SACD vs. Vinyl

"Can someone whose a huge vinyl fan establish a case for SACD as well" Yup,WITHOUT A shadow of a doubt.!!!!Once your set-up is up to the mark,the Quality of the recordings become more important than the format..I fully agree with Mikelavigne about the superiority of DSD recordings.This has been my experience too...

"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 " yup,you are right there.Bring those SACDs{I hope they are one of those 'proper'SACDs ,not a mimicker]to a properly set-up SACD rigs and hear the difference!!!

"Once your set-up is up to the mark, the quality of the recordings become more important than the format.."

Well said, but getting one's front end up to that "mark" is precisely the problem. Short of that mark one's relative opinion of the formats is colored by systems limitations. Most systems are below that mark(including the OP's, in the sense that SACD and RBCD players are available today that will surpass his vinyl rig.) Thus for most purposes the question is better answered in context than at the extreme of SOTA. A mid-line SACD player is not a significant upgrade over a mid-line RBCD player. Assuming that there are financial constraints, the best option is to avoid the cul de sac SACD collecting, and commit precious dollars to a better RBCD player or perhaps a hirez server option. A better RBCD player can close the gap with a mid-line vinyl front end while leveraging the ubiquity of the CD.

None of these media formats were ever actually meant to be "better" than another or "the best" or to compete with the others for such a title - they all are only meant to sell you stuff, to make profits for the media companies...

Alast some do sound more pleasing than others, although ALL are flawed...

Many of us have lost sight of these simple TRUTHS and folks will argue till they are blue-in-the-face that one is best. Let us not go there.

As such, I'm of the opinion that the best strategy is to decide which media YOU enjoy the most and invest in that ONE. Nothing wrong with having several types to choose from playing, but only go ALL OUT on ONE. in other words, 10 grand + invested in one media playback source is going to sound better and please you more than having 10 grand + invested equally in 2, 3, or more different types of playback sources - jack of all trades, master of none... And you are really going to need to invest at least 10 grand in a single source to get over the flaws of the media itself, before you can start moving on.

One of the benefits of SACD is the dead quiet background. I hate the snaps clicks and pops of vinyl. Some vinyl is very quiet while others are not . I am in the process of sending an album back because of excess snaps, clicks and pops and it is a brand new 180 gm recording. I never had to do that with any of my SACD's. And when it comes to classical music a dead quiet background is a must (IMO).

Not one person thus far has compared the outstanding dynamics experienced on vinyl to what's heard on SACD.

So is there anyone out there whose familiar with vinyl and it's fabulous dynamics that can make a comparison to what they're experiencing on SACD that is on par to what they've experienced on vinyl?

Grateful makes a very valid point of investing into one format, however everything isn't available on vinyl, which is the point of inquiring about the SACD format. Although, I don't hear what all the fuss is about with multichannel discs, for the few I have are master recording discs that I don't hear anything substantive in multi channel format...but then again I'm probably just a jaded 2 channel guy.