self serving to boot. It seems everyone else here has the time to respond to all that is directed to them. You shouldn't generalize (something you're very good at by the way) or speak for everyone like that. Face it, what I stated previously is true.

 

[Pepzhez]

My current reference redbook rig is a Meridian 507 coupled with a Van Alstine Transcendence DAC. Actually, this new DAC is so breathtaking that any decent transport will do (including my Pioneer PD65).

When Sony et al. can manufacture an SACD DAC that stands up to this (redbook performance, mind) then I'll be interested. Otherwise ...

 

[serge]

Quote:

How long did it take CD to sound half-way decent? 15 years. We have really only just begun to hear what SACD/DVD-A can do, it's only going to get better and better.

Hi Markl. A BIG AMEN to this point. Obviously, some people are not that open to progress or maybe, they're simply apprehensive. This is quite normal. Even when plain CD was introduced about 15 years ago, people didn't warm up to it immediately.I guess history is repeating itself in a way with the two new formats. They haven't fully gotten off the ground and already some people are nailing them down.

In fact, 15 years after and one can say that the plain CD still hasn't perfected its act. Despite the different techniques of recording music employed, HDCD,XRCD,DSD, etc.,it still got that typical "digitized" sound characterized by a somewhat artificial quality. Hopefully, with the two new formats, things can get REALLY better, not just neater. Something that would elevate listening pleasure to significant level.

They've already shoved vynil almost out of the limelight, though this is still strong in some region, and now we have to make do with whatever technology is currently offering us. This is acceptable as long as it's always for the better and, ideally, accessible and affordable.

No compromise please.

 

[kelly]

The only thing worse than propoganda is propoganda that so obviously condescends. I'm certain that I'm not the only one wondering whether my patience with Head-Fi will last long enough to see credit-taking for hand delivering the audience to SACD if the first signs of moderate success ever arrive.

I've just read this entire thread and I have comments for everyone so if it suits everyone just the same, I'll not bother to quote.

First, I want to agree that these formats are in their infancy. A question might be phrased, "But were they still born?" and to that, we're all a bit hesitant to reply. In either case, the formats have certainly NOT arrived yet. The notion that it is a user's (nay, even a fanatic's) responsibility to purchase a new hardware format just to "support the format" is ludicrous. Sony has taken large chunks of money from all of us--through their components and microchips and through their royalties. If it is anyone who owes it is they who owe us. I don't owe my support or allegiance to any audio company.

If you'll excuse the euphamism, chicken and egg my ass. If there is no software, there's no market. Only fools buy hardware with the express purpose of waiting to see whether or not software they want will arrive. If there isn't software now nor software announced that interests you, why should you feel obligated to buy in? To create a market? Please. Sony owns enough recordings all by their lonesome to populate this format. That they've dawdled and released a scant supply of single-layer discs is hardly our fault. I'll let Sony take the responsibility, the credit and the blame for SACD.

I'd like to use an analogy to video games if you'll bear with me. I know some people in this thread think video games are only for children despite the market research but just go with it for the sake of example. If you look at the Gameboy platform, you'd almost have to be confused. Simultaneously, Gameboy was an abysmal hardware format and the best selling game system of all time. Why? Tetris. It's that simple. Software drives the market and it takes killer apps to sell hardware. Rolling Stones were a killer app. That's one. SACD will need more to capture even the niche market of audiophiles and enthusiasts. Lots more.

Only the audiophile market need be concerned with this at all, frankly. For the average consumer, there is nothing about SACD or DVD-A to drive them. I know some of you say the cheaper DVD players from Sony are great and they may well be great for their price/performance but I wonder this: Who buys those? What kind of associated equipment does that person have? Are these really the people who are going to want a new format just because it sounds better? I'd say not. The average guy may end up with some SACDs by accident jsut as he undoubtedly owns a handful of HDCDs whether he likes it or not. Sure, sneak them onto some CDs people were going to buy anyway and start including the feature standard on DVD players and one way or another people are buying the new formats some of the time. Minor victories.

The truth is that the average guy doesn't care and will never care about high resolution audio. The FCC is having to force HDTV down his throat and HDTV is something even your half blind grandmother can look at and say wow. Why don't people care? Think about this question: "What does it do for me that my old one doesn't?" That's an extremely common question with everything remotely consumer electronics oriented. Want to know how the VCR weaseled its way into one-third of civilized households? Features. Ironically it was laserdisc where the idea of extra features on video was introduced and largely by a company called Voyager who was responsible for the Criterion line of laserdiscs. Maybe you've heard of alternate endings, behind-the-scenes footage, outtakes and commentary? They were on a handful of Criterion laserdiscs but never remotely standard on LD. At the absolute peak of LD's heyday, they commanded 1% of the home video market. DVD took these additional features and instantly, DVD was a success. When I talked to most people about DVD you know what they talked about? The extra features. Only on the internet do people quote lines of resolution and sound format jargon. Think about that.

