CD vs SACD in STEREO

"SACD uses the DSD audio format, which is more analogue and realistic sounding than normal PCM,..."

So I assume CD is PCM format, SACD is DSD format. 

Now I can drill down on the ’numbers’ (resolution, frequency range, signal to noise ration, etc). I am using Sony 700 (2nd system) and Oppo 103 for SACD and CD, both using HDMI output. 

And here is what smartypants Allen Iverson (AI) has to say:

When comparing Super Audio CD (SACD) and standard Compact Disc (CD) for 2-channel (stereo) listening, the technical differences are significant, but the audible benefits often depend more on the quality of the mastering than the format itself.¹

Technical Comparison

Key Differences for 2-Channel Audio

• The "Mastering" Advantage: Many audiophiles find SACDs sound better because they are often mastered with more care for a niche market. This typically results in less dynamic compression (the "loudness war" effect), leading to a more natural and "airy" sound compared to the same album on a standard CD.²

• Resolution and Filters: SACDs use DSD, which records the signal at an incredibly fast rate.³ This allows the player to avoid the steep digital "brick-wall" filters used in PCM (CD) playback, which some claim can cause phase shifts or harshness in the high frequencies.

• The "Analogue" Feel: SACD is frequently described as having an analogue-like smoothness, particularly in the reproduction of cymbals, strings, and room reverb. In contrast, standard CDs can sometimes sound "clinical" or "glassy" if not mastered well.

• Hardware Requirements: To hear the difference, you need a dedicated SACD player or a high-end universal player. While Hybrid SACDs have a CD layer that works in any player, you will only hear the high-resolution 2-channel layer on SACD-compatible hardware.

SACD is better than Redbook but much more noticeable with a high end player. Some are surround sound but real music is all 2 channel like going to a concert. I have a Atmos set up for video do not care for it with music.

SACDs generally sound better than Redbook, but format matters less than mastering. For example, Japanese SHM SACDs often sound "bright", sounding anything but "analog".

The other difference maker is the DAC. If you play a great SACD through a mediocre DAC, it won't sound anywhere near as good as a Redbook CD played through a great DAC. 

I only listen to SACDs in stereo or mono. Surround sound is very unnatural. 

Agree that you need good equipment to appreciate the sonics of SACD, but if you have the right equipment most SACDs are a nice improvement over CDs.

The other problem is that unless you listen to classical music, very few SACDs are released and when they are it's in small quantities.  When sold out they increase in price significantly.

@larsman 

SACD has never been about multi-channel as far as I know. On the other hand there is Dolby Atmos, which is

There is so much bad information in this thread, it is hard to know where to start!

Mainstream SACD has ALWAYS been about multi-channel, 5.1 or 5.0.  But realising that not everybody has multi-channel playback capabilities, and given the huge storage increase of a SACD over a CD, most SACDs also include a two-channel mix for play back over conventional "stereo" systems.  I note that the word "stereo" actually means "solid"!

Also, most SACDs are hybrids, meaning they contain a separate layer corresponding to the Redbook CD equivalent.  This means they will play in any conventional CD transport or player.

Direct Stream Digital (DSD) is the native format for SACDs.  Unlike Pulse Code Modulation (PCM), it is a brilliantly simple concept.  Each successive bit simply indicates whether the sound pressure level has gone up or down since the last sample.

For SACD, the samples are taken 64 times more frequently than Redbook CDs, so instead of a steep playback filter, you only need a very gentle filter in the MHz range.

DSD is great for delivery, but not for editing.  This is possibly why is has not caught on for pop/rock.  For editing, even higher resolution file formats are used.

DSD solves the other big problem with PCM, which is the difficulty of trying to match the levels of widely disparate bit values.  The most significant bit is tens of thousands of times more important than the least significant bit.  Many dacs attempt to solve the linearity problem by converting to DSD-like bitstreams – the sigma-delta type.

Of course, to get the best out of DSD, your dacs need to process DSD natively.  Many don’t. 

People have been making multi-channel recordings almost since the invention of magnetic tape.  Four channel records were released almost as soon as two-channel ones.  Dolby Atmos takes it to a new level – literally.  Up to 32  channels can ‘fly’ through 3-d space.  Dark Side of the Moon on Pure Audio Blu-ray exploits this beautifully.

But Dolby Atmos can also be used to represent static sound sources in a natural acoustic.  Try the organ of Notre Dame in Paris by DG.  Better yet, buy some packages from 2L - the Nordic Sound You get hybrid SACD plus Pure Audio Blu-ray with multiple high resolution PCM files and up to nine channels.