Dedicated SACD ONLY player.

I sure would be interested in a dedicated SACD only player. One that doesn't even have to compromise by having to switch focal lengths to read Redbook as well.

A dedicated SACD player could be made with far less complication and therefore be more robust and reliable. By concentrating on one format they could probably manufacture a near SOTA player centering around the 3K range. You could then also buy a dedicated Redbook system and have the best of both without compromise.

The market may be relatively small for a dedicated SACD unit but, I do think there is one.

 

I believe that a single format SACD would have a very small novelty niche market - I understand the argument that a minimalist approach may theoretically allow optimal performance but feel that the practicalities would possibly negate this advantage.

To wit

- small market and small production equates to higher prices.
- re-engineering would be required not just the removal of superfluous circuitry.
- the two factors above would increase the financial risk for a small company
- the theoretical improvement from single format may be attainable by other routes (no remote control, no display, minimal number of I/O sockets etc..)

For expenditure X - I suspect that the best performance would be available from a dual format player from a company with sound quality control, engineering and R&D departments.

All the best - Andrew

 

I guess I'm just a a very small novelty niche kinda guy

I do believe though a fixed focus uni-format laser reading mechanism might make all the difference.

 

So do you believe that the current hybrid mechanisms introduces errors into the chain ?

Andrew

 

They sound pretty darned good to me

 

My Sony SCD-XA777ES sounds great to me, and it was a 3K list orice player I got for $1995 (thanks Oade Bros.)

 

Ugh. To ignore the redbook CD. Pitty.

 

I do believe that the necessity of switching focal lengths adds a complication that has to be overcome in the design. There is added room for potential misalignment due to constant switching. In order to hold the tolerances necessary there has to be increased cost in production. The money invested in a reliable dual reader could well be spent on higher quality closer tolerance components in a uni design.

The ultimate format/platform would be a solid memory Hi Resolution minimalist medium/playback system. The more you eliminate the possibility of any component in the chain going out of tolerance the less probability of error.

Hell, the most modern disc playback system is just that, a disc playback system. We haven't advanced much from the turntable have we!

 

Not at all, just optimize for each format.

 

Can't argue with your logic there

Well there are many solid state memory mechanisms currently available - there is nothing stopping me from transferring 24bit/192KHz or DSD audio onto a computer and then outputing this from memory to an external DAC . It just takes a few £ ($)


All the best - Andrew

 

I just got a Marantz SA-8260 ... I haven't done a direct comparison with my Pioneer DV-45a combo player since I don't have two sets of 6 channel inputs in my receiver. I will do that tomorrow when I have more time, but I popped a few SACDs in, and on a fairly quick (like 20 minute) listening test, all I can say is there is a difference in quality of a dedicated vs. the combo of the 45a. Gaucho is the most impressive of the lot so far - it seems to have a much more open soundstage and the 5.1 mix sounds phenomenal. Much more musical on a blind test without a direct comparison.

The SA-8260 (sadly discontinued altho it was introduced last year) is considered by many to be a great redbook and SACD player, and a steal at under $1k. I just picked up one on closeout for $650. I listened to the redbook layer and IMHO doesn't come close to the DV-45a - combo players as a rule are not known for their stellar CD playback.

Now, another positive on the dedicated player - at least on the 8260 - is the text that goes along with the SACDs (i.e. track listing names). Totally missing on the DV-45a.

I got two $15 Radio Shack A/B boxes I'm going to jury rig as a switch system. I just need to go buy more RCA cables. I don't have the $ to spend on 3 sets of $200 interconnects, and more plebian cables still show the difference in players. I'm sure better interconnects would show more difference, but let's be real here: unless someone wants me to rob a bank, that's the next layer of upgrade.a

I was considering the Marantz DV-8400 to upgrade from my DV-45a, but I found this at a deal I couldn't pass up. Now, I never had any real problems with the DV-45a sonically overall, and quite like it for DVD-A. So now I have two dedicated players!

 

"I was considering the Marantz DV-8400 to upgrade from my DV-45a, but I found this at a deal I couldn't pass up. Now, I never had any real problems with the DV-45a sonically overall, and quite like it for DVD-A. So now I have two dedicated players!"


I'm also looking at the Marantz 8400 for its DVI capabilities. Another Universal Player that I'm interested in will be the upcoming Denon 5900 which also does DVI and HDCD.

 

The DVI is not active yet on the 8400; it needs to be enabled in the OS. Since I don't have a DVI-capable receiver yet and am not going to buy one soon, the 8260 was a much better deal esp. since I am not unhappy with my DV-45a (great band for the under $1000 buck).

From what I hear, the 8400 sounds great (I don't know anyone who compared it to the 8260 for SACD), and for SACD, definitely better than the current Denon 2900 multi player. For video, I hear the Denon is better. Then you have the difference in converters (Cirrus for Marantz, Burr Brown for Denon).

I've always been partial to the sound of the Cirrus.

I say do an A/B ... you may be making choices based on your preferences of stronger audio vs. better video.