EMM LABS sacd vs cd


I expected the SACD output of my CDSD/DCC2 to blow away the cd. Such is not the case in my experience. On many disks e.g. "KIND OF BLUE" I actually prefer the CD version.
Although it's SACD version seems to offer a more vast soundstage, I prefer the dynamics of the CD version. Perhaps it is because my DCC2 has more break in time with CD than SACD? In any case where there is an improvement in SACD the difference seems minute.
jjwa
Bill- Play your cards right and you might just get that lucky ;) WHAT are you doing posting, go enjoy France!

I agree with Cincy_bob when listening to "good" SACD there is no comparison, however, there are some black sheep in the herd. Some people hear these fair at best SACD's on a mid-fi SACD players and they are ready to protest the format all together. Most all SACD's, to my ears, are better then the same recording on redbook and some are much, much better. There's a smooth, refinement to the sound that has great dynamic contrast and analog like texture and body, redbook comes close at times but never can match the level of well recorded SACD.
At cruising speeds, a bigger engine tends to be quieter than a smaller engine. When accelerating lightly, you also tend not to notice a difference in power. Many times the car with the smaller engine will be much more comfortable to drive because you won't have the car lurching ahead when you happen to apply a bit more pressure than usual to the gas pedal. But when you need to accelerate quickly, you'll feel the smaller engine working harder and straining in comparison.

In music, a musician is never called a virtuoso unless they have absolute command and control throughout the entire range of their instrument. When redbook CDs stay within their comfort zone they can sound very good. But SACD's simply have a broader range of control, whether in frequency or in volume.
I would also have to agree that the difference between cd & sacd on a (dual layer) SACD is not that great. I find that EMM's magic in the converting of the PCM to DSD really pushed the cd quality to a level that when switched to the sacd layer it is very close in sound quality. The sacd layer will give you a deeper and wider soundstage. It also sounds a touch more harmonic/natural and seems to separate the instruments with more air than the cd layer. The cd layer seems to have a more dynamic punch to it. If you listen the Norah Jones sacd "come away with me" and then put in the regular cd and listen, there is a bigger difference between the two in my system. CD has come along way in the last 10 years and sacd is just starting. There is no doubt that sacd can out perform redbook cd if it is allowed to mature and the recording engineers perfect their techniques but, will sacd survive in the long term? I came up with the idea of "Music Squares" 8 years ago, storing music on memory chips but at the time the largest memory chips only held a few seconds of music but it sounded killer (no moving parts). You will see this technoloy in the next few years, postage stamp size albums in full fidelity! Remember where you told it first! Too bad I couldn't get investers interested, they all thought I was crazy!
To answer my own post after two weeks with the DCC2/CDSD combo: Break in with SACD is as crucial as with CD. The sound I'm getting now with SACD is aaaaamazing. It reminds me of the EXPLODE command on a computer program I use i.e. PCM exploded; bass, timbre, air etc.....left, right, front, back ...every where. I'm at the point where I can say I am finally satisfied with the sound of my system, limited only by the quality of the recording. Associated equipment: DCC2 & CDSD, ARC VT100 MkIII, VALHALLA IC & SC, KIMBER PK-10 PALLADIAN PC's, AUDIO MAGIC ECLIPSE Conditioner, VERITY AUDIO SARASTRO.
Yes you've finally come to your senses! :D SACD does the holographic surround effect with 2CH that redbook can't match. Not sure whether that's realistic but it's fun nevertheless.