SACD or not

Thanks Gfi,

high rez redbook CAN sound better, but only via HQ dac/players

I went SACD with PS Audio Transport and DAC.
To my aging ears, it is a not inherently superior
format.
I strongly believe that the quality of the original 
recording is the prime determinant of sound quality, regardless of format, including SACD
and Hi Rez.

Once I had acquired over eighty SACD's, I began to feel the need to have an SACD player in reserve, and replaced a Marantz SA-8004 with a Denon DCD-A100.  It was a nice step up--for redbook as well as DSD playback.

I started out being excited about SACD per se, but came to believe that mastering quality matters more and it is the combination that excels above all.

I would get a player that can do SACD so you can hear for yourself.

Comparing regular and SACD versions of same music, i.e. Oscar Peterson 'For My Friends' series, my perception/conclusion/self-delusion about SACD is that the noise floor seemed lower, a night without moon or stars, an imaginary black hole. 

If you concentrate to hear a difference. What fun is that. And, total lack of noise doesn't make the recording better. They were great recordings to begin with.

It is more about how the content moves you, if the recording personnel did a great job. Thwn, how much involvement your system can provide? 

Prior to other tweaks, I highly recommend remote balance control, apply a speck to some recordings, bask in the real difference it can make.

I highly recommend the Esoteric models - the K-01xs and the new K1X. The sound is incredible for both Redbook CDs and SACDs.