there have been numerous threads here, i know, about sacd v. dvd-a, upsampling, oversampling, etc. a number of these threads have included discussions of which, if any, new digital format will replace what we now call “redbook” cd’s. i don’t wish to rehash these discussions. rather, i’d like to hear from others how they are coping with the “age of uncertainty” in the realm of digital audio. is it better to “roll the dice” and invest in sacd or dvd a? ignore the contenders for the new and get the best possible out of redbook cd’s? buy with upgradeability firmly in mind? follow another path? i don’t post this query out of mere curiosity. i really haven’t figured out what course i should follow. i’d appreciate your giving me a hand. -kelly
amazon.com,,can find used sacd,s below new prices,,i have a integra uni.player now,,i own about 10 sacd and 2 dvda,as much as id like to upgrade my player,i think ill wait a while,a poorly done sacd sounds worse than a well done cd,and visa versa,,
We'll, as some of you know I've not been in favor of financing the hi rez format war and chose to sit on the sideline and see what happens. I've found that well recorded labels like xrcd, chesky, etc. sounded pretty good on my Ikemi compared to hi rez discs on simarly priced equipment. Right now I'm listening to a Diana Krall dual disc on a cheapo dvd player, and people might just eat this up. Two channel cd, surround sound and videos, all on one disc that can be played on any dvd player. It's a matter of time before all the audio will be hi rez in what ever format finally wins and there you go. I guess it's time to upgrade the cheapo dvd player.
I agree with you Ferrari. Even though i've had an SACD player and now own a universal machine, i don't think that SACD is going to make it. DVD-A has a better chance of the two, simply because it incorporates video along with the potential for better sonics. Either way, they are both pretty much dead formats that are still floating but could sink to the bottom at any given time. Given that the mass majority of new releases that come out aren't available on either format, the only ones to blame for this fiasco are the record companies themselves. Either Sony has something else up their sleeve or they should get their tech departments and music / video departments to work together a little more closely on the next "format" that they try to foist on us. Sean >
PS... While we're on the subject, what's the best source for SACD & DVD-A discs? I've purchased a few SACD's here and there, but really can't find much that i'm interested in. Still don't own any DVD-A's yet, although i have heard a couple of them.
I am most likely the senior member to this thread. Been in this hobby since 1957, now 62 have seen a lot of things come and go in audio. So one can imagine the depth of my library in Vinyl, and CD at this point. Some years ago finally disposed of the Cassette and Reel to Reel tapes. Made a donation of them to a public library. Pardales is right about the remaster of Redbook CD issues. I have not found a clunker in the lot of them. One of the reasons purchased the Arcam CD Player is that it is a 24 bit machine and a lot of the remasters are coming out coded in 24 bit. They sound superb and are worth everyones attention to fill in their library.
I was in the entertainment business for years with CBS-Columbia and later TV Guide. Trust me on this guys SACD and DVD-A are going to have to make serious in roads to the consumer if either format is to survive. Frankly as I see it , it is just not in the cards. SACD and DVD-A has just to much red ink to overcome. Currently I do not see either format surviving much beyond 2007.
My opinion for what it is worth get a high quality CD Redbook player. Don't spend more than $2,000.00 for one either, then your buying something else than quality. Try to get one with the current 24 bit technology and you are set for a very long time. There are as of now some very good sub $1,000.00 players on the market that deserve merit.
Remember this hobby is about the music. more than it is about the gear. We all hear things differently. What sounds good to me, may not sound so good to you. Always pick the equipment that sounds the best to you, not to some sales person or review in some magazine. You will be living with it ,not them!
And ALWAYS - ALWAYS beware of the HYPE! It is there for a reason!! Have you noticed that all the really good gear out there never HYPE their products. Well that speaks volumes about that company and the people involved with it.
Do your home work and you won't get sucked in. Someone once said " A Fool and his money are Soon Parted" Don't let it be you.
It's funny, I have been on the Hi-Rez bandwagon now for about 2 solid years. I have amassed about 150 SACD's and a handful of other Hi-Rez format discs. I can even be found at several points on this very thread saying GO! SACD GO! -- I think I am going to get off this ride though -- the vast majority of the SACD's I purchased were hybrids, and new music to me. But lately, I have made some comparisons between recently remastered redbook CD's and their SACD counterparts. I tell you, it is a really close call -- the quality of recent redbook remasters on decent equipmetn is so close to SACD that I would rather buy the redbook remaster because it is easier to find, costs a lot less, and sounds just as good.
