Sacd/dvd-a, The Hype Is Dead, For Me At Least...


SACD, DVD-A....

I purchased a 2000.00 Universal and about 10 titles mostly SACD

SACD- Nice on surround, actual 5.1 disks, Stereo SACD well if you can get a Re-mastered CD or a Hybrid then its just as good on an awesome Redbook player as thru an SACD decoder... It is interesting.

DVD-A- Most of them ended up very UNDERWHELMING.... as stated earlier, and just a PAIN IN THE A$$...

Vinyl- I am only mentioning this as it seems viable for the discussion, as much garbage as it takes to turn on a DVD-A disc half the time I can put a LP on my VPI record cleaner, and Que it up just as well and it BLOWS away the DVD-A, and Most SACD's... I am not an Analog protector, as a matter of fact I bought My Analog RIG after ATTEMPTING SACD/DVD-A universal world.

CD- Bottom line Re-mastered Cd's and SACD Hybrids sound superior on a good old 16x BIT WADIA 4000.00 player than the SACD on the top of the line Marantz SACD player(this was borrowed)... This will catch much Heat I am sure, but drop the drama, invest Redbook, You can't buy anything on SACD or DVD-a in comparison to well recorded Redbook on a Very good redbook machine unless you are looking for the true benefit of surround SACD's. 2 channel I do not see the point.

Now let me back up, I am irritated only because, I am young, never had vinyl, and I started my High-end(audiophile) Life right in the Middle of SACD/DVD-A War about 2 years ago, so of course I had to have it... I will never go back to the headach of it now that someone was kind enough to show me the true sound of a Wadia player and a Vinyl rig in comparison to it.

I sold all Hi-Def Audio Software and Hardware and took all that money to the used market and Purchased the Wadia and Vinyl rig with YES an old fashoned Record cleaner to get the most out of it, and could not be Happier! Plus 90% of everything you could want is on Vinyl and CD, including New bands, many re-issues, etc...

Don't get me wrong, If you are into the titles that are in abundance on the SACD format GO FOR IT! It sounds VERY VERY good, but if you like maybe 10 CD's that exist on it, take the extra Money and purchase at least a Theta, Wadia, Maybe even Krell Machine(but I do not like the sound as much)... Okay don't take this as bashing, this is Truly my opinion on what I have heard and spent much time testing, And these were all done in home comparisons with Equal cost equipment for the most part for many months. And done in a very good room, good cables, speaker placement, power supply, and acoustic treated room that sounds excellent and does not lie....

I have nothing against the Hi-res music, hell I wanted it, I tried it as a newbee, and there is some definate impressive stuff, the MAIN thing I love about using Hi-res is When you can get your favorite guys in concert with DTS up on the HDTV in front of you, that so far is the only worthy format I have found worth the money and the cause, So I have a Seperate MOVIE / Slash / Concert DVD system that is a lot of fun and phoenominal results... But 2 Channel, get the best CD's or Hybrids, because the Hybrids do for some reason sound better than the originals probably due to they are Re-mastered very well, and a rewarding CD player will show this as much as the SACD counterpart if in a correctly setup system. And Vinyl, Ha well lets just say coming out of college recently my friends laugh until they here it cranked and can't believe it, especially if you have some good stuff to back it, but there is "DOG" recordings on ALL formats so don't think any sytem will Turn coal into a diamond in front of you.

But this all costs money No doubt, I only threw this little thread in here to maybe help some people save some cash... We can't have it all, but you can have it better if you know the direction to go in, I did not, but I found it, and it was full circle all the way back to the begining.. Don't let Hype rule your ears.
matrix
Don't quote me on this but I read somewhere that Sony has admitted that SACD has a fundamental flaw in the recording process. Here's the kicker, they have adopted a new scheme (forgot what's its called maybe digital experts can help here) which is basically PCM!*>)
I can say this, that :

Sure Chesky and whoever can lay down Classical and Patricia barber all day, and be succesful on SACD...but for the more mainstream Audiophile it seems that many of the recordings are done on Hi-res just for that reason, to get the Audiophile to return to purchase another Sony stamped product that is in no way superior to its predecessors..

Now Dark side of the moon, for obvious reasons they could not fake the Upgrade as easily because all eyes and ears were watching on that one... but for most of the selection, Bowie, Neil young, or even Slipknot(I could care less but for a point) it becomes more of a marketing thing, and not even a very good one, because they have not pushed the format hard enough and In my Opinion, the last 5 years of Standard CD recording's Have truly Enhanced quite a bit, possibly due to the threat originally from SACD, I don't know, but just about any 2005 recording you purchase will unlikely fall short of your expectations to pretty good sound quality... I have even replaced some old 80's and 90's Cd's with current re-masters from about 2002 on up, and they absolutly sound as good as new Albums and even SACD... Why? Again I have no idea accept that the Standard Digital industry is finally catching up with itself, For Example BECK, SEA CHANGE is a very new Album, whether you are into the music or not I have tested it on the Standard CD and the SACD only release, the Standard Was as good if not better in some ways, Bass responce and all, had very good weight and overall very full nice smooth sound, Now the SACD was something Special in the Surround MODE, but casual Listening Head to Head 2 channel I would take the CD version... Whats my point, Nothing but the fact is technology has definatly advanced, but for Who? I think the old 16 bit system is starting to show its true capabilities as well if the recording is properly done in the first place. Surround sound Does still have its place, And Hybrid SACD's do sound excellent on the Redbook playback as well as SACD.
Man....a lot of SACD bashing out there.
I have always felt that SACD would only appeal to a small slice of the public, namely the audiophile.
Look how popular MP-3 has become. Low res (MP-3) beating the pants off hi-rez (SACD and DVD-A). Really does not make any sense. Most of the public is looking for convenience over sound quality. They could care less about the sound, much less pay more to get it.
Just get a nice universal transport and enjoy the best of all formats, except vinyl of course.
I have a Theta Compli universal trasport hooked to a Theta Gen.VIII DA/Preamp.
Life is great!
No its not bashing, its just getting to the facts of the opposing formats and the advantages and disadvantages, but in 1999 I think SACD had a chance, and CD was a bit lower tier, but recordings now seem to be competing pretty well on standard DVD and CD... Its tuff.
I'm pretty much starting to feel the same way...i too have the Beck 'Sea Change' CD and SACD...for me...the sacd sounds better...but now all that much...and that is through the same player...an el cheapo combi player. If I were a diehard classical & jazz buff i probably would have bought more SACD's, but of the 20 or so that I have...there were only a couple that I REALLY wanted...other than that i was just buying stuff that in my mind was "ok"...but there were plain old redbook CD's that I would rather have had at the time...but wanted to wait to see if it would come out on SACD. Years later...no luck. My next DVD/CD player probably won't have SACD...at least it wont be a priority.