2. digital
  3. 1071840927

New Sony NS999ES is in.

It's a day old so it should improve but---

The CD player is competent, on par or perhaps a bit supperior to the Adcom/MSB combo. The SACD is better but not by a whole lot. But it is better. A touch more detail, and depth, etc.

What it does do is make listening to digital not Sux.

Vinyl still hold a serious edge but the gap has closed.

Oddly with the Sony the bass seems better with the CD.
Cymbals and all the air are only slightly better than the CD, and the Sony is slightly better than the antique Adcom, and newly improved MSB link.

So if your wondering about making the plunge, I say save your money for something else.

Will I buy SACD's in the future, you bet, will I replace existing recordings I already own, no way.

BTW I haven't yet done the 5.1 with it. That will come after Christmas.

cheers and Merry Christmas to all

loon
loontoon

Showing 4 responses by trelja

trelja
3,223 posts
 
Ben_Campbell, you are the SACD Scrooge in this Christmas season.

You are quite sensitive when the topic of SACD is brought up. To the point where quite a high percentage of your opinions rendered here on Audiogon have to do with SACD. I for one, feel you have made your point(long ago), and have grown tired of it. It makes you look petty and resentful, and I know you are a better man than that.

As I have made statements regarding the superiority of SACD over CD, I have touched a nerve in you. You then feel obliged to say I am speaking in absolutes(which I am in some cases there). There is no problem with my post other than that which you have.

Do you want to argue that digital players need time to break in? If so, we'll go another round. Until then, have some egg nog, throw in a CD(or SACD, if you still have the player), and enjoy the holidays.
trelja
3,223 posts
 
Ah, peace in the holiday season is a wonderful thing...

Merry Christmas, Ben and everyone else here at Audiogon!
My best,
Joe
trelja
3,223 posts
 
Ah, you see Ben, I knew you were a great guy.

I'm in Philadelphia, and I know you are in England. By any chance, are you near London? If so, we could simulcast, just like we did in LiveAid back in 1984. Of course, JFK Stadium is no longer here, but I could go to the corporate structure of greed(CoreState Center then First Union Center then Wachovia Center - we just call it the FU Center) where the Sixers and Flyers play and do it from there. Anyway, it's cold here now, and I prefer a nice, new, warm building over the splintered bleachers of JFK in the winter anyday.

I guess I will have to make my own T - shirt ala Johnny Rotten, and we can sort of meet on that bridge just like he and Steve Jones that fateful day. Yes, the SACD war is over(if we want it).

Seriously, if this format sticks around, which is VERY debatable, and enough software comes out to interest you, give it another shot with a friend's broken - in player. Of course, if you ever come to this side of the pond, you are welcome here anytime,
Joe
trelja
3,223 posts
 
Give it some time, Loontoon...

I have often been very much disappointed in new digital players, only to have myself really take to them after a few days(assuming you are playing it all the time). The first 100 hours often shows tremendous change.

SACD is clearly better than CD. I say that in terms of the foundation and the flow of the music. This won't be apparent on a boom box, but it doesn't take an ultra high end system to distinguish the improvements. When I say "foundation", I am directly going against the statement that CD bass is superior. Allow things to run - in, and you will experience the slam and solidity of the lower frequencies that CD is incapable of in all but the best players. I'm not necessarily talking about ultimate extension, but the entire spectrum up to the midrange.

But, in the final analysis, you are quite correct, vinyl done right is still superior.
More to discover