SACD/CD Question

I have this hybrid SACD (there's no need to refer to these as "so-called hybrid compatible CD/SACD" - hybrid SACD covers it) and it sounds just fine. I've only played the high resolution layer in stereo (it is a multichannel disc).

Here's a review:

http://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/1516

I like Volodos, although I prefer Murray Perahia who is also featured on a number of Sony SACDs.

I don't think that buying hybrids for the CD layer is a great strategy, unless you are positively planning on getting an SACD player in the near future. You will be paying a premium for something you don't need, and most reviews you will see on-line will be for the hi-rez section, so praise could be misleading (as it appears to be in this case). In some cases (The Rolling Stones), there is no corresponding CD - so you have no choice.

I buy SACDs for the high resolution stereo sound, and in fact have never played the Redbook layer on any of the hundreds of SACDs I own.

Regards,

1. As Metralla says, there's no reason to buy hybrid SACDs for the CD layer if you are not going to get an SACD player in the near future.

2. The differences between those various releases on the same label is not the medium but the mastering.

Kal

I don't have this recording so I can't speak about it specifically. However, I would add that Sony is rather inconsistent with their productions. Just look at the packaging. Depending on when they were produced, many CD's and SACD's have different labeling although they are the same recordings. I never cared for Sony in this regard. Blame the mastering and the engineering, not the medium. I have hundreds of hybrid SACD's that sound just fine on my "high-quality" CD-based stereo rig.

Like the previous poster, I don't own this specific recording on SACD, but I do have a number of SACDs in my collection. I'm fortunate enough to have both a dedicated CD player as well as an SACD player and to be quite honest, if you have a high quality CD player you don't need an SACD player. That I found out via direct comparison between the two players (in 2-channel mode) using the same hybrid SACD in both, using electrostatic speakers by Martin Logan (which I believe are best suited for such comparisons as they bring out details that most mid-priced cone speakers are unable to deliver).
In your case I belive it is the recording that suffered not your system and I don't think an SACD player can save it.
For your own information, I found the SACD hype to be just that, more hype than fact. I find slightly better air present with SACD players, better feel for the size of the room where the recording took place but the music is the same, especially orchestral music (I own Beethoven's symphonies 1-9 on SACD and the CD player sounds just as good). For vocals there is slightly (slight is too big, less than that) more natural timbre but that depends on the player you use, as said already a good CD player will correct all that (try Audio Aero products to see what I mean, I use an Audio Refinement CD player which is nowhere near the Audio Aero Prima Cd player and it already matches my Marantz-8300 SACD player).

Good luck.

The acoustics for Berlin recordings are sometimes problematic. For a blazing Tchaikovsky #1 in great sound consider Argerich with Chailly. She sometimes drives the music too hard, but excells with Russian composers. Look for the older edition on Phillips with Rachmaninov #3. I believe the newly remastered version of Rach #3 on Philips 50 has deleted the Tchaikovsky #1.

I also like Pletnev on Virgin, which contains all the Tchaikovsky piano concertos. There's others to consider, but these have great sound. Sell your Volodos on Amazon marketplace.

Also, if you want to get the best out of your redbook CDs, consider Walker Audio Vivid Enhancer.

Rob