Jtinn: Don't point away from this thread. Analog, SACD converted, signals have bandwidth of about 100kHz. It put different requirment for the rest of the system. Nice to have speaker with hi-freq tweaters for example, more important such huge banwidth reqires very fast passive parts etc etc. So discussion of best speakers for SACD is appropriate. Next, proper amplification is the most obvious reason for speaker to loose its dynamic range. C'mon you can do better... Read HP critic of Watt Puppy 5. However, it well may be that "6" is different. As I stated in my post I did not auditioned them, only 3/2 and 5. I am glad, actually, to hear that "6" do have good dynamic range appropriate for SACD. Thanks for info - Simon |
Simon: I hate to turn away from the point of this thread, which is SACD not speaker evaluations, however, you could not be more mistaken regarding the Watt Puppies. They are very dynamic (not as dynamic as Avantegardes) and I would venture to guess that you have not heard them with proper amplification. SACD is magnificent with the Wilsons!
Still not getting ugly! :) |
Watt Puppy system: Gentelmen, I enjoy so much this particular discussion (not a single ugly comment...yet) I decided to give my "drop" on it. As a matter of fact, I never auditioned Series 6 - good beginning (but I heard that a friend of my sister-in-low played one on TV...). Well, I had Watt 3 Puppy 2 for many years and auditioned Watt/Puppy 5; I found "5" to be worse then 2/3 combo. I read that "6" has lower extention then previous ones, may be. However, I feel that Watt Puppy 6 may not be good for everyone, some may even hate it. SACD gives, per my personal opnion, the most realistic sound reproduction, beter then DVD-Audio and even vinil. For people who prefer small group or solo the Wilson speakers are very good. However, if someone like me loves symphonic, choral, operatic (BIG) music then 3/2 and 5 (and I suspect 6) do not have good dynamic range to represent the 'fury" of the orchesra. I changed mine wilson speakers to Diapason by Dick Shahinian (I am sure that participants of this forum know this name) and with SACD I am in "Paradise". Of course "6" may be different but it is difficult to believe. If I am wrong - please correct me but by ones who KNOW - Simon |
Trelja: I hope it does play SACDs. It would be quite a bombshell!!!
BTW, When you are drinking Scotch slower is better :) |
Jfrech: The VK-60 will drive the Watt Puppies but will not really get them singing. I recommend you go with the monos. You will get increased performance that will really make it worthwhile.
Brulee: Yoyoyoyoyo! |
By the way, I want to be clear. Until I see(and hear) this player play a SACD, I do NOT believe it. Otherwise, they would be advertising it as such. |
Sorry to hit you up under this thread...but I have a vk50se with a single vk60, Wadia 850, Audio Physic Virgos. I'm considering the Wilson Watt/puppy 6's. Do you need the Bat Monoblocks? I know they are better, but is one amp sufficient in your opinion? Did you listen to the Wilsons that way? Thanks for your time. FYI, Try the fatman 2000 power cord on your VK50se ... |
Wow! You guys are true men. Able to turn a negative into a positive with the best of them. I bought a Cambridge D500 SE today. Sounds pretty nice out of the box. I really needed a player to hold me over for the period of uncertainty(I had been waiting to upgrade for 3 long years). I compared it to other players(in its class - didn't want to spend too much $$$), and it was the best. Then, after paying, my dealer drops the ULTIMATE bombshell. One from which I still haven't recovered. He gives me a piece of paper with a warning about the player. It says the player has a 24 bit/192 kHz processor designed for CD ***AND*** SACD!!! I asked, and he confirmed, that it plays SACD. I was floored, and asked why he didn't tell me before. I would not have needed to audition any other player, had I known this. I also told him to tell anyone looking at this player FIRST, before telling them ANYTHING else. The product literature makes no mention of SACD, so I am going to have to go out and buy one. Just to see... If it does, THIS $450 player will soon sell faster than lemonade on a July day. Will keep everyone posted. Best of all, my girlfriend bought it for me. Can't find a better woman than that! |
Jtinn, Your alright. How ya been? |
Simontju: I think the Marantz is slightly warmer than the Sony, I cannot tell you which I preferred because I could not conclude one was better than the other for SACD playback... just a tad different. Sony SCD-1, dCS Delius and dCS Purcell, VK-50SE preamp, BAT VK-150SE monos, Watt Puppy 6 speakers, Transparent Ref XL all around, PS Audio PP300, BDR Cones, pArticular Ypsilon rack, pArticular Duo amp stands and Transparent Reference PIXLs. I just replaced my Audio Research Ref2 and VT200 with the BAT gear but have listened to SACD with the ARCs as well.
A few of my reference SACDs are; Ellington - Blues in Orbit, Rebecca Pidgeon - The Raven, Heau & Zygmanowski - Musique francaise pour clarinette et piano, Peterson/Brown/Jackson - The Very Tall Band, McCoy Tyner Quartet - New York Reunion, Al DiMeola - Friday Night In San Francisco, CharlesMingus - Ah Um, Stevie Ray Vaughan - Couldn't Stand the Weather, Yo Yo Ma - Solo and a few others.
Trlja: I would prefer it took less time to load, but I do not mind as it gives me a bit of time to pour another glass of scotch! |
Trelja: the boot time of 9000ES and I presume 3333..etc is much shorter then that of older generation. It may sound strange but I love SACD sound so much that I prefer longer loading time because I can turn off lights, sit, take a few deep breaths and wait a few seconds as in real concert. It brings me into the "right" mood. Thank you very much for your kind words - Simon |
Hello Simon. I noticed you have an impressive working knowledge of the new generation of Sony SACD players. Could you please be so kind as to answer a question I have? Do these new players initialize disks faster than the first generation players? I checked out the first players, but HATED the time to initialize a disk. That, in and of itself immediately turned me off. That is going to be something that needs to get better, in my opinion. Or are we becoming used to long boot times ala Bill Gates(Win 95/98/ME/NT)? Thank you. |
Jtinn: are imply that SACD sound was the same for you? May I ask for your reference system and SDACDs you played. Rhanks - Simon |
I have compared the Sony SCD1 with the Marantz and although I bought the Sony, I thought the Marantz was better in a few areas:
1. Loading time was much faster
2. CD Playback was better (I run through an external DAC so not an issue for me)
I recommend the Sony purely due to the difference in price... street price for the Sony is $2900 vs $5700 for the Marantz. The difference buys you a whole bunch of SACDs. |
