Why HDCD did not become a dominant format?


I've been listening to Reference Recordings 30th Anniversary Sampler while evaluating a Sony NS 9100ES and it was so obvious the HDCD decoding through my modest older Toshiba SD 9200 was "vastly" superior to the new Sony playback. I just don't understand why HDCD did not become the new standard as the musical quality is much enhanced. What happened?
psacanli

Showing 1 response by sharpnine

I prefer to purchase HDCD or hybrid SACD when available just for the red book CD playback, which generally is better than average on these discs. I assume the red book benefits from the quality of the mastering of these better formats. However regarding HDCD, I have my CD transport (EAD T-1000) going out to two different DACs 1) an EAD DAC that supports HDCD but doesn't do upsampling, and was new in 1997 and 2) a Bel Canto DAC-2 that doesn't support HDCD that is newer, 2002 and supports higher resolutions and up-sampling.
The Bel Canto seems to sound a bit better, even on HDCDs, although I have a hard time detecting much difference.

One thing I like about HDCD is its ability to live within the red book standard: CDs can be ripped using apple lossless and stored on a server, and played through a squeezebox, and the HDCD on the DAC still lights up.

My squeezebox is routed through the same 2 DACs (they each have two inputs) and my impression is the same as for CDs. Basically my take: HDCD discs--good. HDCD player--not necessary if you have a very good DAC or output stage. All things being equal I would take a DAC that didn't support it over one that did, but things are never equal so you should take the one that sounds the best.

HDCD white papers did claim that HDCDs would sound better than normal CDs even when played through non-HDCD equipment, IIRC.