When I look at SACD, I see two promises: multi-channel sound and higher resolution. Remember, I just said the average person doesn't care about the resolution so let's throw that out. Multi-channel? Let's give the benefit of the doubt and pretend that eventually down the line there will be multi-channel mixes of software you actually want to hear that don't sound like some monkey was playing with the mixing board. Fine, it may well happen. And eventually some people in the home theater market may have the equipment necessary to play this stuff back. (I don't, for one--my receiver has pre-outs but no main-ins. I bet a lot of folks are in the same boat as me and I bet you not very willing to buy another receiver just to hear Freddie Mercury teleport from corner to corner of your living room.) My point is that there is potential there, but it's not potential to be realized anytime soon.

If not now, when? Some of you have already mentioned blue laser. The truth is that there probably isn't anyone among us prophet enough to know exactly what the next big thing is. But as a matter of logic, I'll tell you a little bit about it anyway. It will play HD-DVDs. It will play high resolution music. It will play the extras on both music and DVDs. It will be feature rich. A convergence between home theater and music reproduction can, will and must take place--like it or not. There will be ONE format for this. SACD is fringe. Some people have it, some don't. The real format to be excited about right now is DVD. The replacement for DVD will carry audio with it, this much is certain.

Meanwhile, back in the present -- the argument has been made that SACD is something you should consider if you're in the market for a new player anyway. I agree--somewhat. Buy it IF you like the redbook performance enough to warrant its price relative to other components and/or you like the existing and announced SACD or DVD-A titles. I don't mean to scoff at the current library. I think Telarc is great and I love a lot of the material that's out there. I plan to own more of it than I already do. But I know this music isn't for everyone and I know Telarc has never commanded a large percentage of the market. So think for yourself: what software are you planning to buy over the next year or so. Is a lot of it SACD? Then think about it. If not, just buy the best price/perfromance components that make you happy.

Now about some of the specifics regarding SACD vs. redbook. The fact is that as Pepzhez pointed out, not many of us have done AB comparisons between the leading redbook players and the leading SACD players. I'd venture to guess, though, that dCS has and that there's a reason other than hype why they're trying to support this new format. But that still reinforces the point--if there does exist better redbook, why not get the redbook? I haven't heard that Van Alstine DAC but their reputation preceeds them and I have no doubt that Pephez is stating some pretty valid comparisons here. That DAC retails for $1800 and the Meridian 507 can be found readily on the used market. If this combination beats a $3000 Sony player, maybe that's something you shouldn't write off so easily.

On the other hand, I did want to point one discrepency out. I don't know what Pephez actually has but the description sounds more like it fits the SCD-777ES than the XA777ES, which is Sony's current model. The SCD has a lot going for it in terms of depth and focus but it does have a "cooler" and more detached presentation. The XA has better tonality and a stronger bass. Be careful not to confuse the two units. Both are somewhat lacking in the pacing, as far as I'm concerned, and in that way I was more impressed with the Meridian 588 that Tyll carted around on the World of Headphones tour than I have been with my auditions of the XA777ES in either redbook or SACD. And, of course, my memory of the Wadia 270/27ix is like a shadow looming over all of these other auditions, anyway.

To those of you who don't know my bias, I've purchased a Sony XA777ES for the express purpose of having it upgraded by Dan Wright at ModWright. To summarize my emotions here, I'm both hopeful and nervous. I've seen multiple Wadia 861s sell on eBay and Audiogon in the time my player has been gone and for slightly less in total than I've spent on this modded Sony--and of course, I'm also reminded that I could have just as easily purchased a brand new Meridian 588 from a dealer in England instead. My hope here was not to buy a Sony, though, it was to buy a ModWright player built on the Sony platform. I'm hoping it lives up and indeed, I'm also hoping the SACD portion of it lives up too. There's a lot of potential. Luckily Dan's work is in demand, though, and if I'm not too happy with the player, you may see a listing for it on Audiogon and I'll just as readily go back to the old redbook-only world.

Incidentally, on the stock XA777ES, I did think the SACD layer was universally preferable to the redbook layer--though neither were perfect at any given time.

