You can buy my Denon 2900 universal player. Cheap. I'm trading it in on a Rega Apollo. For all intents and purposes, SACD is a fish failing about on the boat deck. Very few people have heard SACD properly since the basic format of SACD is DSD and anytime a signal is sent through a signal processor, such as a compresssor, which doesn't sample DSD, it has to be down converted to PCM, which destroys the benefits of DSD and then up coverted back to DSD to master the SACD. Was SACD poorly marketed? You'd have to show me the marketing that occurred for me to tell? Remarkably, it has outlasted DVD-A.

$150 for the Oppo DV-970HD universal player. Read the reviews.

Hundreds of SACD titles at:
http://www.elusivedisc.com/
http://www.musicdirect.com/Default.asp
http://store.acousticsounds.com/store.cfm

Consult www.sa-cd.net and see if you find enough to pique your interest. I see plenty for me.

Kal

I've been through all that, KAl. There are currently no shops in Dallas that stock SACD's. I know about the catalogs and web ordering but I like to go into a shop and browse and pick what strikes my fancy. Ordering music over the internet is like picking your nose with your toe.

If I could pick my nose with my toe, I'd never leave the house!

Lotsa SACD/DSD, if you really cared www.cdconnection.com and the others DSD recording is being used for even those obsolete LP's. cus' it makes everything sound better. Pryamix has teh only software that works in full DSD....way to go. www.emmlabs.com @x SACD sampling of the 2.8Mghz up over 5mghz But you could pay $45K for a CD only Zander machine, if distortion and Cd playback is somehow better, it does have 3 boxes to house that elaborate CD only playback. Emmlabs CDSA does SACD/CD it is the 21st century

?

If you could pick your nose with your toe and order all your music over the internet, you probably wouldn't have to leave the house. That's one difference between you and me, Monty, I can do neither. Let me know how the toe thing goes.

I wanted to chime in with Kal and point to the fine selection of SACD stuff at Acoustic Sounds and Music Direct but I got so caught up with your nose and toes reference that I forgot what I was going to say. Don't they complain when you do that while browsing at your local shops?

I think that SACD is pretty much a dead format. Whether it wasn't marketed properly of if the market for it doesn't really exist, the end result is that I think that most companies have either abandoned it or are on the way towards abandoning it. Seems as though the hardware manufacturers are staking their claims on Blue Ray or HD-DVD formats. I think they're trying to create a universal music/movie format taht would allow them to control the copying aspect. Seems that companies that currently support SACD do so half heartedly as an interim format as they wait for the next thing to come along.

I think I'd stick with CDs for now and see how the market shakes itself out. Else, you'll be stuck with a catalog of SACDs and eventually no player to play it on.

Hybrid SACD will play on old regular less fi CD players. DCC was officially declared DEAD by Philips. Not so with SACD/DSD. Matter o' fact DSD is being used more and more. Pryramix recording software, Tascam DSD rtecorders. DSD is the way to go. Higher fidelity, and it don't cost $100K to spin and playback now does it. How can you say SACD is dead, and LP ain't?

s it ironic when DEAD musicans are recorded onto dead mediums? Is that considered double jeapordy? Or is that just an old tv show? And if you watch an old tv show on analog tv, you are watching an obsolete show on an obsolete medium. IF you watch a dead performer on a dead medium are you know experiencing way too many dead things at the same time? Happy Easter, LP's where resurected from the dead, why ain't there no chocolate records and chocolate TT's? Easter is all about death and resurection, very appropriate for StereroPhile to publish an Easter edition. A big chocolate TT on it's cover.

I think that LP is essentially a dead medium as well, relegated to a niche market.

Re: SACD, note that I was speaking strictly of SACD, not DSD. DSD may have a life in the recording studio and the resulting DSD may be transferred to Blue Ray or whatever other medium may come about.

As far as dead musicians are concerned, the discussion that was carried over from another thread concerned live performances - something you'd be hard pressed to squeeze from dead musicians.

Quote:
Don't they complain when you do that while browsing at your local shops?

If I could, they probably would.

Quote:
I've been through all that, KAl. There are currently no shops in Dallas that stock SACD's. I know about the catalogs and web ordering but I like to go into a shop and browse and pick what strikes my fancy. Ordering music over the internet is like picking your nose with your toe.

