More important than number of SACD's is the number/percentage of quality recordings, which in the case of SACD, seems to be at least 40% of what I've heard. Some of the Sony remasters of 70's and 80's are so so or just plain terrible, but that's balanced by FIM, Red Rose, Opus and others who have done a nice job on.
In addition to my recently aquired SCD-1 front end, I also jumped on the DVD-A bandwagon a while ago, but I've got only three DVD-A recordings I like (out of about 15) and that's only because they give me a decent souround sound fix once in while -- they in no way approach the SACD front end in sonic quality. Sonically, I can't afford to duplicate my tube 2 channel system x 3, which is what DVD-A wants you to do. I think, for that reason, it may become a favorite of the HT crowd and my well survice in that niche, especially if they can get some full motion video on the discs.
I'll post some more direct (unbiased comparisons) between my SCD-1 front end and DVD-A system when I get my newly arriving Classe 400 into the DVD-A system -- at least then I may approach the Aranov monoblocks, First Sound, SCD-1 in detail (although I doubt it). Finally, I'm thinking of getting Stan Warren to go over my Pioneer 38A and bring it up a notch or two. And what to do with that bass-impaired HT centre channel speaker - DVD-A would like it too to be full-range? I think we'll face the same problems with multichannel SACD: You may be able to afford high end for two channels, but doing it all around is almost three times as expensive, especially with long runs of speaker cabling. Oh well, I guess its two channel SACD for most of us audiophiles by default.
