SACD Players

I don't know about players announced at CES 2001, however, I listen to SCD-1, owned 777ES and now own 9000ES Sony SACD/CD/DVD Player (you can get it for about $1.1k "www.oade.com"). 9000ES, per my personal opinion, is by far the best sounding Sony CD/SACD and 24/96 Player. It has much improved transport and D/A chip is possibly of 2nd SACD generation. The most important sonic characteristic is its midrange sounding similar to the best tube amps i.e. not syropy or euphonic but full harnonic texture, timbral accuracy and sence of naturalness. Its bass is also the best among these Players. Highs are good but can be better if 50kHz low pass junky filter can be removed (SCD-1 and 777ES has extrenal switch to disconnect this filter, in 9000ES its internal). SACD sound is breathtaking: much, much better then vinil (its dynamic range is noticably greater) and DVD-A (whatever DVD-A I auditioned none sounded so natural as SACD, and by far). My opinion is biased, however. I love SACD sond of 9000ES. Rest of my system as you asked: CAT SL-1 MkIII Preamp, Two Bel Canto digital amps EVo in mono mode and speakers are Diapason by Dick Shahinian. Al wilre by Electraglide. This system was geared to listen to "big sound": symphonic music, choruses, opers etc. SACD is increadibly realistic here, second only to live concerts. I am not professional reviewer (however, by education I have diploma of classic piano) therefore my experience is highly biased (as, I bekieve, it should be here). Good Luck - Simon

Linamine. You ask two entirely different questions. one is subjective: "How they play DVD". My answer is to push button with word "PLAY". Now, your question "How $1,200 Player sounds better then $3,500 (and I would add $5000 as well) is more difficult to answer. I will split my answer for you on two. Firstly, I stated that I am biased, it is highly biased opinion. How I developed this opinion? I don't like to compare one piece of equipment with another. I (try to) comapare it with live acoustic music. I spend 12 years on music education (piano) and I am lucky to live in Philadelphia where sound (and importanly, ambience) of Academy of Music is easily reacignisible on many records made there. The latest, among many, is "Nature" by Waterlilly in 24/96, Red Book CD and SACD. I described in the previous post my system and you can, therefore, judge for yourself of its degree of fidelity to acoustic music (Many people demend fidelity to the actual recording which for me is one of many steps of reproduction of acoustic music. Unfortunatelly, I do not listen to electronic music and thus cannot comment to it. In summary, for my ears, in my system, in my acoustic environment I firmly (but dubjectively) believe (as of today not three years from now)that SACD sound is the best among, CDs, DVD-A, Vinil etc. I listen to Sony SC-1, owned 777ES and again I believe that sound of 9000ES is much superior. Non-biased, professional answer. According to Scatt Hall of Electraglide and few others th transport in 9000ES is much better then in previous SACD units, others suggest that its D/A chip is of second generation. I am out of this discussion, sorry, guys, for the lenght - Simon

Myles, thank you very much for your detailed analysis with my observations. Regarding SACD vs vinil; you are correct that SACD has better "bass dynamic". I love symphonic music and therefore this "bass dynamic" makes me to say "this listening experience is second to the live acoustic music only". Regarding piano, I also cannot argue with you. Its sound ranges wildly from "Italian Co, Glenn Gould" to terrible Volodis. Kavi Alexandr recording may be his worst, again I am not arguing, my point is only that I am very familiar with hall ambience, orchestra and our esteem maesto Sawallich. so I can use it as reference (in CD, 24/96 or SACD mode) Now, you said something EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, if I understood you correctly, SACD signals are converted in PCM format in 9000ES in SACD mode (and from PCM must be converted, finally to analog). Wow, theoretically it should negate all advantages of SACD. Ed Meidtner (spelling?) designer of some SACD machines, said in writing that actually PCM initially is recorded in something very similar to SACD, and he illustered many errors coming with it (e.g. Gibbs artifucts and many others). Thus 9000ES, I hope I misunderstood you!, perform in poor PCM? PLEASE, clarify - Simon

Myles, Doug: FRAUD or FROG? DSD->PCM or vice versa. As far as I know: many many years ago digital recording became single bit (in most but not all studious) x64 or x128 oversampling. Lets count, 44.1 kHz x 64 = few MHz. in other words its very similar (if not mathematically identical) to... SACD. For Red book CDs these single bit signals are converted into PCM (24/192 is only "hot rod" of 16/44.1 PCM. I am not distinquish them here due to their identical mathematical principals). This is what you probably read, Doug. Myles, you claim actual FRAUD in Sony 9000ES by stating, as I, and apperently, Doug understood you that "they" take "pure" DSD signal and then convert them into the "dirty" PCM (here is not A/D but D/A so you must imply mode called by Sony in this machine as "SACD"). PCM converted from DSP has huge amount of artifacts, as discussed by Ed Meidnter (spelling?) as oppose to PCM created directly from the sound waves in A/D process. Not that SACD is without a problem... BUT that you are saying is a fraud by Sony. Are you sure about that? It is hard to swallow, really - PLEASE respond - Simon

Doug, I know what you read. Multi-channel SACD is said by "experts" in Stereophile (in the issue where Scull reviewed Technics A10 DVD-A Player) can be done only by using PCM process, if it is so in Sony/Phillips units or not we, really, don't know. But its entirely different from Myles statement that on 2-channel SACD part of 9000ES Sony Player SACD signals are converted into PCM format. If he is corrrect and I wish him to respond VERY MUCH then sound quality is compromized, indeed. It is very serious matter for me, I own 9000ES and send it to modify analog stage, however, if digital part is "dirty" it will not help much and it is huge waste (emotional at least).

JADE:Its matter if you want to continue and build upon available. In such as case, current sound is less important then expected in future. it much better to start with good engineering rather then bad. If you are only interested in stock, you are 100% correct - Simon