Now, pure DSD recordings are incredible, and SACD's on a half way decent machine get you a level of sonic performance you would have to spend a lot more on a dedicated redbook CDP to acheive -- but, I think, if you can afford a pretty nice dedicated redbook CDP, you will get better quality from redbook CD's comparable to SACD. I think that is the direction I am going.
I doubt if many here remember the mid 70s debacle over the CD4 and SQ4 formats. Both ended up being doomed. One is that RCA and Columbia could not come up with a decoding format that worked for both. So the four channel died a quick and I hope a painless death. Although I know many folks invested heavily at the time in this format. Only to have obsolete gear 18 months later.
As far as I am concerned SACD, DVD-A and other formats, is that I belive it is headed for the scrap yard as well. It will take sales in the millions to save either one. How many of us are going to repopulate or musical library with these additional formats? I won't go to that expense and the vast majority will not either. It is just not sensible to do so. The Redbook format has been with us since 1982 and was developed between Philips and Sony. I have every reason to belive that the Redbook format will continue for the fore see able future. Sure there are 18,20,22 and now 24 bit CDs on the market as well as HDCD, but the basic format remains Redbook.
I have two CD Players one a Classe CDP.5 player with HDCD and recently acquired an Arcam CD73 that is a 24 bit player. Very happy with both of them and is ceratinly all I need for the digital format.
If the SACD and DVD-A survives, which is highly doubtful at this point, it will be because the software and players have become more affordable. Players will in time, will only come down in price, if the demand for the software increases and the price of the software decreases. I just do not see that happening. Costs have to be recovered to do this, it will be cheaper for the manufactures to cut their losses and get out of the SACD, DVD-A arena.
I for one will stay with the current Redbook players I have and enjoy the music library I have amassed over the years. I see no reason to repopulate my library. Financially it just doesn't sense.
CHECK THIS.....My MARANTZ DVD 9500....is the Most analog sounding REDBOOK CD player I've heard to date....the sound is as warm as "toast" .....my old cd's sound Listenable and actually Enjoyable...AND YOU GET SACD AND DVD-A to BOOT....You otta hear the STones on SACD...WHEW...buying a plain redbook cd player only is a mistake when you can get this kind of analog sound for $1600.....Anyone buying a cd player or a Universal Player MUST check this out....IT BLOWS AWAY ALL THE DENON's For Audiophiles.....It actually makes Redbook cd's sound JUST LIKE HIGH QUALITY VINYL played on a TOP-END SYSTEM.......Re- discover your cd collection and get SACD and DVD-a to boot for $1600......This Marantz MakesMUSIC.....and it makes me smile.....
ive heard a state- of- the- art vinyl playback system and it was head over heels more musical and real sounding than any digital system. theres a seemless quality to vinyl that digital technology, at this time, is not able to capture. however, vinyl is time intensive(record cleaning, proper set-up,no remote, short paying time, etc) vs the ease of digital. i have a levinson 37 and 360s digital system which is very enjoyable but there is a quality to my less expensive analogue system- VPI turntable with a Graham Slee phono pre (which is remarkable)- that reproduces music that is more realistic.
As for digital connections. Once again no point in waiting. There is no uncertainty, Not because we have something that works, but because chances are we never will. Unless the SONY SuperMAC interface (48ch (dsd or pcm), proper clock and control over cat5 good 300m)which is now being ratified as an AES standard, makes it to home audio.
1394 is a software mess, everyone is doing their own thing. To fix compatibility mfg's would have to invest heavily into software. 1394 also has some clock issues that some designers can deal with most can't. HDMI is a joke it's only good for video since it doesn't even cary DSD. So if you are awaiting for that "player" that will connect to your pre pro with a single link, well you can get them now, from Denon, Meridian and alike. Other then that, don't hold your breath. There is not much wrong with short set of nice analog cables going into a pre pro with proper analog bypass. Unless you hate the idea of paying for a nice set of dacs twice. However this allows for tailoring. You can keep your fancy da you got for your cd's and not have to worry about if your new player will paly cd's ok or not (Most will.). So you may be thinking Denon 5910 for all it's linkage (1394, denon link, HDMI) but realistically unless you get a denon box, these will only be good for video (HDMI).