I will take your word for that but browsing at shops became hopeless years back for me (and I live in Manhattan). Internet is the only way for SACD or, indeed, any format.

Kal

Quote:
I'm still curious about the playback setup on SACD. Are they in 5.1 surround mode or stereo?

Usually, both. Your choice at playback time.

Kal

This raises a point I've never been able to get a clear answer for. If the player is set to default to two channel SACD (when available), then there should be no issues with the bit stream which is sent to my two channel pre amplifier by way of the analog outputs. Unfortuantely, most of my SACD's do not seem to contain a two channel mix. However, if I set the player to only output two channels read from the 5.1 layer, does the player do any mumbo-jumbo to the bit stream to downmix from SACD's 5.1 mix to the desired two channel output?

I recently came across an issue with Dolby Digital and its "midnight compression" mode becoming the default should all 5.1 channels of information not be used. (A situation not found in DTS, BTW.) This default mode can result in as much as a 12dB reduction in dynamic range when setting the player to not output a signal to, say, a center channel. I've not seen anything similar with SACD's but the matter of downmixing to PCM is always an issue and from what I can see, not a very predictable consequence for the consumer to figure out. As with DD, where this issue seems to have come to light recently in the format's 13 year history, the purveyors of SACD are not always clear on the workings of their product. I've been running the Denon from the front L-R outputs only and believe I've correctly set the menus to downmix properly.

Just comparing for a few minutes the SACD's I own being played on the Denon 2900 to the PCM layer on the Apollo, it is clear in most instances that SACD is in many ways a more compelling presentation. The difference in the Redbook layer is not a contest with the Rega the clear winner over the Denon. I won't discard the SACD format entirely since I have a lower priced Sony DVD/SACD player to use in the main system and another in the HT system. I regard the Apollo as a high bar to hurdle for most competing $1k Redbook CD players just as I do the Denon for a similarly priced SACD, or at least universal, players. Can you, therefore, place a relative price on a redbook CD player that could perform with equal musicality against a current affordable SACD player? Or is this more like asking for a comparison of analog to digital or apples to camels?

As to internet buying, I lament the demise of brick and mortar stores. If the music industry leads the way, I fear the hardware shops will soon follow and there will be no where to audition decent equipment. I recently inquired at the local Spendor dealer about an audition of the 3/5 or 3/5SE as a replacement for my four decades old LS3/5a's. "None to be heard", was the asnwer. "So, if I'm interested in the speaker, I'm just out of luck for an audition before I buy?, I asked. "Yep", came the reply. I regard audio components similarly to music purchases, just let me browse and make up my mind with the stuff in my hands. With all things except breakfast cereals this is becoming increasingly more difficult.

YES YES YES Kal is correct. The only way to get LP Cd, SACd DVD-A is online, easier much more selection, more info, stores are OBSOLETE. As per tower, circuit City bye bye i haven't been in a store in ages all audio related is on line, tools, supplies online. That's why the UPS/Fedex trucks go round teh neighborhood. Usually when ya go to a store, they ain't got it anyway. Stuff i use for work related supplies, on line is teh only way to find what i need, easier, better, usually cheaper. www.cdconnection.com www.alligator.com www.acousticsounds.com www.musicdirect.com www.dccblowout.com So many others, checkout www.goldmine.come if you want LP. And many times www.amzon.com is cheaper still with it's free shipping stock up at Amazon baby They have some great prices for sure, over $25 many times gets FREE shipping

Quote:
As to internet buying, I lament the demise of brick and mortar stores.

Me, too.

However, I have learned to embrace online stores for their depth and breadth, especially for classical music. I support the local stocking seller when I can, but to limit myself to their offerings would deprive me of a lot of wonderful music.

Quote:
This raises a point I've never been able to get a clear answer for. If the player is set to default to two channel SACD (when available), then there should be no issues with the bit stream which is sent to my two channel pre amplifier by way of the analog outputs. Unfortuantely, most of my SACD's do not seem to contain a two channel mix.

Very strange. There are very few SACDs that lack a stereo DSD track. Are you certain?

Quote:
However, if I set the player to only output two channels read from the 5.1 layer, does the player do any mumbo-jumbo to the bit stream to downmix from SACD's 5.1 mix to the desired two channel output?

