It's a real shame that massive dynamic compression is the norm these days. Fortunately for me, I listen to mostly classic stuff. Do the engineers resort to the same tricks with DSD or is it pure? I imagine they'd be more concerned with preserving dynamics, given the audiophile bent. I've been wanting to try SACD and have been thinking of picking up a player, actually. My DAC decodes HDCD and I've been very pleased with the performance. Maybe I'll pick up an Oppo or something after I get my turntable.

The recordings available on SACD use the same amounts and types of compression and other processing. The advantage to SACD is that it more accurate reproduces the master recording through higher resolution, it does not make the master any better nor decrease the amount of compression used.

Classical recordings typically have less compression, but compression is still used. Compression is not necessarily a bad thing; it can bring coherency to a recording. Classical recordings typically also use a lot of multi-mic'ing and mixing. Again, this isn't inherently bad, but takes skill to perform well.

HDCD is a great process that unfortunately did not catch on. Through encoding on recording and decoding at playback it improves dynamic range and increases the signal to noise ratio while still allowing a high overall signal. Very cool.

SACD is wonderful and provides higher resolution. However, the higher theoretical dynamic range doesn't matter in practical use as there are relatively few recordings that exceed roughly 30-40dB of total dynamic range. Most pop and rock uses much less, often less than 10dB total. Some classical does have a large dynamic range but the dynamics can easily be captured on Red Book CD even without compression if desired.

Thanks, Elk.