... age uncertainty... Everything digital is basically end of life by the time the product hits the market. Compatibility going forward will be meaningless. So there is really nothing you can take for granted. Everything is a giant uncertainty. And even when you think things are in concrete, someone else will come along with something faster better cheaper. Some mfg's are already talking 384khz and Wide DSD (8bit).
I for one use all these connections and technologies very happily in a very nice and simple system. I use HDMI for my cable box to the projector, I use analog from my UNI Player to my Classe SSP75, I use AES from my HTPC to the classe and DVI for Video from the HTPC to the projector. The classe is superb decoder and DA for all PCM low ress. The Marantz plays DVD an SACD over analog. So you can have it all today enjoy it for what it is and stop worrying about obsolescence, because they are all already there.
I think modified universal players are a great solution to the current "age of uncertainity". They offer great performance on DVD-A and SACD (if you are into that), and the mods really make the redbook performance outstanding, in my experience.
No matter what, you can't talk about it unless you experience it. So to wait for a player or software that would make you change your mind is kind of counterproductive in this form of talk.
When I hear "It would be a mistake to buy into a new format right now" I have chills running down my spine! It is a business! Good or bad! MONEY TALKS!
And yes I blame the mfg's for this mess, but looks like they have no interest in cleaning it up either.
Why do you think SONY is lowering it's ambition on it's DSD catalog program??? Because IT MAKES NO ECONOMIC SENSE for them. At first it was the issue with DVDa vs SACD. Now it's like media vs download! The tide has moved and you are falling asleep! DVD is far better then CD, too bad many engineers in studios still don't know how to mix for 5.1. Turns off a lot of stereo lovers. DSD is better then anything you ever had! (In theory or if you got an EMM player.) I think it's better then analog when done right. It is still expensive to get right tough.
I think everyone who can afford it should get a UNIVERSAL player, I know you don't want to be a guinea pig, but if don't start buying titles the industry will soon pull the plug in we will be left with I-pods and compressed AAC files!
CD as a medium is basically dead. Like it or not if you look at CD sales they are slowly but surly loosing ground to downloaded files. So stop bickering and get a freaking player now! The new Marantz dv9500 is a good place to start. I for one would hope to see SACD survive because DVDa is just ain't that cool (video menus, PCM sound). There is one other really disturbing issue with all of those 1000 of cd's we all have. They are disintegrating at a faster rate then previously advertised. Last year when I discovered that some of my CD's are simply "fading" and some wont even play anymore, I quickly moved em all to a music server (lossless compression.) And never looked back! It has lower jitter then any transport I have ever had (5ppm)! Of course it does, it's got enough buffer for an entire album, not just a few samples like $20k motor driven spinning platter.
CDs with all their warts are a certainty. The future of DVDa and SACD are uncertainties. Yes there will be better formats but until they become mass market they are only a niche product. When a better format becomes mass market (like the CD) I will buy into it. I liked the idea of the digital cassette but that one only lasted about 60 seconds.
Trying to speak to everybody,58 minutes so whatMaybe redbook can only go so far but does that explain why plain old cd players have been soundimg better lately,Last thing i need is to make somebody else rich by buying a new format.Its not the technology it is what you do with it.
Anyway, fine. *If* and only if you like Classical and classic rock and jazz, SACD is a pretty safe bet now. Word on the street is that it has established itself as the prefered audiophile format. If you're an Emimem kinda dude, (nothing wrong with that), stay with your redbook. Dual disc is coming, was coming, which got the DVDA crowd all excited, yet producers can use the real estate on the disc any way they want, and DVDA may be pushed to the wayside. The CD side can only hold 58 minutes.
The problem with what you say is that "redbook" is getting better. It *cannot* get better, as its information is limited. Recording machines have gotten better and better over the last 20 years, yet the improvements can only barely be reflected in the good 'ole redbook CD. Ironically, the better your system, the more it's going to reveal the deficiencies of the 16bit. In any case, as much as my SACD player leaves me beyond criticism, I'm still keeping an eye out for mid-fi redbook only player next year--850 of them are collecting dust in the closet.