Dunno. Never done that and would not want to.

Quote:
I recently came across an issue with Dolby Digital and its "midnight compression" mode becoming the default should all 5.1 channels of information not be used. (A situation not found in DTS, BTW.) This default mode can result in as much as a 12dB reduction in dynamic range when setting the player to not output a signal to, say, a center channel. I've not seen anything similar with SACD's but the matter of downmixing to PCM is always an issue and from what I can see, not a very predictable consequence for the consumer to figure out. As with DD, where this issue seems to have come to light recently in the format's 13 year history, the purveyors of SACD are not always clear on the workings of their product. I've been running the Denon from the front L-R outputs only and believe I've correctly set the menus to downmix properly.

Still, I cannot see why you every need to down-mix.

Quote:
Can you, therefore, place a relative price on a redbook CD player that could perform with equal musicality against a current affordable SACD player? Or is this more like asking for a comparison of analog to digital or apples to camels?

Nah. Too many variables to come up with a rule.

Quote:
As to internet buying, I lament the demise of brick and mortar stores. If the music industry leads the way, I fear the hardware shops will soon follow and there will be no where to audition decent equipment. I recently inquired at the local Spendor dealer about an audition of the 3/5 or 3/5SE as a replacement for my four decades old LS3/5a's. "None to be heard", was the asnwer. "So, if I'm interested in the speaker, I'm just out of luck for an audition before I buy?, I asked. "Yep", came the reply. I regard audio components similarly to music purchases, just let me browse and make up my mind with the stuff in my hands. With all things except breakfast cereals this is becoming increasingly more difficult.

Sure. I understand but you can audition most music over the Internet.

I don't want to hijack a thread, but I am not interested in the surround mix from many of the SACD's I own. My main two channel system doesn't allow easy adaptation to 5.1 and I am unaware of any processors I can afford that will give the same basic quality of sound as I can afford in two channels. I'm not interested in inserting a HT receiver to process the surround mix and I'm not seeing the value of running the analog outputs of the SACD player into multiple power amplifiers that have no connection to each other for convenient level matching. Maybe you have a suggestion I've missed.

Your reply indicates multichannel is the only way you really prefer the SACD format. On many of the more commercial SACD pop/rock/jazz reissues (that I own) the surround channels have been overused in my opinion as if just to prove the value of having more channels. I'm not a fan of being placed inside the guitar's pickups or the vocalist's larynx. This is what I hear quite frequently from the pop/rock remixes of old analog recordings. It reminds me far too much of the four JBL Centuries sitting one each in the corners of my friend's room when he brought home his new Pioneer CD-4 receiver back in the early 1970's. The trauma stays with me to this day and I suffer flashbacks of the most horrible kind.

Simply placing audience noise and applause behind me isn't of value to me if the primary presentation lacks musical value or convincing realism in the first place. I am by no means discounting the potential of multichannel formats, just saying I haven't been convinced up to this point that it is yet worth the strain on my budget in order to get transparent reproduction (equivalent to my two channel set up) for what all too often seems to be an engineer's playground rather than a useful device.

I quite enjoy my SACDs in stereo or down-mixed to stereo.

Quote:
I don't want to hijack a thread, but I am not interested in the surround mix from many of the SACD's I own. My main two channel system doesn't allow easy adaptation to 5.1 and I am unaware of any processors I can afford that will give the same basic quality of sound as I can afford in two channels. I'm not interested in inserting a HT receiver to process the surround mix and I'm not seeing the value of running the analog outputs of the SACD player into multiple power amplifiers that have no connection to each other for convenient level matching. Maybe you have a suggestion I've missed.

Well, that is certainly not my intention. What I tried to indicate is that downmixes are unnecessary because every SACD I know or have (almost without exception) has a stereo track on it. I did not mean that you should not enjoy that but that I was puzzled why you needed to downmix the MCH track in order to get stereo. As for actually listening in MCH, if you decided you wanted to do so, that can easily be accomplished with an analog MCH preamp and these come in all quality ranges.