One final correction. An interface standard has been settled on for SACD and DACs will be available. Of course, your old transports won't cut it anymore but dCS seems to be the company on top of the first of these products. I'd very much expect more in the future.

Sorry for the typos and whatever. Writing for free does not allot me a budget for an editor and there isn't a handy checker built into the Head-Fi interface that I'm too lazy to circumvent. In other words: deal with it.

 

[D-Audi]

Quote:

Originally posted by williamgoody I agree it will be a niche market. And I'm coming from the other side of the spectrum: the music buying public. I've worked in record stores off and on for the past six years, and I have to say the mass market consumer has no clue/has no interest to invest(given the cash involved) the potential of high end audio. CD's when they were introduced became wildly popular yes because of better sound, but mainly because of convenience. No more eaten cassette tapes, no more rewinding or fast forwarding to get to the next song, etc. People these days don't really "listen to music" (keep in mind I'm referring to the average joe), they use it to accompany their lives while they do things. That's why I believe mp3's to be so popular. Although more of the popularity obviously to the technology, All you do is click the file and listen. Until the industry (of which there is a high distrust in these days) comes out with another format to really enhance the convenience of playing, carrying, "using" music, you won't see an "exploson" in a format, or the "death" of the CD. And this has nothing todo with the ,erits of SACD/DVD-A. It's still all about economics and marketing to the masses.

This is exactly what I was trying to say. The most valid argument of this entire post (IMO).

 

[Pepzhez]

Kelly, I auditioned from a dealer (did not end up purchasing) the Sony XA777ES - stock, of course, though I would be interested in hearing - and hearing about - the Dan Wright mods.

I want to emphasize that I am not against SACD or DVD-A in and of itself. I very much would like a high-rez digital format (one that delivers, not a mere hype), but you hit the nail on the head by asking the correct question here: is it stillborn? There's a very simple reason why Van Alstine is not dealing with SACD or DVD-A at all at the present moment. He believes that it's going nowhere, if not entirely dead in the water. If the software doesn't readily exist, if the selection is practically nil, then what's the point? One could just as easily buy a hydrogen powered car in order to "support the technology" and then wait for the hydrogen fueling stations to be built all around your town.

Back to reality. Again, if the redbook layer of a hybrid SACD sounds superior through one of his (Van Alstine's) DACs than the SACD layer sounds through one of the most highly regarded SACD players out there, then, well, we must really stop and think. Which isn't to say that maybe one day Van Alstine may produce THE killer SACD DAC, but he sure as hell isn't going to waste his time on such a thing unless SACD is a viable, real world format. Let's face it, at this point all you really have are some old Stones albums and a handful of Telarc discs and some odds and ends. That's IT. Repeat slowly - the currently available SACD and DVD-A selection WORLDWIDE is miniscule compared even to the prerecorded MD market. And when was the last time (if ever) you saw a prerecorded MD in a shop? "Coming sometime maybe" isn't good enough. Show me the selection and then I'll revise my views accordingly.

By the way, I am the one who is making the claims and singing the praises of Van Alstine's DAC in comparison to SACD. So please consider my opinion just that - my opinion and mine only, and NOT Frank Van Alstine's or the Van Alstine company. To my knowledge, his only public utterance concerning hi-rez formats thus far has been that they have been going nowhere, so he has seen no need to deal with them. What he really thinks of SACD and how his redbook DAC compares to it is something I have absolutely no idea about.

Onwards, then. Note to loyal consumers on this thread: Sony is not infallible and Kelly is absolutely right stating that it is not OUR duty to show early-adoptee "faith" in their technology. Too many posts in this thread imply (or state overtly) that it is incumbent upon us to do so, and I find this very curious indeed. As for the implications that "if a behemoth like Sony is behind it, then it can't fail!" - well, Sony are in fact responsible for so many huge marketing blunders, and if Sony markets SACD as well as they marketed MD (a format that I am rather fond of and one that SHOULD have been much bigger than it ever was/is in North America), then you can forget all about SACD conquering the world. A hi-fi dealer friend of mine had a very astute answer to the question of "DVD-A or SACD?" He said, "If any of these hi-rez formats pan out at all, my money would be on DVD-A - and only because Sony will be certain to screw up their marketing of SACD so badly, like they invariably do with everything else." (Keep in mind that this is from the mouth of a man who once sold [or tried to sell] Sony's Elcaset machines - a technology he actually liked, I should add - if you're old enough to remember those.)

