SACD, MSB/Upsampling, LPs Compared

Using a S9000ES, Audiophile Audition reviewed 10 SACDs and compared them to the identical CDs (using the S9000ES and MSB DAC with upsampling) and at times to LPs. SACD was the clear winner, even though the LPs were close. The article even noted that the CD layer on hybred discs sounded better than the CD.
Is your analog front-end a Radio Shack TT??
Doubt it, maybe you should check out positive feedback for another unbiased opinion,because there comparison says sacd sounds better than the best analog and that dvd-a sounds like crap.thats three unbiased comparisons of sacd vs dvd-a and to a lesser extent vinyl that says sacd is the clear winner,But do not fret cause mike fremer will vote vinyl and stereophile will have to figure who,s advertising more sony or the dvd-a backers before they cast there vote,either that or sit on the advertising fence along with a few other commercialized biased to the max rags.
Their comment that the CD layer on hybrid disks sounds better than CD ( I assume all through the 90000ED + MSB) sets off my BS detector.
Thanks Tom for the reference. Isn't it fun to pass on something you read and have guys shoot at you as if it's your fault. Doubt-it and Drubin, what's your problems, A guy posts a piece of information and you two, Good greaf.
In rereading the article, some LPs were viewed as superior to the SACD.

As for the CD layer on SACD discs, here's a quote from Sony's literature:

Better sound on conventional CD players.
The Super Audio CD is mastered with Direct Stream Digital (DSD) technology. A separate layer, compatible with the Compact Disc “Red Book” standard, is transferred from DSD using Super Bit Mapping Direct ™ downconversion. The
result is a disc that sounds noticeably better than conventional CDs when played in a conventional CD player. The new disc makes better use of the full 16 bits of resolution that the CD format can deliver.
My earlier comment was in no way an attack on tommart, which I am sure he understood. I was questioning the comment in the review, and now he has shed some light on it. Chill out,jadem.
I think the source for digital transfer and remaster process play a big role on how the music sound. Like some CDs I have, the earlier version does not sound good at all so with the same song LP sounds much better. However, the later 20 bit remaster version sounds almost like the LP. Any how, there is no need to argue about what format beats the others since there are other factors we don't know about should be considered.
Thanks for pointing out the article and the link to it. I have had an SACD player for a few months now, and I would agree that the sound is extremely nice on good recordings. As with every medium, there is bad software out there as well, so SACD is not the silver bullet.

My fear with both SACD and MD is that both will go the way of the Betamax. Althougg Beta was better quality than VHS, it still lost the format wars. Same for MD, it seems to be loosing the format wat to MP3 players, despite the fact that the audio quality is better. Reason it is loosing? Cost and marketing, IMO.

Drubin: J-10, in his review of SCD-1 id Stereophile also said that RedBook part of hybrid disc sound worse then sinle layer CD's. So you are not alone in this opinion. My 2 cents that in all identical recordings I compared available as single CD and Redbook part of hybrid, hybrid ALWAYS won and with big margin. But, I am not professional reviewer. The difference is huge and one had to be blind not to hear it. Unless, entire system is highly colored, of course - Simon
Interesting, I guess there is something to this after all. And if you ask me, "professional reviewer" don't mean squat. Most of those guys are bozos just like the rest of us, or worse. :-)