Quote:
Your reply indicates multichannel is the only way you really prefer the SACD format. On many of the more commercial SACD pop/rock/jazz reissues (that I own) the surround channels have been overused in my opinion as if just to prove the value of having more channels. I'm not a fan of being placed inside the guitar's pickups or the vocalist's larynx. This is what I hear quite frequently from the pop/rock remixes of old analog recordings. It reminds me far too much of the four JBL Centuries sitting one each in the corners of my friend's room when he brought home his new Pioneer CD-4 receiver back in the early 1970's. The trauma stays with me to this day and I suffer flashbacks of the most horrible kind.

I understand and had no intention of forcing such on you or anyone else. My personal preference for MCH is based on the fact that, in the repertoire that I enjoy, there are many well produced and satisfying MCH productions.

Quote:
Simply placing audience noise and applause behind me isn't of value to me if the primary presentation lacks musical value or convincing realism in the first place. I am by no means discounting the potential of multichannel formats, just saying I haven't been convinced up to this point that it is yet worth the strain on my budget in order to get transparent reproduction (equivalent to my two channel set up) for what all too often seems to be an engineer's playground rather than a useful device.

Understood. If my preferred music was poorly represented in MCH, I would make the same decision.

Kal

Quote:

Quote:
I've been through all that, KAl. There are currently no shops in Dallas that stock SACD's. I know about the catalogs and web ordering but I like to go into a shop and browse and pick what strikes my fancy. Ordering music over the internet is like picking your nose with your toe.

I will take your word for that but browsing at shops became hopeless years back for me (and I live in Manhattan). Internet is the only way for SACD or, indeed, any format.

Kal

Kal,
I don't even have a SACD player but I want to strongly second your observation that the internet is really the way to buy music. Let's not forget one thing we take for granted, you can sample the music on the internet. The sample is long enough to determine whether you want the disk. Plus, since I don't live in a major market, the variety of music available locally is dwarfed by what's available on the web. I also find buying music on the web to be a lot more efficient use of my time. Finally, I pick my nose the old fashioned way. Remember, you can pick your nose and you can pick your friends. But you can't (or shouldn't) pick your friends' nose.
Later,
Mike

Quote:
As for actually listening in MCH, if you decided you wanted to do so, that can easily be accomplished with an analog MCH preamp and these come in all quality ranges.

Suggestions, please, no more than mid price range.

I've previewed discs on the internet that sounded interesting in a review or article. I've changed my mind about many selections I might have purchased if all I could do was choose by way of cover art. But I still find no substitute for browsing and considering while wandering the store and hanging on to a pile of "possibilites". That's just me but that eliminated many SACD selections here in Dallas. We are down to a few small, very small, independents that are not in my area, Best Buy and Circuit City for new music purchases. This in the seventh largest city in the US. I got tired of explaining to even the employees at Virgin and Tower just what a SACD was in order to find some music in that format. It was easier to find LP's than SACD's in Tower. I would say marketing of SACD has been lacking.

As far as Best Buy and Circuit City in my area, they are a bust for any hi-rez formats, with the exception of a hand full of Dual Discs (if you wanna see those as hi-rez.) The employees are pretty easy to confuse, by the way. I got a really blank stare, when looking for Neil Young

Yup i woulda' thought they shoulda' just start doing evertying in SACD/Hybrid, the improvment from DSD is readily aduible even on any CD player, as they died then all CD/DVD players shoulda' been SACD capable, the entire stream woulda' updated it self..and Philips/Sony coulda' kept collecting the next 17 years of royaltys from all teh more SACD/DSD being made for everything. Why did they mis manage it so poorly. Like blu-Ray or DVD-HD is gonna fly....what's wrong with these guys. they create a great product and wind of killing it themselves. Never advertised it much, DSD is teh way to go. A car CD player makes you aware that this Hybrid sounds so much better than PCM "standard" CD.

Quote:
I've been through all that, KAl. There are currently no shops in Dallas that stock SACD's. I know about the catalogs and web ordering but I like to go into a shop and browse and pick what strikes my fancy. Ordering music over the internet is like picking your nose with your toe.

Jan, shockingly Fry's Electronics has a decent selection of SACD and DVD-A. They are not grouped alphabetically or by genre, but they are in one location. I have picked up quite a few at the 635/Olympus and Garland locations.

RG

.