Multi-channel I can do without. Now I'm old enough to remember (although I was a young kid then, I had a stepfather who was suckered into the mess) the quadrophonic fiasco in the 1970's. Doesn't this industry recall their own history?! Will they ever learn from past mistakes? Apparently not. I remain convinced that multi-channel sound for music will never be any more than a gimmick - and probably a badly done one at that. Does anyone really find the promise of 5.1 surround a truly viable idea? Or a preferable one? It is and will always be a circus trick. I really don't care to hear some hack engineer's butchering of Beatles/Stones/et al. parlayed into 5.1 surround (you know it will happen if the market dictates), nor do I look forward to hearing badly compressed mixes (i.e. - most contemporary pop releases) spread out over 5 channels (shudder). And who really has the money and the space to set up a decent surround system? In my house, that would only be a logistic (not to mention financial) nightmare. And I am not alone in this. To bet on surround sound is a losing proposition on any level, I believe. It's simply not practical, it's prohibitively expensive, it's something no one really wants (save for the select few) and perhaps just an aesthetically rotten idea in the first place (feel free to disagree, of course).

Now certainly we have to deal with things as they are dealt and not as they should be. In an ideal world modern recording consoles would sound better than an Ampex 600 (they don't), modern mixing engineers would know something about the existence of a concept called "dynamic range" (or maybe they do know and are insteadl part of a sinister conspiracy to stamp it out wherever they find it), the dominant video technology would surpass 35mm film (the best HD video doesn't even challenge 16mm) and Macs would be the dominant computer platform (and not a mere 5% of the market).

So who really knows how all of this will shake out? Time will tell (and soon). At this point in time, I wonder if the era of physical media is itself dead in the water. It's not a notion that I particularly like, but there are plenty of people - younger people - who are quite satisfied with downloadable, virtual file formats, damn the resolution. I do not own one, but it's easy to see the advantage of a device like the ipod - easily adaptable to the latest changes: a simple software and firmware update is all it needs to support the new this or that. This is something redbook CD, vinyl records or any upcoming hi-rez format cannot do. And in an era of rapid technological development and change, this flexibility is all the more important. Who knows where hi-rez technology is going to be in a year, two years from now? I can, however, guarantee you that even if SACD and/or DVD-A are still present in the marketplace, the cutting edge of resolution will be present and in use on computer platforms. Don't believe that this foreknowledge isn't in the minds of an entire generation, who undoubtedly (and quite rightly) see the elephantine "progress" and the inept, laughably half-assed (yes) marketing attempts of the latest hi-rez formats as the joke it really is.

The proponents of SACD (or DVD-A), the true believers, if you will, have only faith to expound, and the mere *promise* of a pay-off - an impending trip to (hi-rez) heaven - just doesn't ring true. Sony isn't the church and SACD isn't a religion, but I do wish the evangelists well, because without faith, you currently don't have a leg or a valid argument to stand on.

 

[kelly]

Pepzhez
I am one of the kooks who believes in a downloadable medium -- but only if it's done right, and it never is. The question of whether it will be worse than what we have now is where my anxiety stems. Let me share some of my dreams with you. I pre-order a new album, film or video game release months in advance and forget about it. On "release day", the new item becomes available in my home "system." I own a personalized license to play it at my leisure at home, in my car, in my portable or wherever - and I never had to stand in a single line. The potential is awesome. It's the implementation I fear.

On multi-channel I agree with you with regard to existing 2 channel medium. Rarely do I wish for something tampered with unless the tamperer is himself quite an artist--and those are rare. What I see potential with is for new artists who dive into the technology and exploit it to create something new. There's no reason why, if done properly, a multi-channel album couldn't sound better than a two channel album if done from the outset with that in mind. It's that implementation thing, again.

Sorry for the bad guess about your experience with the XA777ES. One other thing I might suggest to you is that the tonality of the player does change considerably during its first 100-150 hours of burn-in for each the SACD components and the redbook components. Of course, I don't know precisely all of your complaints with the XA and I'm sure it involves more than just the tonality but I thought it worth mentioning. You may want to audition at least the SACD portion again if your friend has had a store model in stock for some time now. Just a thought.

 

[Pepzhez]

Kelly, from one fellow Texan to another (though I'm much further west from Dallas), I too believe in a downloadable medium. And I also believe that we'll never live to see it done correctly, or even passably. It's odd that the last two decades or so have been an ongoing primer of blown opportunities, rotten marketing and incompetent implementation. In retrospect, the true wonder of the so-called "golden age of hi-fi" (before my time, granted) seems to be that the best ideas and technology were actually used and adopted. It does seem that reason and good taste generally prevailed in the audio world up until the late 60's.