Im sticking with good old red book,newer cd player of late have outstanding sound,I not even going to get into sacd etc.Forget it I am way done.I mean five different copies of this 2 of that one ,no thanks.Just stick with the brands that have been there for a while,they have had good sound in the past and will do so in the future.Oh thats right after records first came out what did they sound like say 20 or 30 years after their intro,last time I checked they are still getting better and so is digital ,including red book,Al
Enjoyed reading this string - several years long at this point ! Well, I bought a Sony SCD 777 ES a few years ago on demo/closeout and I really loved it. Thought it was definitely an improvement over redbook cd. But now my ears are aging rapidly (56 years old) and suddenly my Pioneer Elite CD burner (model PDR W37) sounds MUCH better than the Sony when playing CDs and, I think, better playing CD versus the Sony playing SACD ! Blasphemy !, I know. Now, I have to add that I have not used the Sony for one year and only recently put it back in the system and it is possible there is something wrong with it. But it never did have much presence playing normal CDs. At first I thought it was fun - to have that 'dark' presentation of CD discs. But, lately, I would call it not only dark but dull, sort of lifeless, maybe even 'gummy'. So, as my hearing gets worse I am able to still enjoy music but now on second-rate compnents ! Who'd a thought of that ?!
If I want the best sound, I'll put on an LP. It trumps dvda sacd or whatever four letters you want to come up with. For the titles not available on vinyl I have a wonderful CD player (Redbook) (Cary 308T) - why in the world would I want a 3rd format? I enjoy music and why would I want to screw that up.
I think most people get angst because they feel they are going to miss the boat. Well the boat is moving very slowly. How many years have these new formats been out? And look at the dismal selection. I don't know if there is more than a couple of releases I'd even want to listen to; so there is no reason to worry. And who's to say another "new" format won't come out soon that is better than SACD and DVD-A, I know for a fact engineers are working on it as I type!
Vinyl is alive and the last CES show had more new analog components than it ever had before for the gentleman who said analog is on its way out. Analog is what digital is trying to approach, how can it be on its way out?
If you like, keep stressing over what is compatible with what. I'll be sitting back in my stereo room lost in my music just enjoying the beauty of it...
Personally, I believe software is of much greater importance than hardware. There is a parallel here that hearkens back to the invasion of the compact disc. There was a period where many end users were hesitant to get on board with the new medium, and happily stockpiled vinyl until such time as the sources dried up, especially regarding newer releases. At that point, users had to decide whether adopting the new format was preferable to scratching around for material on vinyl. Many posters here and indeed, many of my audio freak acquaintances, have two dedicated machines available to them: the turntable and the compact disc player.
Once one of the contending formats rises the top, there will most likely be a considerable period of overlap where rebook versions are still available, but this period will certainly be finite. Additionally, the 'new' format, whatever it will be, will likely exclude a large catalog of existing material. Hence, in order to acquire all the material we will want to listen to, an additional front end component will be necessary to play it.
I tend to view the emerging technology as a potential additional component, not one that would replace any of my current equipment. Maybe my purist nature prevents me from believing a multi-format player won’t be a performance/integration compromise. After all, it has taken more than 20 years to reach CD's current level of 'state of the art!' Thus, my philosophy: I want the best available playback I can achieve NOW. Who knows what is going to happen tomorrow? I don't want to wait for the next big thing to reveal itself and risk missing out on material that may not be available 'later.' This means precisely that I want and have a reference Redbook player that I plan to have around for a very long time. At such time as a 'new' format hinders my ability to obtain the music I desire within my current playback capabilities, I will research the component needed to play that material and buy it. Therefore, I see no reason to be bothered with my equipment options until that time arrives.
This is my take on the whole CD versus LP question.
The sonic benefit of vinyl is due to the fact it is analog. Analog is often described as more liquid, full and involving. Just another way of saying you are hearing a more detailed and complete presentation.
Digital is an approximation, taken from the analog source (instruments and people), converted into bits for storage and sale to the customer where it must converted back again to analog. These processes contain errors that result in tiny pieces of the music being continually omitted.
