Have you gone hi-rez? Which format and why?


I've had a taste of SACD and really liked it. I have an inexpensive Sony SACD changer and a few SACDs. I have not heard DVD-A. At some point I'd like to get a higher-end hi-rez player and I'm leaning towards SACD. My search at Tower informed me that there are more SACDs available than DVD-As, but some research suggests the availability of either runs along record label lines. I also get the impression that DVD-A leans toward multi-channel listeners where SACD still addresses both equally (is this a valid assumption?).

There are some universal players coming to market, but you know the old addage... jack of all trades... Regardless of my hi-rez choice, I will keep my redbook CD player for some time. I read today that Arcam is releasing two new DVD players in March that support DVD-A. Their news page stated that it would be too difficult to incorporate SACD and I wonder if this is a sign or if it's just Arcam's choice to support only one format for whatever reason. In my searching I also noticed that the number of CD players is decreasing (at least in the mass market) and most are producing DVD players with CD playback. According to the Arcam news page, it's easier to incorporate DVD-A into a DVD player because SACD requires a separate reading mechanism.

I'd like to hear whether or not you decided to add hi-rez to your system and if so which format and why? FWIW, I don't have and won't have multi-channel. Thanks!
budrew

Showing 1 response by russ_l

Dautch- Not sure why you think DVD-A needs five full-range speakers and SACD does not. There should be no difference if we're talking multi-channel vs. multi-channel. In any case, all of us pretty much being audiophiles at this web site, why go full range in the back?? We should be putting our money to best use up-front. The rear surrounds will mostly contain hall ambience, crowd noise at live events, etc. Full range speakers are not required as such. AND, a center channel is NEVER required. IMHO.