SACD 2 channel vs Redbook 2 Channel

Oh no, someone pulled the "science" card! Science would also be quick to tell us that we can't hear the difference between cables, would it not? It would tell us that all amps that measure the same sound the same, and all amps that measure poorly sound as such, which anyone with ears to hear will tell you isn't so! That one should use pure science as the tool to measure quality/aesthetics/art (music, for those at home) boggles the mind of anyone who understands the concepts involved here, it's completely ridiculous, really.

Further, as a scientist myself I find the arrogance of the audiophiles' confidence in what is known about the electrical, acoustic and even psycho-acoustic properties of music as being complete and fully understood a sad joke on those of us forced to constantly hear their words thrown around as if a gospel of spoken (but unheard) Truth. Those who have ears to listen should hear. Why folks have come to put so much faith in science completely boggles my mind (though not at the level of absurdity of the faith most hold in medical science, but that's another rant :)

Sorry to be so argumentive, but I completely dissagree with everything written in the above post at an extreme level.

"Sorry, but I have yet to hear ANY SACD player put out a better musical signal than a competently built "redbook" player"

So, you just admitted that you have VERY little experience to SACD. It's common for the unlearned to proclaim absolute knowledge based on limited actual experience. Absolutes only come from the unlearned in this hobby, or the arrogant and self-loving, neither of which types are a useful source of information in my experience.

"thank the sound engineer who recorded the disc, not the disc itself"

Does this make any sense to anyone? It doesn't to me. Poor argument, I won't even bother with it unless it can be expanded upon greatly. Though it's nowhere as inane as this comment:

"Ever check out one of those old Sony recievers with all the differnt modes of ambiance? Like "Hall", "Stadium","Live" etc etc?? Basically thats whats done to the SACD in simple terms"

What a load! You've clearly not had adequate exposure to the format, as anyone with a halfway decent SACD player can easily see from your writing, despite what you'll no doubt claim shortly. I suppose all remastered redbook albums are pure as the new fallen snow, however, right?

"So why dont redbook cd's get remastered?"

Uh, they do. Do your homework, most CD layers of the hybrid SACD get the exact same DSD mastering technology used on them, the DSD is down-converted to PCM, yet oddly enough 99.9% of listeners will prefer the SACD layer of their hybrids. Go figure.

"How many people do you think in the general population care about remastering obscure CD's such as the ones listed?"

How about tens of thousands, of people, millions of coppies sold overall. Again, do your homework, look at the sales stats for those "obscure" and "dated" recordings, don't just spew negativity about.

"If SACD was such a grand stepping stone...and had a profitable future then alot more mfg. would be jumping on the bandwagon to produce SACD players."

Uh, they are! Again, you've not done your homework or you would notice a trend of aftermarket players taking over for mass market players in the industry. Sony and Philips have backed off and the likes of Bel Canto, Linn, McCormack, Esoteric, EMM Labs, dCS and a dozen other companies have taken over the reigns on the hardware side, with more players coming.

Again, do your homework, don't be so blindly pessimistic and negative all the time, you might learn something.

"One word: BETAMAX. SACD is already heading down the same path."

You base this on what exactly? Pretty weak or I'm pretty dumb. Given the second as true, please explain this one to me as well.

"And one last thing tireguy, for every cd you listed that may sound better on SACD from your opinion, Im sure I could pull up just as many(and many more) that sound as good or better on a regular cd."

Please, by all means, give me a list of CD's you have that sound better then their SACD counterpart. I'm sure EVERYONE here would like to know about them.

Ritteri, from what you've written, just like Ben, it's clear that you heard a single, low-fi or unproperly setup SACD player, playing some of the worst offerings software wise on said machine next to a stupidly expensive Redbook setup, then decided to start a crusade to call ALL SACD players and software inferior redbook, point blank. Surely, if a $10K redbook player sounds better then your $500 SACD player unproperly setup and playing junk titles then it is very logical to conclude that ALL CD players sound better then SACD players, same with the titels of course....I hope that I'm not the only one that can read between the lines here....

Ritteri, before I start, know that I'm not disrespecting you, the person outside of this discussion at all, it's just your highly flawed and what could be seen as deliberately misleading "arguments" that I'm having problems with in your posts, nothing more. I'm just letting you know how your comments appear to the half-way intelligent reader:

"As for companies getting on the SACD bandwagon, after 4 years since its introduction there are probably still less than 3-4 dozen players total. MOST are from Sony and Philips, and that is a poor sign....Do you know how many companies had CD players out 4 years after the introduction of CD???? HUNDREDS."

