It's probably worth it for someone with a player like yours, but for me, I just couldn't find a SACD player that I felt got the most out of standard CDs, I got up to about the 5K range and decided to stop chasing hi-rez. Plus, in so many cases, the original recording was done in 16/44, so it doesn't really matter if you're buying the SACD, multichannel aside, of course. But for guys like you and people who own DCS and high-end Esoteric, SACD can be great. There's tons of them out there, especially if you listen to classical music. Then again, some companies are recording with DSD, but releasing in redbook.
Any hope for SACD?
Is there any hope at all for transferring more music, especially classic popular music, to SACD?
I mean, so many audio companies are investing so much in R+D for the hardware, but, to me clearly, there is huge bang for the buck in having an SACD version of the recording.
For example, the recent Carole King Music SACD is incredible, with a totally natural image density and rock-solid soundstaging (qualities I hear in most SACDs of long-familiar albums). Is there no economic justification for this? You get so much for so little. I wish the audio companies would band together to fund this. It sure would make equipment demos sound better.
My little system at home with SACD trounced the quality of even the megabuck systems at the NY show a few weeks ago, including all the vinyl demos to my ears. (My EMM XDS1 helps, but my Sony 5400 on SACD is also quite fine.)
It just seems like such an incredible waste that SACD is dead or dying and nobody in the audiophile or larger music community is talking about this. Does everything have to suffer at the invisible hand of the profit motive? This is an artistic pursuit fundamentally, and you might as well always show all the paintings in the world behind blurry glass. It's a crime that, say, the Beatles aren't available in SACD or any HiRez format.
I mean, so many audio companies are investing so much in R+D for the hardware, but, to me clearly, there is huge bang for the buck in having an SACD version of the recording.
For example, the recent Carole King Music SACD is incredible, with a totally natural image density and rock-solid soundstaging (qualities I hear in most SACDs of long-familiar albums). Is there no economic justification for this? You get so much for so little. I wish the audio companies would band together to fund this. It sure would make equipment demos sound better.
My little system at home with SACD trounced the quality of even the megabuck systems at the NY show a few weeks ago, including all the vinyl demos to my ears. (My EMM XDS1 helps, but my Sony 5400 on SACD is also quite fine.)
It just seems like such an incredible waste that SACD is dead or dying and nobody in the audiophile or larger music community is talking about this. Does everything have to suffer at the invisible hand of the profit motive? This is an artistic pursuit fundamentally, and you might as well always show all the paintings in the world behind blurry glass. It's a crime that, say, the Beatles aren't available in SACD or any HiRez format.
- ...
- 34 posts total
- 34 posts total