What interconnects with SACD 1000 ?

Jeffrt: If you haven't already done so, please try reading ALL of IA's posts regarding the SACD 1000. For a good start, you might want to start here. I have no problems with dissenting opinions so long as they are actually legit and have some form of foundation ( first hand experience, technical details, etc..).

As far as AA goes, I was one of the original founding members of the forum and have contributed quite a bit of info to both the AA forums ( primarily in the past ) and the actual funding of operations. I went so far as to sponsor and run two different fund-raisers to help support that website. If you doubt this, take a look at the list of contributors and see how many times my name comes up. For the record, i was actually the very first person to contribute and support that site. If you don't believe me, ask Rod.

As such, I could post the same material on either website. Personally, i find the constant quarrels and high level of negativity on AA to be bothersome. This is not to say that i haven't started my fair share of "ruckus" with specific individuals ( primarily Stereophile employees ), but this was done not on a personal but professional level.

I also don't need to see a dozen+ posts a day in the digital or Hi-Rez forums that are nothing more than SACD is better than DVD-A or vice-versa or Rich doing nothing more than putting everyone / everything down. I've been down that road and talked to Rod, Stephaen, etc... and they've more than got their hands full.

As such, i prefer to post / contribute to these forums. It is a little more laid back ( this is a good thing ) and doesn't have quite the knowledge base via professional input but is also typically more consistent in the views presented. Since Infinity Audio was anything BUT consistent in his point of view, THAT is why he was called to task. He or anyone else can present their point of view and say that a component is a piece of junk or has specific flaws. I've done it more than a few times and probably will again. One does not have to agree with everything presented here to post or share a point of view. The fact that Infinity started his own thread about the inadequacies of the unit, then started another thread on his own shortly thereafter stating that he was happy with the unit and then produced more negative posts shortly after that about the unit is what bothers me. That and the fact that he has changed his story about what he's using as support components several times. As such, it's hard to get a grip on where he's coming from, let alone believe what he's posting.

As far as the SACD 1000 goes, i've never stated that it was a "world class" unit. I've said that i thought it was solid performer and had a lot of potential. Is that anything different than what has been said at AA ??? Sean
>

Socrates: Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Nobody is denying that right. If you have a problem with what i've posted or why i've posted something, so be it. Do both of us a favour and let me know. You can post it here or send it to me privately. Either way, i'll do my best to respond AND try to understand your point of view.

Following that same line of advice ( what's good for the goose... ), i did the same thing with IA. Since he has not responded to the majority of questions / comments that i brought to his attention, he's either been caught red-handed in a bunch of inconsistent lies ( as to what equipment he really does own, what equipment was used to evaluate the SACD 1000 that he supposedly purchased, etc...) or is simply too embarrassed by his own words / actions that have been collected in this forum and within his member feedback to even respond.

The fact that he has responded to other comments made by other individuals tells me that he still frequents this forum and reads these same threads. Draw your own conclusions as to how believable his comments really are. Before doing so though, i would ask that you read ALL of his comments regarding the SACD 1000 and try to keep that in perspective prior to passing judgment.

Now, i have one question for you based on your own words:

"Not everyone here is a American flag waving, WASP, high-brow yuppie prick with years of prep schools rhetoric training under their belt."

What makes you think that one has to be:

1) A "patriot" i.e. "flag waver"

2) A "WASP"

3) "high brow"

4) A "Yuppie"

5) Well Educated

to have drawn the conclusions that they did about any specific subject, let alone what IA has posted ? I'd love to hear how you arrived at such wording and the thought process that it took to get there.
----------------------------------------------------------
Kana: Obviously, not all people can read the same text and walk away with the same meaning or level of understanding. To me, it was very clear that IA's posts were extremely inconsistent and loaded with flaws. The fact that he thought that his equipment might "blow up" if using the SACD 1000 at the 50 KHz setting told me a lot. If IA really had an SCD-1, you would have thought that he might have at least a little understanding of what was involved with setting up this type of equipment. Then again, one would have to be observant enough to put 2 + 2 together to even think about such things and tie the two subjects together.

The fact that he went out of his way to rave about the "very high quality" of some $269 Ebay speakers should have been a little more obvious to anyone reading these threads and his system description.

Many people take comments at face value without looking at why / how those comments came about or who made the comments to begin with. I am not one of those people and i guess you aren't either : ) Thanks for paying attention and the words of support. Sean
>

PS... I've always said that one should buy what they like and want to listen to, regardless of what the general consensus of the product is. I still believe that and hope that most of you do too.

IA: I agree with your initial comments about the SACD 1000's tonal balance. I stated much the same thing in my very first post about the unit i.e. it had a strong bottom end and lacked top end extension and "air". Obviously, these were my results with the unit taken directly out of the box and installed into a system that was not "optimized" for this component. Up to this point, we are on the same page here and this is where things begin to diverge.

