SACD vs. Vinyl

I believe that the problem is that people, perhaps even the original poster, get dynamic-range and "dynamics" confused. There is no doubt that digital formats of 16 bit depth or greater have more dynamic range than both vinyl and magnetic tape (reel to reel) playback. What is happening here is that due to psychoacoustics, people hear increased dynamics due to compression of the low-end (low frequencies) and high-frequencies. I listened to some very high price SET monoblocks at a local audiophile's home a couple of years ago and was amazed as to how much bass energy his 22 watt tube amps could produce; upon deeper thought it was clear that what was happening was low end compression and thus a thickening of the low frequencies that manifested itself into the aural sense of greater bass energy. This is not unlike the results that one gets from compressing the low end in the studio, or with a mastering set-up like the one that I have at home. At the time I quickly noticed and informed the system owner that although there was plenty of bass energy to be heard, that the bass sounded monotone. Do not mistake perceived dynamics for dynamic range as they are actually the antithesis of each other!

Dgarretson, We are in complete agreement regarding SACD and its ability to deliver low-frequency information, extension and low level details. As far as the "LF delineation & tonality" that leads you back to the LP is concerned, I would characterize it as enhanced low frequency "intelligibility" caused by increased background noise and an enriched harmonics spectrum caused by the mechanical nature of the tracking by the cartridge's needle on the vinyl.