Well I do remain open to the possibilities of SACD and DVD-A. The XA777ES will surely not be the last player I will carefully listen to.(I did not rush out to adopt CD either when it first came around; I did not purchase a CD player until early 1990, in fact). My reservations over the crippling of the technology (so-called "copy protection") remains a thorn in my side - and yet another instance of a blown implementation that will come back to haunt Sony, mark my words (the public is neither as passive nor as stupid as they insist on treating them). I will watch from the sidelines the evolution (if any) of these hi-rez formats and am always curious to listen to them. And that is really all I am trying to emphasize in this thread: be objective, consider the relative merits of the situation, your own needs, the real world viability of any new (or old) technology, truth vs. marketing hype. Common sense? You'd think so, but one look at many of the posts on this thread leads me to wonder.

I hope that you will write about the Dan Wright mod when you receive it. This is something I really am curious about.

Oh, BTW, as a curious aside, I can tell you the even more curious reason why LD never caught on as it might have. Believe it or not, the answer is pornography. Yes, Pioneer, the patent holder of LD technology, refused to license LD to **** producers. Some years later, the DVD consortium, well aware of Pioneer's blunder, made it a point to license DVD technology to all comers. As a matter of fact, they went as far as to actually court the **** industry and sell them their (then) new wares. The result was that the **** industry became the earliest mass adopter of DVD (at a time when the MPAA was sitting on the fence and several major Hollywood studios were balking at DVD and betting on DivX), spurned DVD sales and demand and ... well, you figure out the rest. (FYI, I do not own a single **** DVD, or VHS for that matter!)

Does it somehow follow, then, that Sony's best bet would be to demonstrate SACD to Larry Flynt? Hmmmm.

 

[PAGEFAULT]

Quote:

Originally posted by gloco I'm with Hirsch on this one. I just don't see the need for a SACD/DVD-A player right now...and guess what? I'm probably speaking on behalf of the whole consumer audience that doesn't view SACD/DVD-A as a redbook killer (i think the average person doesn't even know or doesn't care to know). I'm just not interested in these new formats at all, i get the feeling SACD/DVD-A won't catch on the way DVD movies did. Eventually the new formats will be phased in, but i think it may be years down the road until it trickles down to the average buyer....which make the bulk of the sales in audio stores.

The ONLY thing 99% of people would be interested in is the 5.1 sound, like dvd movies. 99% of people dont care about the sound quality. Most people dont have a 5.1 sound sytem but the time is comming that multi chanel audio will be needed. I dotn expect to see dvd-a in quanities for 5 years, at least.

 

[serge]

Again and again x 50, the fact of the matter is gradual progress and acceptance.

The coming of the two formats is an inevitable course of audio technology. True, people don't care now, but surely, later they will.

 

[jpelg]

kelly & Pepzhez -

Thank you both for taking this discussion into some very interesting areas. All well thought out and well written. Makes for interesting and informative reading (for me anyway).

I appreciate your input.

 

[kelly]

Pephez
I'd never considered the missing pornography from laserdisc. That's interesting and undoubtedly it did play a large role. DVD and the world wide web both owe much of their success to this part of the market.

I realize this is a non-standard view, but believe that any attempt to make piracy and importing inaccessible to the general public fuels a market for profiteers. There is no doubt in me that any copy protection schemes will be defeated and the thriving businesses of Hong Kong and Taiwan will continue to produce.

It is my view that copy protection schemes not only create a business model for entrepreneurial pirates but cost the software makers money in development and often times quality assurance. Already people are complaining that they can't play some CDs in their computers and in some CD players--until of course they read how to defeat the ludicrous protection with an ink pen. Meanwhile anyone who obtained the albums illegally never had problems playing them in any player. That doesn't exactly inspire consumers to purchase.

I will definitely be posting impressions of the ModWright mods. My only hesitation will be the logistics of scheduling time to compare to dparrish's stock XA777ES and trying to find comparably priced redbook sources to AB against. Alas, I don't have a collection of expensive CD players and DACs in my own home.

 

[TimSchirmer]

about this layering....

it really wouldn't suprise me if sony tweaked the recordings to give a slight advantage to SACD.


You guys can fuss about this all you want, I'll be kicking back, and listening to my vinyl

 

[elrod-tom]

Quote:

Originally posted by TimSchirmer about this layering.... it really wouldn't suprise me if sony tweaked the recordings to give a slight advantage to SACD. You guys can fuss about this all you want, I'll be kicking back, and listening to my vinyl

I say support the 8-track tape...the moldy oldy format!!