Should I get off the SACD wagon?

I bought this expecting what CD promised 20 years ago: "perfect sound forever". I assumed the lessons learned from 20 years of CD mastering/manufacturing would have all been used for the new SACD's. I bought a (cheap) Sony unit to get my feet wet, along with a bunch of SACD's. I eagerly put the first one in, hit play and....

I was not impressed. It may have had a slightly smoother sound than CD's, but certainly not night and day. Then I read somewhere I had to "burn in" my player before it would sound as good as it could. I don't know if this is true, but it couldn't hurt. So, 200 plus hours of burn in later, and I am still not very impressed.

Am I the only one that feels this way? Besides the skimpy selection of available discs, the inability to play them anywhere but at home, and the almost nonexistant new releases, is there anything to keep me interested in this?

Help me out here, guys. Am I missing something? I realize I have a cheap player, but I would have expected better sound than this simply because a "better" format is used. The regular CD's I play from this player sound fine. Does anyone agree with me here? Or should I be listening for something that I am obviously missing?

Perhaps (with the exception of compression) regular CD's have been tweaked anough to rival the sound of SACD's. And, in addition, the selection is thousands of times better. SACD has been around for 2-3 years, and I don't see much selection at all. Perhaps if they made more hybrid discs, it would make more sense to buy them because I could play the CD layer outside of my home.

Don't get me wrong, there are some SACD's I like. The Dylan Blonde on Blonde sounds good, but it is a different mix than the regular CD, so it should sound good. There are a couple of jazz titles that impressed me, but they still didn't sound as good as my vinyl copies of the same title. I find myself listening to these less and less every week. I only listen to the stereo mix of the discs I have, since multichannel really doesn't interest me. I am seriously considering ebaying the whole lot.

 

Some of the best CD players I've ever heard were SACD players, and a few modded sets, and a reference Sony from the 80's.

You could sell the unit, but chances are the sound just from Cds is what you might miss. I'm not hugely an SACD advocate, although Steve likes it, and a few others here. Mostly, I blame the state of mastering used today that has a nasty brassy-fast-food approach (no pun intended Patrick). Most SACD players are dipping below $300 for starters, minus the heavy sets. Take a look of what finished ebays have done for most SACD players. Donno....

Think about it; you SHOULD have a fairly godlike CD playback unit by in large, although I'm not sure what unit you use. Think of me when you wanna dump the Dylan and the player. I may bite?

 

I got the CE775 as well. I bought a handful of discs and my feelings are mixed. I do think they sound much better than the regular (for lack of a better term) CDs. I find it hard to get used to recordings that I love remixed to multi-channel but after a few listens (I guess this is the 'burn-in' that you spoke of) it gets better.

As far as formats go, I believe that every new SACD release should, by default, be hybrid for mobility and to retain backward compatibility and contain both the stereo mix and the multi-channel mix so that the consumer has complete flexibility to his listening pleasure.

For now, it seems that classic and jazz fans have the better selections available. There are some great releases coming out of DMP, Water Lily, Telarc, Chesky & Rounder. Most of these follow the hybrid, stereo, multi formats that I spoke of.

Unless I've missed something new I do not believe Sony has released any hybrid SACDs to date which is sad.

To me, it seems that music that has been recorded specifically for multi-channel mix sounds much better than older reissues. I believe that they will get even better as technology improves and more recordings are made for SACD.

I think that the sound has a lot to do with the speaker set up and how well they have been adjusted for the room. It's not hard to get good balance between two stereo speakers but 5.1/6.1 is a different story.

In the end...it's going to be up to Sony to get the SACD ball on the move. Selling hybrid CDs is the place to start and until this leader in SACD technology jumps on that wagon then I am skeptic to it's future!

 

Just last week I removed my Sony 333ES player from my system rack and moved it down the hall to my sons room were it will serve out its days as a CD player. In the 11 months that I have owned this player I have purchased all of 5 SACD's. I left my Panasonic RP91 DVD-A player in the rack since it functions as my primary DVD-Video player but the software situation in that format is just as bad. I regret both of these purchases and wish I had used that money to upgrade my viynl system instead.

 

I bought about 10 SCAD discs, played 'em once. Check that, played "Kind Of Blue" many times, the others once or twice. "Tubular Bells" sounds better than ever. But for the most part there is certainly not a night/day difference/improvement over redbook CD. And like CD, you put the disc in, press play, some sound comes out, and you are not really moved, there is not much emotional involvement. Technically though, the sound is about as clean and undistorted as you can get but it still kinda sounds "under glass". No real fun factor. Mind you, I could attribute some of this to pure expectations, in that I expect the earth to move when I have to pay $30 CDN for a disc, particularly when I take into account the contrast in paying 25 cents for a mint vinyl record that gives me goosebumps.

 

Where's our resident SACD fanatic that went berzerk-oooo everytime we mentioned SACD?

Saw a seller in eBay called "vinyl beats SACD" Muhahahah....!

