SACD or DVD Audio, which one is winning the race?

Thanks, that was clear enough, but I'm quite surprised, I mean really surprised to know that a lesser resolution format can give more detail than a higher one; It just seems to defy logic, although I'm certainly not arguing the point especially where it is accepted by many audiophiles. But my common sense tells me there are some deficiencies in CD format as it stands now if its higher resolution system can't extract more details than the lesser resolution LP's. I simply can't think of any other reason why it is so.

Emafaith: I never said that CD can't "extract more details" than LP. Because of differences in dynamic range (which is directly related to resolution), a CD can capture some details that an LP just can't.

Now, whether you can HEAR those details or not depends on the rest of your rig, particularly your speakers and your room set-up: That's where details get muddied.

Okay, I got the idea. So each of these formats have their own preferences or advantages as to the types of "detail" they are more capable of presenting with respect to the other. That makes sense. So this thing about ole LP's being better than CD's are not totally false. Thanks for the info, Bomarc.

Before I log-off from this topic, I'd just like to say that the $400 Pioneer universal machine as mentioned by Bld63 is not a bad idea, although I'll still have to contend with the problem of which format to choose for softwares. I've always thought about the Beta-VHS contention of the past, but on the second thought, Beta format has been outdated and the VHS may also be on the way out. Maybe we should just enjoy what we have now and worry about what to come later. Even the CD's, which was once touted to be the ultimate format, can be replaced by either or both the SACD and DVD-A. So I guess nothing is permanent in the field of technology.