PPBs reply is what I expected. ANd probably deserve. I own about 2500 red book CDs. About 10 xrcds and about 15 sacds. Of the xrcds and sacds about 90 percent are made from old recordings I already owned the LP versions. In all instances where I knew the LP, the SACD sounded better then the xrcd but my first post was the only one I had exactly the same performance/recording session. I would not call the other xrcds dudds but I do think they are not worth the $30 asked for. I also made my own cds off of records and except for more pops I think my A to D version just as good and it cost $.25. Just my opinion. I guess if JVC didn't hype their "incredible" A to D process so much I wouldn't feal this strongly.
SACD vs xrcd
I made a mistake and ended up with a JVC XRCD24 cd of Van Cliburn playing Tchailovsky's Concerto No 1 and the RCA SACD (BMG pressing) version of the same exact performance.
The SACD cost $13 and the JVC xrcd24 cost $30.
THe two versions were played through a Sony XA777ES and the new Ayre C5xe. Both were played in stereo (no surround). Preamp Ayre K1xe, amp Krell FPB300cx into Revel Ultra Salon speakers. (We also have the original recording on LP circa 1958.
The bottom line is the SACD sounded much better. I guess I'm not writting this to say the obvious that SACD sounds better, but rather to say if I have my choice of purchasing music from any company other then JVC I will do it. Their xrcd premium cds are not worth the more then two times the cost of a normal red book cd or an sacd. I wont go into the differences other then to say what I was hearing was not the technical difference between SACDs and CDs but rather a less then good A to D mixing and equalization. The orchestra to piano balance was all off while the SACD sounded just like the LP without the ticks and pops. (The SACD also had more music on it including the Rachmaninoff Concerto No2)
OK this is a single data point but its enough for me to question JVC's sales hype.
JVC JM-XR24004
BMG 82876-61392-2
The SACD cost $13 and the JVC xrcd24 cost $30.
THe two versions were played through a Sony XA777ES and the new Ayre C5xe. Both were played in stereo (no surround). Preamp Ayre K1xe, amp Krell FPB300cx into Revel Ultra Salon speakers. (We also have the original recording on LP circa 1958.
The bottom line is the SACD sounded much better. I guess I'm not writting this to say the obvious that SACD sounds better, but rather to say if I have my choice of purchasing music from any company other then JVC I will do it. Their xrcd premium cds are not worth the more then two times the cost of a normal red book cd or an sacd. I wont go into the differences other then to say what I was hearing was not the technical difference between SACDs and CDs but rather a less then good A to D mixing and equalization. The orchestra to piano balance was all off while the SACD sounded just like the LP without the ticks and pops. (The SACD also had more music on it including the Rachmaninoff Concerto No2)
OK this is a single data point but its enough for me to question JVC's sales hype.
JVC JM-XR24004
BMG 82876-61392-2