 

Hi Chris,

I was in the same boat as you. I bought a Sony CE775 about three months back, and purchased a handful of well-known Rock CDs (that I already owned as regular CDs), and proceeded to switch back and forth between the two. On 4 out of 5 of the SACDs that I purchased, I prefered the regular CDs. Only on SRV "Couldn't Stand the Weather" did I somewhat prefer the SACD on certain parts. Great dynamic range and detail. However, on the other four, they suffered from what I believe to be poor mastering. Too bright and they actually changed the whole tonal balance of the music. It seemed like they really wanted to "demonstrate" just how much SUPERIOR the SACD was over the stock CD. You could DEFINITELY tell a difference, but it was not a good difference! Why couldn't they just take a straight dump off of the Master tape, and let us know what this format is capable of... I was so pissed off at how badly they screwed up the Bangles Greatest Hits (the stock CD is very nice and mellow - the SACD was "in your face" and harsh), that I simply took the unit back to Best Buy. I have a feeling that with decent mastering, the SACD may be very good, but I will wait until Steve puts out his first SACD before I shell out for another SACD player. If Steve can make SACD sing, then I will keep it this time. My dissatisfaction for SACD was one of the reasons that I recently got back into vinyl (and am loving every minute of it)...

Kevin

BTW, the new CCRs (on vinyl) are awesome Steve! Thanks!

 

Ah... This thread makes me glad I haven't bought into either SACD or DVD-Audio. I have a friend constantly asking me "when are you going to buy into one of the new high rez formats?" and now I'm chomping at the bit even less.

Keep going guys! Air it all out!

 

I am very surprised at the responses so far. I also agree with all of 'em. I also have a Panasonic RP-91 DVD Audio player, and that will stay as my DVD player, but I might be dumping the DVD Audio discs as well. For all the complaints we had about CD's, I guess there really isn't much better out there as far as digital media is concerned. I like the sound of a good vinyl LP recorded to cd-r better than a lot of these SACD's and DVD-Audio discs. Advanced resolution? Means nothing to me now.

 

25 cents for a vinyl record is also a great (and cheaper) way to discover music you missed the first time around. If you don't like the album, you aren't out of $15 and stuck with a disc that you can't resell. AS much as I wanted SACD to take off, i'm glad now that I didn't jump on the bandwagon to begin with. But, I won't bother with DVD-A either! CD will do just fine, when I do find something i'm interested in, that is.

 

I have been toying with the idea of buying into SACD...but having read about the lack of discs and the less than enthusiastic views around, I'm not so sure.

My CD collection is pretty big and the only SACD I'd be likely to buy initially is the Dylan "Blonde on Blonde"..great though I've heard that is, I don't think it justifies a player purchase.

But I'll keep an open mind....

 

What I may end up doing is copying the good discs (like the Dylan BonB) to cd-r (yes, I know I have to do the analog output/input thing) so I can listen to the better mix anywhere I want and then dump the whole lot. I am really bummed this did not work out. That is why i bought a cheaper player to start - I didn't want to spend a bundle on something that failed. And I think SACD will fail. Oh well, I gave it a shot, and at least I know how it sounds. Of course, if they do some Beatles, Stones, etc., I might jump back on again (if there is any improvement in sound). At least as far as those 2 groups go, it would not be hard to improve the sound. On the other hand, at least for the Sony SACD's, they also did remastered CD's of the titles around the same time the SACD was released, so it is possible the groups' regular CD's would get remastered as well.

 

Just got back from Borders where I picked up a copy of a Gold Hoffman disk by those Everly Bros. (Too expensive, but what the hell).

They do not stock any SACD disks. They do stock about 50 DVD-A disks but they tell me they have not sold many. Even our local Albany Records is not represented in this vast music section in any of its hybred SACD.

Unless hybred redbook CD/SACD disks become the standard issue I am now of the opinion that SACD will die a fast death. They buyers do not understand! The public does not understand! I love my 500V Sony player, superb DVD and multi-channel SACD and redbook CD. But my wife thinks I am nuts to purchase CD's that I can't play for her in the car. I think she is right. If hybred SACD's become standard issue this format may have some legs. But since the new digital radio formats are not multi-channel, this multi-channel push may be still born, the one big advance.

I have both the Blond on Blond SACD and SACD into CD-R and my kids agree that the SACD sounds better.

 

Wow, I'm sure glad that I haven't taken any new audio format plunges yet and until it's definately better and more available I think me and my SH DCC's will be quite happy.

My condolences to everyone who bit the bullet and felt ripped off.

 

Wow!!

I must say it's about time people came around!!

I think the love affair reviewers have had with SACD will fade soon. We should remember, reviewers are people too and many are more prone to flavor of the month than others. There have also been more technical arguments questioning the "accuracy" of DSD.

I never quite understood the fervant, almost cultlike devotion to SACD that was so prevalent even a few months ago.


That said:

I do think SACD DOES sound better than redbook, but not by the huge margin some would have you believe. It also doesn't trounce DVD-A like many SACD propenents say it does. (Actually, maybe it does - I don't think there is any software in both formats sourced from the same master. How can ANYONE really compare the two accurately?!!?!!?!?).