Both formats do have their advantages. Digital is error by omission, making it more difficult for some listeners to detect its problems. The errors that exist in vinyl playback are more easily identifiable because they are errors by addition. The most obvious being noise or tracking errors. To achieve perfection in vinyl playback requires an enormous investment in both time and money. Few people have had the opportunity to hear analog at its state of the art limit, leaving the majority convinced that digital is superior.
Perhaps a more important part of this debate should include the mention of software availability. A very young person such as my son, will find their favorite music primarily on CD. My interest in music covers the last half century, and I have more music available on vinyl than I can possible listen to.
Rja, one thing about the ‘net, which has been addressed several times by others as well, it is impersonal. Like you, I am not looking for an argument, I simply shared my thoughts in contrast with yours.
No doubt there are many cheap CD players “out there”, CD has been the man playback method for many years now; when LP was more popular, how many cheapo LP players were there “out there”? A lot. Furthermore, I suspect you can get CD to sound good cheaper than LP. That said, I am not stating LP doesn’t sound good or even that it may still be the best yet, but digital is here and here to stay…and…I don’t miss dealing with LP’s one bit.
It does concern me, a bit, to see the popularity of playback methods like MP3; I agree they are handy but the quality is compromised, obviously.
I do not argue the points you list. If you look back at my previous post(s), you will see that I too ‘scoff’ at the new formats slow progress.
Brianmgrarcom, You're certainly welcome to your opinion. I am not attempting to start an argument or change anyone elses opinions, I was merely expressing my opinion on this thread. If you like CDs; great, I'm glad you're happy. I have to admit a certain level of cynicism and skepticism in this digital format discussion. Yes, CDs can sound alright if you have an excellent CD (sound quality) and superb playback equipment. As for excellent sounding CDs there are definitely many out there but they are far outnumbered by the mediocre ones. And how many superb playback systems are out there? I would bet a small percentage compared to all the nasty sounding mass market (read cheap) CD players out there. How about the sound of a bad CD on a cheap player? My point is that most poeple don't care or don't know the difference. And, the trend seems to be toward lower resolution formats like MP3. If this is true how can DVDA or SCAD become successful as mass media? Basically I'm saying the demand of the masses does not exist for a higher resolution format. At the same time most audiophiles, including myself, are finding sonic fault wth standard CD word length and sampling frequency. The possiblity exists of course, of creating a demand. But a compelling reason, like the convenience factor of going from LP to CD or VHS to DVD doesn't exist. Even if demand were somehow created a higher resolution would have to be backward compatable. Not to mention the pricing structure of higher resolution formats. If most poeple could care less about sound quality why would they be willing to pay more for software? Here's are the conditions, in my opinion, that would need to exist before DVDA or SACD could take off. 1. Find some compelling reason or benefit (other than sonic improvement) for consumers to switch to a new digital format in order to create demand. 2. Closely related to above: convince the mass market that the new format is not merely a marketing ploy to replace old formats and thus increase corporate profits. This one involves trust, a real tough one. 3. Backward compatablity; ie. ability to play CDs. Again, closely related to #2. 4. Pricing structure for high resolution hardware and software similar to current pricing of CDs and equipment. 5. Selection of DVDA, SACD or another format as the industry standard format for the foreseeable future. No one wants to be the sucker who owns the losers (read Beta) hardware and software. Remember Minidisc, DAT and the Digital Cassette? Are you a gambler?
Rja, I certainly do not see things as you do, I do find satisfaction in CD playback, as many others. Digital playback is just another form of music reproduction, I wouldn't say it is in 'competion' with analog playback. You assume the analog playback methods available are 'perfect', they are not. IMO digital playback created audiophiles, revived audiophiles or kept them interested. Sure, there are those, as yourselves that don't like it, but you still have LP's you can play.
If you don't care for digital playback, that is your right. The new formats are, amongst other things, trying to progress reproduction. I am sure others would like to add more to that but my point is noted.