After that initial post, i began experimenting with my system. With further tweaking and refining of what was already there, i was able to minimize the deficiencies in the system. Prior to this, i had primarily blamed much of what i was hearing on the SACD 1000, as the introduction of this piece into the system surely did change the performance that i was experiencing. The fact that the SACD 1000 was also improving from break-in during this period of time surely didn't hurt matters either or lessen my opinion of it.

While i'm not done experimenting with the system or the SACD 1000, the changes that i've made to the system ( which i noted what it consisted of part for part in a prior thread ) have resulted in a far more transparent and natural sounding reproduction chain. Obviously, this is with the SACD 1000 acting as the Captain and barking orders down the line. As many others may realize, one system or mode of operation may not work that great when other changes are made. Kind of like working for one boss and then having someone else take over the company.

The new boss may seem like he has his head up his ass initially and the way that they want things done may be very different. As such, it would be easy to jump to early conclusions that were incorrect in nature since only part of the plan had been implemented. In the long run, when all of the changes have been fully implemented, fully understood and running as a whole, the end result may be increased efficiency for every aspect of operation. This is true even though one might have initially thought that everything was going down the drain. That is what i ran into with the SACD 1000 once i let ALL of the system changes and those within the SACD 1000 itself run their course.

Given the lack of consistency in your posts, the reduced level of understanding that you displayed about the unit itself and how to set it up in your system, etc... it was VERY easy to jump to conclusions about your level of understanding how "systems" work and how willing you were to work with the product to obtain optimum results from it in stock form. The fact that your story seemed to change along the way didn't help matters either.

As to your comments about the price of the unit, that never entered my mind. My comments about the performance of a unit are not based on price, brand name, reputation, cosmetics, etc... I try to forget about all of that and simply let the product do its' thing as best possible and judge it on its' own sonic merits. As such, i stand by my statements that the SACD 1000 is a very solid performer when one's system is optimized to work with it and that it would be an excellent candidate for further internal upgrades and modifications.

As to whether or not you agree or disagree with me on any of the points i've tried to bring up here, that is up to you. I never tried to make this a personal thing. What i did try to do was get to the bottom of the information being presented, the consistency of the information and how that information came about. You were simply the carrier of that information. I would have done the same thing to anyone else that said what you did in the manner that it was presented.

Either way, i hope that you enjoy the system(s) that you have and continue to contribute to these forums. I would also add that you might want to update / correct / separate the components that you are running in each of your systems as listed on Agon. The way that you have the information presented now could only lead to further confusion if someone was researching what your point of system / musical reference was.

----------------------------------------------------------

Jeff: My intent was to demonstrate that i'm actively involved with this "hobby", have been an avid audiophile / supporter of audio related subjects and am very much a "hands on" kind of person. I thought that knowing a bit of background about me might help to better qualify some of my statements within your mind.

Having said that, I had assumed that you had not read all of IA's comments in other threads and that is why i suggested it. One could surmise ( and your further comments verify this ) that your original input to this thread was based on a lack of information or "jumping to conclusions". As such, i would ask that you DO examine the other Agon SACD 1000 based threads to see exactly what was going on here. At the same time, you might be able to learn more about the SACD 1000 by reading some other, more diverse opinions than those presented on AA. If nothing less, you might be able to pass on the info to your friend or have him stop by here to share his results and insight with the rest of us that are curious about this unit.

And one thing further: I do need to chill out. I've got a lot more important things to worry about than what is discussed on this forum. Sean
>

Just for kicks, take a look at the digital source that is being used to drive custom built tube preamp / custom built tube monoblocks / custom built speakers at CES / T.H.E. Show. Obviously, some people do feel that the SACD 1000 is capable of being used at reference level and are willing to bet the reputation of their entire product line on it by using it as a source for their system at a show of this calibre.

Here's a picture of one of my other transports being used as a reference for another system. It is a G&D Transforms Ultimate TransPort-1 aka UTP-1. My guess is that this is the system that Bob Crump / John Curl / Carl Thompson of CTC Builders has set up to demonstrate the $10,000 CTC Blowtorch preamp ( located below the "Flintstone looking" G&D ), which is probably feeding a pair of their Parasound / CTC Builders JC-1 Monoblocks. From what i've been told by reliable sources, the JC-1's are probably the best buy in high end amplification at this point in time. I know that the JC-1's have replaced some highly respected OTL's in one system and even some $40,000 SS amps in another with the owners never looking back. The JC-1's also seem to be an excellent match for the big SoundLab's too from what i understand. Not bad for amps that list for around $6K a pair. Sean
>