Thanks, I'll take a look next time I'm there. Since I live in Oak Cliff, none of the Fry's locations are convenient and require a planned trip for a sale on ink jet cartridges or the like. I did pick up an Eric Clapton in DTS at Fry's a few years ago. (The outsized jewel case makes it a pain to store in my CD racks. Another brilliant marketing move? Do the people who dream this stuff up get bonuses like the ex-CEO of Home Depot who sent the company's stock prices into a tailspin? Gueetars and drums comming from every possible location on this disc and still no bass or treble and thin vocals. What a remaster that was. What a waste of $17.99.) Gee, I wonder what the future of CD's encoded in DTS would be right now. A bit lower than the expectations for Dual-Disc?

Yep. my brother droped by with that Clapton last year or so. I distinctly remember a couple of tunes starting off with Eric's guitar in the rear channels. Brilliant stuff!

CD playback has improved so dramatically in the past couple of years that unless your talking DSD the difference is minimal. Non DSD SACD seems a crapshoot as to whether all those bits are actaully on the disc.

Given the fact I listen most to Jazz, and the lack of SACD releases in that genre, I've basically given up on the medium. My wife does enjoy her classical in MCH SACD, which seems to be the only genre that is consistantly well mixed and adaptable to the MCH medium, IMHO.

Enjoy your Rega!

RG

Non DSD SACD? Can't be, then it ain't SACD. Doesn't have to be recorded in DSD, but it gets re done in DSD to go onto SACD format. Even Hybrid CD layer is instatnly better even playing back on CD player, not using SACd layer. All CD's should be done in DSD Hybrids, it all sounds better. www.superaudiocenter.com

Listen up, Dupass,

The only reason SACD sounds better to you is because you have piece of shit CD players, so that's your reference....SHIT!

If you ever heard, which you won't, a current quality CD player you might be able to make some educated statements as to the difference in sound quality.

RG

Did I miss a post about SACD not employing DSD? Or is someone once again in their own little world of disagreement with everyone?

The Clapton in DTS is "461 Ocean Boulevard". I had a choice of that and "Backless". I doubt either one was the better selection for sound quality. The reissue of "Eric Clapton" is rather good. The original mix is still murky but the Dowd mix is cleaner with better overall sonics. The performances sound stronger on the Dowd mix and the shuffling of tracks and final mix brings a new album to listen to.

Actually I have some really great players through some really good DAC's...I know how a Cd sounds, I know how an LP sounds, I have a very good phono stage in my pre amp too. SACD/DSD usually beats em. Yup, guess that's why the PCM Cd EVOLVED into DSD. Philips/Sony know a bit about digital recording, and getting it onto an optical disc. Does analog tv look better to you than digital HDTV? That nice fuzzy, blurr of Analog broadcast. i know the raxzor sharp sharpness ultra clear image is just too revealing, like LP blurr you prefer? Over highly detailed incredibly CLEAR DSD/SACD. Explain to me the shit Cd players and what you think are the good sounding ones? And teh ones that sound better than SACD.

Yes you did mis read up a few about NON DSD SACD is a crapshoot.....how is it SACD if not DSD, Oh, I'm just being disagreeable? Huh? Now who has trouble comphrending/reading.

I did misread that post.

But you're still disagreeable and that's being generous.

"I have a very good phono stage in my pre amp too... i know the raxzor sharp sharpness ultra clear image is just too revealing, like LP blurr you prefer? Over highly detailed incredibly CLEAR DSD/SACD."

>>Well is LPs shound like a blur, then you just admitted you have a crappy setup.

Quote:
I did misread that post.

But you're still disagreeable and that's being generous.

I don't think DUP is being disagreeable. I think he's just a very highly strung contrarian.

Acoustic Sounds APO records do a great job. SACD Jimmy D. Lane recorded at APO/ Blue Heaven Studio, it's GREAT!!!! SACD of course.

While I think my SACDs sound pretty good, I guess they may not be all some would crack them up to be.

http://sound.westhost.com/cd-sacd-dvda.htm

If you see music you like appearing on SACD, then the format is not dead. In fact, approximately 60 new SACD titles are announced and released each month. While SACD originally was envisioned as a replacement for the CD, the advent of the iPod/mp3 players helped in killing off that potential.

Stereo.