I have difficulty deciding whether all this format stuff is a marketing ploy or an actual technologic break through. Figure, the resolution of cd compared to vinyl (despite other drawbacks) is not an improvement at all. Is that what we're doing, trying to get closer to vinyl resolution in a digital format? How much digital resolution would that take? Maybe we're just trying to get to the digital resolution that will fool our ears and brain into thinking we're listening to analog. I have no doubt that it can be done, but when? I'm convinced that a major factor in CD's success is more the convenience factor than any real sonic factor, considering that most CD players are inadequate at reproducing music at any satisfying level. Even with SACD and DVDA, doesn't the trend seem to be going in the opposite direction, lower resolution and more compression? Will there be a time when very few people remember what good sound was all about? I plan on sticking to CD's for the foreseeable future and if my Luddite tendencies get the better of me I may even retreat to the warm arms of vinyl. The vinyl stuff (cartrdges, arms, turntables, preamps) has never been better. Nothing like this stuff existed when I gave up vinyl! I have purchased some of the best digital gear and have had it heavily modded but something is still missing!
I have difficulty deciding whether all this format stuff is a marketing ploy or an actual technologic break through. Figure, the resolution of cd compared to vinyl (despite other drawbacks) is not an improvement at all. Is that what we're doing, trying to get closer to vinyl resolution in a digital format? How much digital resolution would that take? Maybe we're just trying to get to the digital resolution that will fool our ears into thinking we're listening to analog. I have no doubt that it can be done, but when? I'm convinced that a major factor in CDs success is the convenience factor not any real sonic factor, considering that most CD players are inadequate at reproducing music at any satisfying level. Even with SACD and DVDA, doesn't the trend seem to be going in the opposite direction, ower resolution and more compression? Will there be a time when very few people remember what good sound was all about?
Players are here to play THE MUSIC YOU LIKE. Most of the issues (I like Jazz) are in CD only. You will hardly find your favorite new music in SACD or DVD_A. So why bother with these players. Get the best CD player you can and it will deliver about the best sound you can imagine. I got an Audiomeca Mephisto IIX, and beeing able to get any player I could possibly wish at dealer cost, I found this one to be the very best. And very elegant and beautifull at that. I think that the SACD and DVD_A fight will end in both formats disappearing, because remember, players with Hard Disks are coming, and THAT is the future. What I do not understand is why the SCAD and DVD camp did not license to everybody and just issued all new music as SACD hibrids (at the same price of CD). That would have been a way to bring the new format into the homes and make it popular. Because lets face it, whichever new format which does not become popular will sooner or later die. Remember the way of quadrafonic sound, Kodaks Disk Film, Betamax,etc.
Don't forget that you can buy a hybrid that plays both until SACD replaces the CD completely. The Marantz SA-14 version 1 or 2 gives very good 16-bit playback and the SACD section is astonishing. Clearly better. If you are worried about the availablity of titles, check out www.sa-cd.net and you'll see there are 2000+ to choose from, three new pressing factories opening and an average of 3 titles a day being released this year. The jump is worth it. Surround is a blast as well.
I have struggled to resist the impulse to buy an SACD player "just because" and am glad I didn't. Instead I upgraded my redbook player and never looked back. Why? because CD's are not going anywhere for a long, long time and whenever I hear something new on my favorite public jazz station, I pop on over to Barnes and Noble or Amazon and buy the cd. I think I would have a very difficult time trying to find the same title in SACD or DVD-audio.
Redbook has the most selections of music nothing comes close and any other format has slim picking in comparison. & there is reasonable priced gear that can extract the very best sound that will please & satisfy.
If you can't live without your CD collection, buy the best CD player you can. I'm just about to purchase the Musical Fidelity A308 CD player with upsampling. Works for me regarding warmth and transparency. Then buy a dedicated SACD player down the road. I don't like the idea of hybrid players; isn't the quality split?
I have read very few of these but just how much money do you have tied up in CD's and LP's. Do you want to replace them all with a new format or are you going to keep them. My choice is DAC and Transport for CD's (My DAC has a DSD converter in it just no way to provide a signal to it. Is one manufacture going to let the dust settle and then mod the DAC) Vinyl By audiophile standards well but it is a significant improvement over my old one. I am 38 I hope I live for another 30 years. For me the choice is simple. Wait for the dust to settle. I will always have my CD's and Albums.
What have i done in the age of uncertainty? I integrated my HT system and stereo, with the HT gear upstream, so it doesn't compromise my main system. I prefer stereo, but I also enjoy movies, multi-channel audio and music dvd-v (e.g. Roger Waters The Wall, Calle 54, The Last Waltz).
