SACD is it worth it?


Recently magazines seems to abandon hi-rez formats and all are speaking of the forthcoming death of sacd & dvd-a.
But if you are planning a new disk player you also have to deal with the dilemma to sacd or not to sacd?
Before 3 years I had the DenonA1 (5900 in US) and the dvd-a was the best sound format I heard but dvd-a is fading out. Now sacd gives the ultimate fight what do you think?
Today would you buy a player with SACD capability or just Redbook cd (which seems immortal). Always have in mind the big cd libraries the most of us has.
kops

Showing 1 response by robm321

If you don't have a TT, I would definately get a player that does SACD or universal. Make sure it playes redbook well also, or get an outboard DAC. Some of the posts above seem as if you are choosing between redbook and SACD, but you get both. You pay a little more for the SACD, but that's your whole front end in one box. SACD (pure DSD) is better than redbook otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. Don't bother with the SACD disks that aren't pure DSD, they aren't any better than redbook and sometimes worse.

On the other hand, if you are into vinyl (or thinking about it), it betters both redbook and SACD by losing that digital edge. And most of the jazz and classical software that you can get on SACD, you can also get on LP and much more. So the ultimate would be TT and good redbook player. It get's a little expensive to have 3 different formats, so I don't recommend all 3 formats, but that's an option and frankly once you get into vinyl, you may have a hard time justifying spending time listening to CD anyway.

IMHO,
Rob