SACD vs. Vinyl


I've not jumped on the SACD bandwagon. I listen mainly to vinyl via a Marantz TT15 Benz Wood SH MC combo. I've a Sony XA7ES cd player that has served me well over the years, but even it doesn't get enough play to justify moving up to a SACD player.

Since I've yet to convert to SACD over the past decade what have I missed? I should add that I've 8 or so SACD discs that I've played via my Sony BR player that didn't sound much different than standard digital, but granted that playback was observed through my HT only system.

Can someone whose a huge vinyl fan establish a case for SACD as well? I just can't imagine anything getting close to the dynamics one hears on vinyl, for sonically vinyl seems to blow digital playback out of the water.
128x128coltrane1

Showing 4 responses by mikelavigne

SACD will always have an advantage over any PCM digital; no matter the resolution (even 352/32). 2X DSD is even better than regular DSD (SACD). i have lots of high rez PCM files (many 192/24) which i do enjoy. but better SACD's are better. and 2X DSD that i have heard is better yet.

all the math that PCM subjects the music to exacts it's cost on the music.

this is assuming you have a sufficiently high performance SACD player.

generalizing about how analog compares to any digital presumes very high quality digital and analog sources. at the top of the heap of analog and digital that i have heard vinyl surpasses any digital and RTR is superior to vinyl. but again; at source quality below the top it's a mixed bag.
Kijanki,

what might change your mind about DSD-SACD-2X DSD would be a visit to a mastering studio where an analog source can be switched quickly to any digital format, including hirez PCM up to 352khz/32 bit. there is a mastering studio near where i live which happens to do the majority of HD transfers in North America for many different lables. he can take a source and run it thru any level of digital processing you might choose, and can switch seamlessly between them. he has many different DAC's and processors as you might imagine. in that 'no boloney' environment DSD smokes any PCM.

which is not to say that everyone subjectively likes anything and that everyone's been exposed to SACD done right.

i own 1000+ SACD's, 4000 CD's and have maybe 2500 hirez (88/24 or higher) PCM files on my music server. i own three tt's and three RTR decks. what i hear in that studio is what i hear in my system too.

you might convince yourself that SACD is flawed in theory, but so is any digital. DSD is harder to process than PCM and it's not music server friendly yet because of it's copy protection. but compare a recording mastered in DSD with one mastered in PCM; no contest. and 2XDSD rivals vinyl in fidelity, whereas any PCM is a mere shadow of analog. OTOH a 2XDSD file is huge, so it's not yet a consumer format.
Kijanki,

sorry if i misinterpreted your post. i agree that DSD has it's challenges in terms of flexible EQ'ing. this mastering guy typically will use an analog EQ for his DSD files since a PCM EQ will do so much harm to the signal.

this mastering studio is able to easily switch from any PCM format, to any DSD format, or to analog; all applied to any source. he gets master tapes, or digital masters, and then does his magic to create the commercial end product. he has analog EQ and all sorts of digital EQ as well as reel to reel and even Lp. he also does recording on site and movie soundtrack mastering and mixing.

i can tell you that there are things in the works to be able to listen to DSD and 2X DSD files from a home music server. the big problem now is the bandwidth to transfer files for the current home DAC's and music servers....but that is getting solved.

file storage is getting to be less and less an issue.

if i had to predict the future of hirez music it would be away from PCM toward DSD as it is so much less harmful to the source.
Kijanki,

the studio is run by Crna39, an Audiogon member. it's called Puget Sound Studios.

here is a Stereophile blog entry which talks about Crna39's work.