I looked at mid-priced universal players and decided they were too compromised for the money and too immature as a technology (i.e. none from audiophile companies). So I bought a dirt-cheap Pioneer DV-563a for now. It doesn't sound as good as my CD player, even with SACD or DVD-A discs, but it plays them, and it feeds an NAD HT receiver (upstream of my stereo preamp).
I have found that m-c does not require the same sort of care (equipment and setup) as stereo to provide good results. I'm not after ultimate fidelity. I just need to meet a certain standard so that the equipment doesn't interfere with my enjoyment. I obsess over my stereo, but not the HT m-c gear. It's mid-fi and it's fun, and it sounds pretty damned good most of the time.
Sometimes I think I should have bought the new Pioneer DV-57AVi, because it would have given me better hi-rez sound and the possibility of future upgradability (connection to a hi-rez DAC via HDMI or firewire), but it was a lot more money and it wasn't available when I bought the 563. Besides as I said at the beginning, the market is not mature, and I've elected to wait and see while I collect some hi-rez titles.
In the meantime I can play vinyl or any digital disc, stereo or multichannel. I buy music based on content, availability and price. If and when hi-rez and/or m-c matures, I can easily change my priorities.
I, too, agree largely with Letch. I go for good vinyl first, then redbook CD if it's not available. Unfortunately, that means I buy more CDs than I really want to!
As for SACD.... well, I must admit to having bought two remastered titles, both Dylan ones. On my Arcam, the CD layer sounds really great (much better than original redbook release), so I'm not ready yet to buy a SACD player, although I am curious to hear what the SACD layer sounds like on a SACD player.
quality sound from digital source components is far more dependant on the software than visa versa. a first generation cd player sounds infinitely better with a recently mastered cd than a new cd player using the same music mastered even 5 years ago.....there are thousands of examples with the major labels alone...the improvements on the hardware side have been oversold as remedies to a consumer willing to pay anything to get satisfaction from their hi fi.
Well, I agree with Letch that when I read a review for a multi-format player that has received kudos for one format but not the others.....I turn the page. I also agree with him that the sound of the CD's in today age represent a quantum leap from when they first came out in the 80's. The sonics from that first period was well....it left a little to be desired.
However, that stated, I am excited about the new formats IF they represent a considerable improvement in sonics. I do think that audiophiles will step up to the plate if they are convinced of the merits of the new technology. That should translate into a driving force for a broader distribution of titles.
But then I suppose a counter argument could be made with the fate with MSFL's abandonment with LP's. The quality was second to none but the criticisms (from high and low sources) is that the title selection was not up to snuff. Hence Mobile fidelity is no longer making LP's...
I agree with Bluechriss that for people with alternative tastes that redbook is going to be the standard for quite awhile. The CD burner revolution for small labels and bands is another stronghold of what's going to be longevity for this format. I am looking to upgrade my player and I am only looking at players that have strong redbook CD playback. I could care less about the useless fancypants formats. I don't listen to audiophile dreck and if I want to expand my Dylan or Stones or any other classic rock catalog, I'm gonna do it through Sundazed or any of the other LP reissue labels putting out killer vinyl right now. I got the Sundazed Stooges LP reissues and I don't see Elektra putting those out on SACD or DVD-whatever anytime soon. I find it annoying that Stereophile is ready to give high rankings to players "in their expected format", meaning that SACD players that sound like garbage with redbook cd's get class A. Wotta joke! Here it is a couple of years past the beginning of this thread and here I am saying, I'm coping with redbook very fine thank you by not getting caught up in any hype. I will let the equipment sort out the resolution and leave my expectations at home. Never really twigged to CD's till the last few years and now the system improvements and remastering have gotten pretty good for my tastes. Sure things could be better but that's inherently the way that we are. Never satisfied? Welcome to the human race. Just don't let your expectations overwhelm the fact that things are pretty good. I can get records that I used to have to look years for (and yes there are some things that annoy me because they aren't available, Tim Buckley's Starsailor being one of the more incomprehensible gaps in the catalog)and between LP's and CD's I do pretty damn well. I'll worry about the so-called digital wars when the dust clears. For now upsampling helps me out and I get what I need.
Redbook wins!! There are only ~2,000 SACD titles available today - nothing in the world of music. If it were 20,000, it would still be a nit. Given the weird stuff I listen to, I don't expect to convert any time soon...
