SACD vs RBCD players

I feel that SACD is a worthwhile improvement over RBCD. A lot has to do with the mastering process though. I have heard a few RBCD's that come close and a couple even surpass some SACD's. I would not really worry about a SACD player sounding inferior on RBCD, as that is simply the difference one hears generally speaking between these formats. My highly modified Marantz SA-11S1 sounds very good on RBCD and excellent on SACD.........for digital anyway. Analog is still my primary source, but I find digital at least enjoyable now, especially SACD.

BTW, you may find this site useful as to what recordings are availible on SACD.

Cheers,
John

I have already stated that analog is my first format choice. That being said, I own roughly 50 SACD's and 500 RBCD's. I find that when listening to digital, I wind up listening to about 40% SACD and 60% RBCD.....mostly due to aforementioned reasons. I would say that I listen to 70% vinyl and 30% digital.

BTW, I'm not a huge classical fan, but I do enjoy classical. I've found that jazz also has a large collection on SACD, and that is my favorite genre.

FWIW, it sounds like you are trying to talk yourself out of an SACD player by saying "I begin to suspect that the number of SACDs I would listen to on a regular basis might not be that many."

If you want a fancy name RBCD player (Cyrus/ Resolution Audio?), I'd say go for it. IMHO a SACD on a Sony (Marantz, Esoteric, etc) will sound better than any RBCD player, but I wouldn't want SACD to interfer with you getting what you really want.

Cheers,
John