SACD vs Regular CD's

I agree with Steuspeed and Alan,really not much of a different in a well set up system for both formats.Good quality Red Book CD can sound quite excellent.I`ve found much overlap between the two in top level systems.
Regards,

More is more. SACD has the “potential” , too frequently unrealized, to sound significantly better than CD. I enjoy well made CDs immensely, but the fact is that SACD, properly executed, will reveal more of what’s on the master tape if there is more to reveal.

Phaelon,
I understand the theory that SACD 'should' sound better(and sometimes it does).The reality has not shown this to be the case consistently.Perhaps with classical music SACD is clearly superior.With the heavy jazz rotation I listen to,there`s no clear winner.
Regards,

I really tried to make SACD work, but ultimately, I decided to stay with CDs. In my case, I found that multi-function players did not play CDs as well as a dedicated CD player at similar cost. I got as far as a 5K player before giving up. Perhaps the more expensive players do a better job with CD. Second, if you are only going 2-channel, you have to remember that many of the intitial recordings were recorded digitally at 16/44, so you can never get more bits out of it. In your case, the Meridian is a very good CD player and I don't think you're going to better it with a cheaper SACD player, despite the theoretical advantage of hi-rez. All this aside, I was still considering one of those new Oppo 105s, which play SACDs and give you Blu Ray as well. Seems like it would be fun to fool around with.

I would agree with some that you will not best a great CD player with a cheap SACD player. I would suggest the Ayre C5xeMP as a universal source. It does both formats incredibly well. The difference on a good system is definite.