That's complete B.S.. Nice story, however. Seriously, what are you talking about here? Please feel free to back this one up. If you're going to BS people at least don't make it so easy for people to call you in yet another untruth....

"Its well known that SACD isnt going anywhere (BS). If anything should take off its going to be DVD-A which I feel is a better format to grow for future sound improvements (more BS). As for my "Betamax" analogy, its based on the fact that your not going to get many SACD's released (BS really flowing now). After 4 years how many SACD's are there? A few hundred (completely uninformed BS here).WHo released most of em? Sony. (yet again, way off base)."

I see what's going on here, finnally! Don't know how I missed it originally, it was evident from the get go. You're a DVD-A fanatic with sour grapes! You see near 2,000 SACD titles full of excellent musical material and have ~600 piss poor DVDA titles to choose from, to play on only a handful of audiphile caliper machines and get defensive. You see the horrendous upcoming release list for DVD-A next to the exciting list of promised and current SACDs, the lack of backwards compatibility, the need for a tv monitor in your system, the nonexistent audiophile or customer enthusiasm and get even more defensive when folks bring these fact to light or even mention that "other" format.

That a given format is not prospering is no reason to take the event as a blow to the ego, it's not personal, just business, as the saying goes. To make up complete BS stories like those above to deliberately delude people into following in your cause and presumabley bolster the ego isn't a pretty thing, not good for ones self or others. Seen this story before, too many times, actually. It's all about music, regardless of the gear or software, let's not forget that. Where all in this for the music, hopefully, and not for back-pats or otherwise complete circle-jerks of like-minded folks with the gear/format/software that we found to have more MUSIC to our liking....

I'm done, there's nothing worth arguing over here. I'm sorry to have been involved, as I'm sure most everyone else saw this coming and I was too nieve to see it....this time, at least.

Ritteri, I'll do no such things that you ask. There is a popular saying that aetheists like to throw around in the heat of a philosophical battle, namely that "the burden of proof lies in the believer." Same applies here, it's actually a well established logical principle found in any introductory textbook. I don't have to disprove what you can't prove in the first place! Face it, you have no evidence to back up your posts. Anyways, thank you for playing, and have a nice day....

Guys, let's just leave poor Ritteri alone....There's nothing we can do to help this one.

Arguing on the internet....:

http://carcino.gen.nz/images/index.php/00b9a680/463c5922

1) This is YOUR opinion, which matters to such an insignificant few, and is a poor argument. Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean that you are right and everyone else is wrong! Stating your personal preference as a universal maxim, however, is consistent with your foolish pride and arrogance oozing from your every post.

2) Poor argument! Most CD's aren'the top 40, if you want to use that logic! How about top 40 DVDA'a? Does one even exist?! Talk trash about SACD's when one can throw even more trash at DVDA? Yer not being careful enough, making rebuttals far too easy.

3) Many would argue that the info is NOT on the disc. Your upsampling, downsampling, interpolation, extrapolation, reincarnation or whatever you wish to do with the data is artificail filling in of all the blanks, it's not high fidelity in the truest sense.

4) You still haven't given us a list of your so-called SUPERIOR redbook CD's that clearly better a SACD. I'm sure we're all still waiting....

5) This makes no sense. You sure are opinionated, but saddly you can't see that your opinion carry with it no water for an intellectual argument.

6) This makes less sense, but the argumentation approach at least is consistent.

7) The only appears to be one person here "missing it completely...."

Man, I can't quit laughing at this entire thread, especially looking back on the nature of the original inquiry! I like to stir up poop as much as anyone but you guys have really let Ritteri drag himself through the mud and toss himself in the gutter here! It borders on mean, cruel and unusual to see a reputation destroyed like this; he may have to have to change his screenname or move to another board if the insanity continues! I'm shocked that his condescending personal attacks where posted on this censored forum, but not stunned to see the deserved response. Anyways, let's stop kicking the dead horse! :) I may have started this but am feeling bad for the guy and his sock puppet supporters now, seeing that reason and logical (yet often funny as heck) retorts have fallen on deaf ears (was that a funny?)! Seriously, the best way to end this is to stop feeding the monkey, to paraphrase a Big Lebowski line. It's painful, it is a train wreck. Agree to disagree and simply quit wasting time and energy on this....unless of course there's more opportunity for the funny stuff from following Ritteri posts after he reads this one :)...just kidding!(sorry!)