WOW SACD machines really do need time to break in.

Yes, it does seem to take some time, perhaps becasue of the higer resolution, there is a more perceptible level of change "before and after" the burn in.

Then again, your neighbor could have just been running a hair dryer at the time the Police album sounded crappy.

That's the fun of Audio!!!
it makes you crazy.

Maybe your Police SACD needed to be broken-in. I find most CDs sound better after several playings... or was that glasses of wine???

I bought the first Police disc on SACD. Even if i played it or the machine 300,000 times, i don't think that it would ever sound "good". Save your money on that one folks. Sean
>

every gear needs time to run-in.......even used gear but turned off for long time.

As the dependable Bringer Of SACD Doom here's my experience-I tried an experiment on my Sony 900NVS where I only listened at set intervals over a two week period (whilst on constantly) and found that I heard little or no difference.
Sony's are notorious for their long break in periods but despite taking notes I did not find the results many others have.
I have the Police Sychronicity hybrid and doning my cowl yet again report I hear little between that and the CD layer-did you check to see if the CD layer had improved?
Recently in my system I found the same of my Ayre CD player/amp-no detectable change over a few weeks however I put both a new power cord and interconnect in and a few days later I thought I heard a noticeable difference in my system.
What caused it?
I have no firm idea but suspect the Cardas cable.
So I have mixed feelings about break-in and remain sceptical but open minded and think it's really not worth worrying about.
The worst that can happen is that your system will sound as good as the first day you bought it and alternatively it will get better.
I don't even trust my own ears so I'm not sure I should worry about anybody elses!

Seriously, folks, do you really think it fair to judge a format by one of its weakest software offereing? The Police albums? Come on! Great music, for sure, a good representation of what SACD is about, not even close....

Socrates there have been those who have raved about The Police on SACD......................

Really? The "Every breathe you take" compilation SACD is pretty poor, me thinks, as compared to say Allison Krauss:Live, or even Beck and DSOTM, for that matter, just to stick to pop/rock stuff that destroys that Police album sonically.

I don't know if Socrates misunderstood my comment, but i was saying that the Police: Outlandos D'Amour was not worth buying on SACD. No matter how many times you play it or how long you allow the machine to break in, it's still not a great recording. Sean
>

Socrates-yes several 'goners have commented on that and other hybrids I couldn't distinguish between-clearly a format that is still splitting opinion...although I agree with Sean and said as much I'm not sure the original recordings were that great anyway but I'm as mystified with some people's opinions as they are with mine.....

My point is the Beck sounded great after 1 day , The Police , which is not a reference recording, sounded much better after a second play 10 days later. So maybe its not the reference recordings that improve with break in , maybe its the ones that are borderline. Again its a maybe. Here's another analogy. On DVDA , people said wow doesn't
Two Against Nature sound great. Well yes it does, however Steely Dan would sound great on eight track, cassette , 78 cardboard, their recording techniques are that good. Just a thought.I always like to keep my mind open and not hold on to any absolute truths in Audio. But really my post is in general do SACD owners feel performance improves after break in or not....
regards,

Not in my experience Darryl but I am in the minority by far from what I've read-the majority clearly believe break-in improves SACD players.
The other side of Beck's Sea Change is true too-it sounds stunning on CD.
Which backs up your Steely Dan argument.
I have to admit I find it weird that break in would matter in terms of the software surely elements of the presentation get better or they don't?

Ben,

Assume that both formats have their limitations.
Further, assume that when a component "breaks in", the way that the 1s and 0s are picked up, transmitted to the D/A, converted by the D/A, and fed to the Analog out all change while the tiny pieces all adjust to having electrical presence in them.

I believe (as most do) that the bandwidth and the amount of information conveyable on CD is less than what is possible via SACD. THerefore, it is possible that a cable might sound fine in your system while listening to CD, but CD's inherent limitations could mask the limitations of the cable. Once you put a SACD player in there, you might notice that your cable isn't giving you that last degree of detail, or finesse, which was totally unnoticed and therefore unnecessary with plain CD, but now that you've got that truer source, it is as plain as day. SO, from there, it isn't much of a stretch to suggest that the burn in process will "peak" faster with the poorer source, since many things that might happen while a component breaks in, could happen outside of what is noticeable, because of the limitations of CD, and therefore, you might think that your CD/SACD player is burned in, while listening to CD, since you stopped hearing a difference. I bet with some CRAP wire, or really poor preamp, or a reference system, but using an 8-track as a source, you might never notice the sound changing at all. So, you're listening to CD, and the sound changes, and continues to change, then stops changing. You might assume that the break in process is 100% complete, but switch to a more accurate, wider bandwidth source, and those changes that were inaudible, or otherwisw outside of the CD's bandwidth, or masked by the sonic limitations (only so many samples for a given frequency range), are now placed under a microscope when you go to a source with roughly 64 times the amount of info at any given frequency (SACD). So, teh part of the break in that was always, still happening, but was unnoticeable, is now noticeable.

Just a theory.

Gthirteen,
I must admit I've read your post several times and I'm not sure I understand a lot of it however the bits I do understand I tend to agree with.
I think you might have misunderstood what my SACD break-in experiment consisted of and perhaps my system.
To clarify at the time I used my Sony DVD/SACD player as a transport-all my redbook listening (at that time)was done through an Audio Alchemy set up (DDE3/DTI2/PS2)through a different input on my amp(a Sugden a21A at that time).
The Sony was broken in over a two week period only on SACD and listened to at set periods and notes taken-at the end of that period I had heard little change on SACD-I seldom listen to CD on that machine-with the exception sometimes to check a hybrid on the same machine.
At no time did I compare SACD vs CD during the break in period-all my redbook playing was done with my DAC set-up.
I didn't hear the SACD player change much at all-maybe it was my system couldn't pick it up or my ears.
I don't see how what you wrote ties in with what I did and my findings.
I hope you don't take that the wrong way but I'm not sure what your main point was.
I also truly believe what I experienced doesn't really mean that much but it did contradict a lot of other experience with Sony SACD players.

Sorry, bro, I was actually responding to the last sentence of your post tha timmediately follows mine:

you said- "I have to admit I find it weird that break in would matter in terms of the software surely elements of the presentation get better or they don't?"

My rambling was just my take on why break in might be more noticeable with one type of software vs another.

Like I said, just a theory.

Have a good day!

Duh-I knew I was missing something...............