I think you're right on. We seem to be in a time of change when more universal players are coming out and SACD seems to be getting a solid hold on to the market (of course, others will disagree with this observation). But like you, I'm holding out for now to see what players will be coming out. This will frustrate the manufacturers, but it's best for the consumer to be more diligent nowdays before plopping down lots of cash for something that may soon be outdated. I'm guessing we're reaching the plateau of redbook perfection and 1) the price/performance ration will improve in redbook and 2) the high-rez formats will take on more relevance and 3) the digital music thing...
I have asked myself the same question. Having a transport or player that can play multiple formats is a partial solution and basically, that is what I'm waiting for. I'm holding off a new puchase until more mfrs come around. The new player from Musical Fidelity seems intriguing (but not at $6500!). The other problem of course, is the ever increasing obsolecence due to evolving technology, which I'm afraid a one player box with multiple format capability does not (at least sufficiently) address. My two year old Parasound sounds pretty good, but somehow I have the feeling it already is outdated.
I have a pretty good digital set up and around 1200 cd so I will continiue to build my redbook collection. I just bought my first TT so this should keep buisy. Why should I buy into SACD when there is maybe 15 or 20 titles, and why should I rush out and buy a SACD player when my current system blows it away! I will give it a few years and the money I would have spent on the new format is going towards more cd and vinyl! Happy Listening!
24/192 upsampling for redbook and sacd for new format seems to be the audiophile ticket... i would buy a reasonabley priced sacd with digital out to a 24/192 upsampling dac.
i would not dump alot of $$$$ into digital till the dust settles.
wether sacd will catch on as a format it is too early to say ( look what happened to BETA and S-VHS and records )
the mass market drives the final decision of format.history shows the way to cheaper/less fidelity format - sad but true.
I just purchased a CAL CL-2500 DVD player with the goal of improving the quality of my CD playback. I had heard the CL-20, and was very impressed with its capabilities as a CD player.
I was at first excited about its ability to play DVD Audio discs and HDCD. It turned out I was mistaken on the HDCD -- the CL-20 and CL-10 both support it, but on the newer CL-2500, CAL seems to have rejected HDCD support. And DVD Audio appears to have changed to an incompatible 24/192ksps format in the few years since the CL-2500 was built. No matter, there were really only about 1-2 discs I was really interested in, compared to the 400-500 CDs in my collection. SACD seems more prolific, but there are still only about 3-4 that I would buy if I had a player. Even HDCD, which is more common than DVD-A or SACD, has only a handful of titles that interest me, which I of course own since HDCD is merely a special encoding on a standard CD. None of the special formats offers enough titles or enough benefit to cause me to even consider compatibility as a factor in choosing a CD player.
You should all be concerned that the "audiophile" formats may never get off the ground, because music distribution is headed towards internet distribution -- which means lossy digital compression and lower sample rates and resolution. Not only that, but the promoters of the formats are sabotaging their own efforts -- SACD because it is proprietary, DVD-A because they changed the format mid-stream to something that existing players, and DVD-Video players, cannot play.
No, unless you are comfortable letting the published catalogue of the "advanced" formats dictate what you listen to, neither format is viable yet. I don't predict them becoming viable anytime soon.
Just look at HDCD -- it's a completely compatible format, but like SACD is proprietary and requires a license to record or to decode. It's been around for years and is still in very limited use. Personally, I hope it dies a quiet death. It does not seem to offer higher potential for quality than standard CD, but sacrifices the sound quality on incompatible players.
I am very pleased with my purchase...despite the fact that the new player recognizes neither SACD nor new-format DAD, it makes CDs sound really good. For someone like me who listens to a wide variety of (sometimes really obscure or unpopular) music, improving the sound quality of all my albums is much better than making slight additional improvements on a couple of titles.
Libor35 states the current condition of audio format lunacy extremely well!! I have around 500 redbook CD's; of that amount, about 80% are vastly superior to any DSD, HDCD or High Res PCM discs I have! The technology used to make a recording dwarfs in comparison to the ability of the recording engineers and how they apply their craft. Most new format discs remind me of what I refer to as the "New HI-FI"...they just don't sound natural, like reall instruments playing in a real acoustic space.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
