2. digital
  3. 1038601128

Want to get excited about SACD again??

First the good news:

The new Verve re-release of Diana Krall's "When I Look In Your Eyes" finally gives us a real shot of the "analog like" potential of SACD. You may want to pick this disk up if you have a SACD player.

Now the bad (potentially good) news:

One of the reasons this disk sounds very good..and the other Verve/Krall SACD release doesn't (and I'm not talking sujective music content) is that this is a SACD only release, ie: no redbook layer.

Think about it, this only makes sense. Go to the Audio Research site and read their logic about their new CD player the CD3. ie: just do one thing well. And Ayre, Classe and other high-end audio companies are bringing out CD only players and addressing the multi-format compromises/concerns.

With all of the jitter and bits/reading concerns that any digital machine can have, it just makes sense that if we had SACD only machines (this way they could have better audio stages...etc. instead of time/money being spent on covering all bases) and SACD only disks (no problem with lasers picking up bits from too many layers)

I know, I know that Sony, and others, feel that these multi format machines and multi layer disks are the safe way to market these things. Well they are shooting themselves in the foot...or maybe the head...because if they don't release the machines and software that will show off what this format can do..well it will die. Because the very people that have tried to support the format are being given hardware and software that is not showing off the formats best.

So, give me a SCD-1 without the CD hardware, and instead put in better caps, resistors and a discrete jfet audio stage running in class A. Then give me SACD uncompromised software to play on it....even just two channel...no multi-channel. If multi-channel was important to audio..this could have been done on redbook cds for some time. This multi-channel is just Sony's knee-jerk reaction to DVD-A...and they are just missing the piont that it is a MOVIE thing not a MUSIC thing.

Sorry to ramble...but I feel SACD will fail...and it's not because it isn't better...this SACD only Krall disk shows this....it's because of this multi-multi direction that is, likely, doomed.
whatjd

Showing 7 responses by whatjd

whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Wait a min....anyone that's nuts about the 914 should be find SACD to be a natural fit!? Ever drive the 914-6?
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Brianmgrarcom, went to your system page...what a great looking home and system!

Best, Jim
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Ben, I agree with your thoughts. However, it could be this very path that Sony has taken is the problem. If they had just released SACD machines and SACD disks....and if because of this, they were more obviously superior..and the press and public became aware of this...well..who knows ?

It seems that this is the only format I can think of that has tried this backwards compatability path. Like Linn didn't comeout with a slot in the side of their turntables to play casettes...or casette players that had a slot for CD's. Their current path has confused it with the standard CD..rather than having the specialized and general public see it as a truly different format.

It is the same logic that seperates pre and power amp., or highend tuners being FM only...etc.

I do think that path may have taken SACD somewhere rather than the nearly nowhere it is going.

But if it is a superior format...they can't prove it in dream machines or the like...if it's highend, perhaps they need to go back and really establish that before there can be any trickle-down. Seems Sony got into trickle down and trying to put SACD into Bose like quality items..before they established that it should trickle-down?
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Hi Ben,

You might try the Diana Krall "When I Look In Your Eyes", SACD non-hybrid, it comes the closest to answering your last sentence...and, I believe it's lack a being a hybrid is much of the reason why.

I have the standard CD of this as well...and, it is interesting that the CD sounds good and the SACD sounds very good...and towards that "more analog" sound.

By comparison, the hybrid of her "The Look Of Love" SACD/CD/SACD-Multi, the CD layer is poorer than redbook CD that I have of the same title..and the SACD layer of this title is unconvincing...
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Ben, I agree that Ms. Krall is not for everyone...inc. me. But until we have Sarah Vaughn, Ella and others on SACD my choices are limited.

The only proof I have is the same I've had for the 30+ years that I have owned high-end audio...my own listening experience.

In my comments above about the SCD-1, it is a shame that so many people/systems out there are striving for good sound and trying different speakers, tubes vs. solid state, copper vs silver wires..etc. and their source component..be it CD, SACD, Tuner..whatever has very poor op-amps that are the begining of the signal through the system. These op-amps would never be desired by any of you in your pre-amp...if this were true we could all dump our tube or fet-based pre amps and buy and old Adcom 565 pre-amp with those class A op-amps.

Anyway, live and listen how you want...I just won't have my source component be so compromised that it makes efforts throughout the rest of the system not usless...but not far from that. This is why so many good people out there are doing modifications on SACD machines. This was just not the case(to the same degree) with CD players...but the room for improvement in SACD machines is so obvious because of this multi-format path making for $ compromise in the sonic areas of these players.

I do want SACD to succeed, and I want to be able to buy a player that on an SACD disk(hybrid or not) will sound better than a redbook of the same title on players like the ARC CD3, Ayre....and others..and that is just not the case now...unless you buy a Sony SCD-1 and put 2k plus into mods.
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
When testing between a SACD and CD of the same title, you really need to have the redbook CD to compare the SACD to. Not just between the CD layer and the SACD layer. On all hybrids that I have and have the redbook CD of, the standard CD is obviously better than the CD layer on the hybrid. This is part of the wonder of hybrids being part of the concern, and I don't trust what is said to be or tech data here..I trust how they sound. The second part is just the $ trade off that is being made in these machines in their audio/power/parts sections to hit price points and still play various formats/multi-channels.

At nowhere else in the average to better audio only system do we make these consessions. These compromises in these SACD source units is akin to having the Rotel receiver reviewed in the latest TAS and scraping the idea of integrateds or seperates...and putting it all in one chassis. Audio fans decided long ago that having a degree of seperation in pre, power, tuner(here even the best leave out the A.M. band) was the path to higher fidelity.

What has gotten most of audio to where it is has been refinement/focus in seperate areas. Usually by companies that even further refine and focus...ie: CJ and ARC..mainly tubes, Magnum Dynalab..mainly tuners, etc.

Think what you want, but to me these combo SACD/SACD-multi/CD players are a compromise. A compromise not unlike receivers, combo DVD/VHS players, tuners with both A.M. and F.M., clock radios(Henry Kloss has made several famous radios...can't remember any famous clock radios)..

Just depends on what you want. SACD was/is touted as a superior format...and compromise is not the way to prove and establish it as that...these combos are a way to leave it in Beta, DAT..etc limbo for a few years.
whatjd OP
1,139 posts
 
Actually Madisonears, all of the above is based on sonic qualities and far from a failure to understand.

You need to read through your own bias. My thoughts above are in wanting SACD to succeed on all levels and feel this success is more likely with top flight machines that truly establish the format, without all the doubt that exists on this and other sites, and in the press. If this were done, it would likely help any price range SACD player to follow.

The computer ideas are of merit, since CDs, like the cassette before, started as computer software. Of the 3 computers I have, all have DVD/CD, Zip, burners..etc. and two have flat panel screens...and all three are poorer than my televisions, my actual DVD players,CD players..etc. They are good computers and do work my TV or Audio systems cannot...but they are not of sonic or video merit by comparison...they are computers.

Any idea what Bowl the Badgers will be in(this is if you are in Madison, Wi.)?
More to discover