Sonic difference K2CD vs SACD

Ahendler, I would never presume that my elementary 5 - 10% improvement comment could compare to any of your eloquently detailed and most likely superior descriptions of sonic differences.

The point being was that high-rez format differences generally amount to very little. You know, like 5 - 10% is little, oops. Unless of course one enjoys choking on gnats.

-IMO

It might be added to that while mastering over format is the biggest issue dictating sound quality (no arguments here) --- it should be noted that the hardware utilized in the playback matters as well --- there are some really good redbook CD players that can, on average, make redbook CD's in general sound better than a modest SACD player can make the typical SACD sound.

Some of the newer redbook CD players are astoundingly good.

I agree completely with Ahendler and Montejay, mastering quality trumps format.
Charles

I totally agree with Ahendler. It would be great to have a general rule but it doesn't exist Mastering over format. I have redbooks that are better than there K2HD counterpart
I also have sacds that are not as good as the original cd. If you want the best sounding version be prepared to research the title and listen to different presses. I've been shocked at times where the better sound is found.

It really depends more on the mastering than the format. You will not find a copy of each format with the same mastering to do this comparison. A redbook with better mastering will sound better than either K2CD or SACD. The 5 to 10% comment is meaningless

I can only tell you that the redbook version is excellent. Not perfect but close enough.

K2CD and SACD versions being what they usually are, I would suspect an improvement of maybe 5 to 10% absolute max.

-IMO