advertisement


SACD - worth the investment ?

Paul R said:
A reasonable expectation indeed.

But (assuming the same original source....) how the CD layer and SACD layer are derived is entirely up to the producer. I wouldn't be all that surprised if the CD layer were, on some discs, deliberately sub-optimal in order to help the SACD layer 'sound' better in a comparison.

Paul
Click to expand...

That's alot of supposition ;)
 
Given that when a CD standard conversion is inserted into an SACD output it can't be heard there has to be some explanation for 'puppie's experience...

Paul
 
sonddek said:
That's going to take some investigation. Knowing me it'll be either used Linn Unidisk because I'm too lazy to audition all the options and I trust Linn not to make a complete dog's breakfast of it, or an old Sony Playstation 3 because it's cheap and will allow me to rip to 24/96.
Click to expand...

Yes your right Linn made a fine SACD player, the Unidisk 1.1 can be picked up at a great used price now.
To the opening question, is it worth getting one. Well no, unless you want the multiple channel experience, and like surround music.
Now I'm making the same assumption that the Linn player is a dam fine player, and one of the best. That said when I bought into the streaming world with one of the first Akurate DS players it playing the ripped CD layer of the SACD as good as the 1.1 played the DSD layer !!!! Now lots have improved since then, updated software, dynamik power supplies and now updated main board.
So good as the 1.1 was, I think the DS option even using your own ripped CD is better, then you can try 24 bit downloads from the Linn website etc..... Want more, get a Renew or Klimax DS.... A whole new level.
Times move on, SACD was great...look forward not back.
 
Isn't the writing on the wall for all CD, SACD or not? I'm not necessarily saying that the laptop and DAC is a better solution - but it does seem to be the way the digital market is going. Sales of downloaded digital exceeds sales of CD's.
 
sonddek said:
This thread has encouraged me to think about getting an SACD player and some SACDs. Like you say, all of CD's strengths, plus higher sound quality, regardless of whether I can hear it. I never bought CDs because I already had a good record player when they came out, and CD has never sounded right to me. I'm looking forward to investigating SACD to see if it solves that problem.

Knowing me it'll be either used Linn Unidisk ... or an old Sony Playstation 3 because it's cheap ...
Click to expand...

I would probably avoid the Sony Playstation ... it is a game machine - not an audiophile product. I don't know what DAC is used by the Linn but it is a discontinued product and a few years old and I suspect a newly designed product may well offer much more for much less.

If I was buying a new machine today, I am with Gerard's recommendation above for the new Marantz KI Pearl Lite (he mentioned 690 pounds):

Marantz-SA-KI-Pearl-Lite.jpg


http://kipearl.marantz.eu/

It just won the Hi-Fi News Outstanding Product Award (in July 2011).
 
I should have perhaps added that the new Marantz KI Pearl Lites are based on the very highly regarded (and more expensive) KI Pearl limited edition SACD player and amp ... there is a review of them here in Hi-Fi News by Ken Kessler:

http://www.soundhifi.com/images/Pearl HFN.pdf

Page 21 of the Hi-Fi News review:

======================================================================

"The fact that all SACDs these days are dual-layer means it’s no big deal to compare SACD with normal CD.
And despite reports by the mainstream press naysayers about the public not hearing the difference,
any music lover who can’t needs a session with an ear-wax remover."

=====================================================================
 
YNWOAN said:
Sales of downloaded digital exceeds sales of CD's.
Click to expand...

Pfft. Wrong. For ALBUM sales, the latest RIAA figures are that download sales = 10% of total sales. Album downloads are not taking off - they are stagnant; people don't buy album downloads. They might rip them - but they don't buy them. The download market is essentially a singles convenience market at 99c: you aren't really paying Apple 99c for the music ... you pay 99c for them to deliver it efficiently to you.

For the classical market (where SACD is quite big and which is essentially an album market), physical sales are increasing - not decreasing (see links above in thread).
 
I personally hope downloads go from strength to strength and CD continues its decline because....I go to a carboot every Sunday morning through the summer. I pick up CD's at between 33p and £1. Some days I have come away with 25+. By doing this I have been able to "take a chance" I have found some brilliant artists I would never have listened to at £10 per CD. If I don't like something I give it to a charity shop ( and have a look at what they have while I am in there ). At say 50p I have only lost 1/6th of the price of a pint !
I am now waiting for the CD players that were once way beyond my means to become available 2nd hand, as streaming becomes de rigueuer.
Ok, so I will be listening to CD's which aren't quite as good as downloads, on hardware that 5 years earlier had been 5 Star but I'll have lots to listen to and I'll feel quite lucky to have what was once a £5k CD player on my rack.
But my CD's will be just the music. I suspect the download of the future could proably require you to listen to a 10 second "We buy any car" advert before the start of your Hi-rez track.... ah la youtube ??

My original posting was probably for the same reason. It should possibly have read " SACD - Is the improvement in sound quality over CD worth investing in for the future, when SACD becomes tomorrows Betamax and I will pick discs up for £1 ? "
 
Sony could easily remove the licensing lock on not outputting any better than cd quality via the digital outs on SACD players. If they did it would hugely kickstart the market.

I'd by an SACD transport and discs to use with my standalone dac, but I;'ll never buy a SACD player to use on its own, no way, no how.

They aren't stopping me from copying SACD, they are stopping me from buying them full stop. It's the 2nd stupidest decision they have ever made, right up there with gifting Apple the entire portable digital audio playback market by refusing to add mp3 to their players and favouring Atrac.

the tits.
 
puppie said:
Pfft. Wrong. For ALBUM sales, the latest RIAA figures are that download sales = 10% of total sales. Album downloads are not taking off - they are stagnant; people don't buy album downloads. They might rip them - but they don't buy them. The download market is essentially a singles convenience market at 99c: you aren't really paying Apple 99c for the music ... you pay 99c for them to deliver it efficiently to you.

For the classical market (where SACD is quite big and which is essentially an album market), physical sales are increasing - not decreasing (see links above in thread).
Click to expand...

Pfft. Oh, OK. To be honest, it is only of passing relevance to myself as I don't buy CD's and have only downloaded a handful of tracks (mostly as ring-tones for my phone). If you tell me that CD has a rosy future, I'm happy to believe it. In fact, I'm glad to hear that the player in my car won't be defunct too soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top