2. misc-audio
  3. 978823629

SACD WINS!

I advise all those who have spent time researching or trashing SACD to visit www.stereophile.com and learn what the industry is talking about todat at the Consumer Electronics Show in LasVegas. Here is a short portion or the current artical "Record labels strongly support the format. More than 235 SACD titles are now available, encompassing "all types of music by major artists," in Demuynck's words, "and all of [it] compatible with existing CD players. We believe in exponential growth for the SACD hybrid." The SACD-1000 should appear in showrooms toward the end of January. At the Philips conference, no mention was made of DVD-Audio, a promising format that seemed to be missing in action so far at CES, at least on the day before the Show officially opens."
128x128jadem6

Showing 5 responses by jadem6

jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,074 posts
 
Try Music Direct www.amusicdirect.com and Elusive disk http://elusivedisc.com/ And get there mail order catalogs. They update four times per year so you can stay current. Also if you subscribe to Elusive Disks e-mail news letter they update the newest releases weekly. Try Jacintha "Autumn leaves" (female jazz vocal), Natures Realm (classical all tube recorded) and Duke Elington "Blues Orbit" (Big band/Jazz) to start with. All three are amazing! I would also recommend the disks from Chesky, All of them are far better than the standard cd. One last thought BE SURE YOUR PLAYER HAS A MINIMUM OF 250 HOURS BURN IN TIME PER LASER!!!!!!!! The brightness will go away!
jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,074 posts
 
YAWN! All I know as a peon guy who loves music is SACD sounds great, better than anything to date to my non scientificly trained ears. Thanks for the info Dustin.
jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,074 posts
 
The above is a quote direct from an artical at the Stereophile website. I've read numbers even higher at other websites. 180 saz you, 235 saz Stereophile, I say a bunch.
jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,074 posts
 
You may well be right. It's a shame that the format isn't getting outside a very small circle. The sound quality is so nice, it would be a shame to never see it given the chance to grow. My SCD-1 player must have about 400 hours on each laser now. I swear it's continued to improve!
jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,074 posts
 
Oh perfectimage, such a loaded question. I don't know what this will bring but here goes. NO, nothing is like vinyl. I say that with all respect of the quality of sound one finds with a "good" set-up. SACD is clearly different, but is much closer to vinyl than digital. SACD is it's own experience. Fantastic smooth, liquid highs. The slam of the base, and the pinpoint detail in the base is far different than vinyl. Midrange is as Rcprince so well detailed, closer to the tapes, wich tend to be dryer. I've found the SACD to be very very special. I quit listening to the vinyl once my player had over 300 hours. (I must admit I'm a digital fan from the '80s, so take my opinion as what it is, slanted) The depth and layering of the soundstage is very detailed. On Duke Ellingtons "Blues in Orbit" (a new favorite) the band is up front and immediate, the back up musicians are well behond on each side with each player defined. The studio is very much a part of this disk. SACD has proven to be excellant at discerning the enviromental information and creating the space. On Jacintha "Autumn Leaves" the color in her voice and the insturments are lovely. There is an air that completely incompasses the source. Color, my systm produces color within the tones. These are a crude attempt to discribe a feeling that is purly SACD, not digital and not vinyl.
I believe the quality of reproduction dollar for dollar my go the SACD. If you are talking altimate sound reproduction, cost what it my be, VINYL still wins, but not by much. J.D. (P.S. sorry my spelling sucks)
More to discover