Is SACD really this lousy?

In response to Rfenol@notes.teradyne.com, there is nothing wrong with your analog. The set up you have is nearly what I had one year ago. At that time I had a Basis Mk5 and Graham with Ruby 2. If you are not satisfied with that set up because of noise, then you need someone else to adjust it for you. As far as suggesting what will give you 100% satisfaction, no person can possibly guarantee that. I will say that if you dislike the analog system you currently have, upgrading will not change your mind. Yes, there is much better analog systems, but as you say, it will never be the Boston Symphony. Neither will SACD, again the topic of this discussion, which concerned an Audiogon poster's dissatisfaction with a new format. And to Goose 89, you are correct, the point should be about enjoying music. In fact I had a topic that was about favorite music. The topic here is the ugly topic of trying to come to grips with the formats that are provided to us audiophiles, regardless of what we want. I am speaking from experience regarding all the formats being discussed here. The problem with all of us music junkies is we are all hoping to get closer to live music. The whole purpose of recorded music is to allow us to listen to people who are not available to perform for us, some of which are already deceased! The argument over format is a natural one, as we spend more money on the software than the hardware (in the long run) and really, it makes about as much difference as any of the pieces of hardware.

Stick with it Jmazur. You cats willing to try new things are the real pioneers. Thanks to Goose for understanding what it's really all about. Most of the peeps in here don't sound all that happy do they? It just means more used stuff for us to choose from. Woohoo!

I haven’t had the chance to hear the SACD, but I have HAD a HDCD Madrigal Proceed CDD/DAP. The thing sounded great (I thought until I had the chance to audition a REAL analog set up) I was so impressed with the sheer silence of the background and sound floor that I had to bring in my player and hook it up for my test. Not only did the turntable stomp the chit out of my $6000 set up, but it opened my eyes to how quiet and real a properly set up, cleaned and cared for vinyl playing system can be. I subsequently sold the high dollar digital and bought a modest player and a good turntable. I cannot remember the last CD I bought. I am having too much fun buying and listening to music on vinyl and dropping my jaw in comparison. People I must say that CDs are great for convenience and size. You can’t listen to your top albums in the car, or carry a turntable Walkman, and such but for the pain in the ass purist sound, analog is unbeatable. Analog to 1s and 0s then read back to analog is a process where something is lost period. As for laser disks as mentioned earlier, they were big, but they were not digital, as I learned they are FM. and are not 5.1 or DTS sound compatible, DVD is. Digital has convenience related advantages, but its ALL ABOUT THE SOUND. If SACD can reproduce the magic of vinyl to the ears of a digital convert, then I say alleluia!!! But it has to have the cost advantages, the availability of vinyl records. Until then, hear the music. Peace, Soundnught.

It's reassuring that a conversation regarding formats has turned to the subject of music. I'm into the odd and unusual in music: musique concrete, european free improv, uncategorizble experimentation ( bernard gunter, francisco lopez, ralf wehowsky), field recordings, and miscellaneous world music. The trickle-down of digital means that I don't have to listen to hissy cassettes. Some sound experimenter in Japan with a few grand in equipment can put out an edition of 500, vg to exc quality cds that would never get a big label release. Some of the sound collage stuff has so many layers that it would get lost in a storm of hiss if done in analog unless it was done in a kilobuck studio. Gunter's and Lopez's stuff has parts that are so quiet that they'd descend below the noise floor if done in vinyl. Don't get me wrong - I listen to more vinyl than cds - I'm just saying that digital has serious benefits for certain types of music (how about those 75 minute long Indian ragas?). It is more or less accepted now that digital's infancy was pretty nasty but, one way or another, it's going to keep improving and getting cheaper, making it more likely that any creative musical type will be able to get their stuff out there, and in a form that will be eminently listenable if not equivalent to live. Patience will pay off, but in the meantime, revel in the humungous polymorphism of non-mainstream music! (To see what I'm talking about check out www.anomalousrecords.com)

Too many posts on the 6th, no time to read them all. Back later...