I do own both an SACD player and a very good DVD-A capable player. Actually, my CD system is by Muse Electronics, which has been upgraded to play DVD-A (stereo only). While I haven't heard many DVD-A players, I know this is one of the best CD systems around. In comparing the best I can, the improvement in the new formats IS there but it certainly doesn't keep me from listening to my favorite music on CD.

I hope one or both survive - but I think we all know both will never be more than just a niche product with a hand full of titles ever being released.


I'm sure someone is going to flame me and all who agree, but the truth is time will tell. I hope I'm wrong because even thought I don't think CD is bad, the improvement is and will be welcome.

 

Hey Chris D.
Good thread. I see there a lot of you out there on the fence about taking the upgrade, or in some cases both upgrades!

I have been on the fence for quite a while about SACD or DVD-A. While I might like some of the "gimickery" of the different mixes- especially ELP Brain Salad Surgery, the Doors, and the Eagles, or some of Sony's SACD titles like Kind of Blue- I thought I might "tire" of it and end up back with normal CD's that can play anywhere without specialized equipment.

Believe it or not I sometimes feel that way with DTS CD's, knowing that I can only play them at home.

I had always thought I would wait to see what path the market travelled before I took any plunge. I have not seen much movement for months. I have seen SACD be moved from an endcap with SACD display at Circuit City to just any old rack.

Guess I will save my money for a while!


Chris

Tada: Member AGAIN ThankYou, ThankYou, ThankYou!

 

I am a holdout myself. While a high-resolution technology is inevitable, I will refuse to spend any hard-earned money in fronting a revolution where there aren't any clear benefits. Besides, the main benefits of SACD appear to rest firmly in the realm of copy protection - solely in favor of an overanxious music industry.

Moreover, as the math, technology, and accessibility to manufacture any one format increases exponentially, no one single format will ever likely be as important, indispensable, as Sony/Phillips wants us to believe.

Therefore, instead of urgently hoping and wishing for a greater volume of musical information to process, I am content teaching myself how to become a better listener to what already exists. And there is already so much more available in the Redbook format to discover and enjoy, second only to vinyl, for many decades to come.

Eventually, in ten years time, I anticipate that the recording industry, governmental agencies, music artists' and the music buying public will all have probably settled upon a high-resolution technology, one in whose terms we can all agree. And, in the end, I believe the music public at large is far too sophisticated not to, in part, dictate those terms.

Josh

 

Bottom line will always be....who is running the show? Now if Steve is back there, and he likes the format, then the results will likely be worth having SACD around. Unfortunately, as concluded in many other discussions on this forum, there are not enough like minded counterparts to Steve's expertise in the industry to provide us with quality product. Has anyone discussed cloning Steve??

 

I think you're being a bit too dismissive of the format. SACD is a logical progression from CD in digital sound storage, and for that reason should eventually come to replace it. It could be argued that DVD-A is a logical progression too, but from what I've heard, SACD has the greater potential.

I don't own a SACD player, I just have a couple of hybrid discs (Tubular Bells and Blues in Orbit). I have given SACD a rough listen in way-less-than-ideal conditions at my local Sony store, and I was not able to really say that it was a dramatic improvement. I would not expect to hear dramatic improvements over CD, even in an ideal listening environment. But I would expect subtle improvements, and hopefully with well-mastered material, a smooth and non-grating experience that would be more like vinyl than CD. That's what I think the format has the potential to deliver, and I would hope that top-notch engineers such as Steve could deliver on that potential.

Don't let a few harshly mastered discs from Sony put you off entirely. The format has to be capable of much better than that. The improvements are never going to be as dramatic as people experienced in the early days of CD, when they traded in their crappy turntables and worn vinyl for a shiny new (but crappy sounding) CD player (note: I refer here to cheap vinyl playback, not top end). SACD is an evolutionary development, but it is significant - after all, it holds something like 10 times as much digital information as the CD.

I agree that Sony has really stuffed up with marketing the format. It's taken too long to get cheap players on the market, and there aren't enough titles yet. And the titles are hard to find. I think they could still make it happen with more aggressive marketing.

 

Something bothers me about SACD... and DVD-A.... and even CD's (ok - digital audio altogether).

When all of us upgrade our systems, I think we can agree that speaker upgrades most often produce the most dramatic effect on sound quality. Next would be amplification - cleaner power will deliver cleaner sound. This seems to be universal - and the dividing point between analog and digital media.

In the analog realm, upgrading the component that physically contacts the reproduction media (the tape deck or turntable/tonearm/cartridge) provides the next step in an "upgrade". An average vinyl pressing will sound better played on a high end turntable/tonearm/cartridge than on a "Radio Shak" sale turntable.

In the digital realm, I have heard very impressive reproduction through "high end" players, but sometimes a JVC cheapie sounds as good (if not better) played through the same system. Quite frankly - I would recommend a cheap CD player equipped with a digital out, played through a high quality independant DAC, for maximum value for the buck. What bothers me most about the latest "advanced resolution" digital formats is the inability of doing independant A/D conversion.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is - in the analog realm, all of the music was on the "software", you mearly needed to get better equipment to get all of it out. In the digital realm, the results of upgrading are ambiguous. No matter what the sampling rate - you are hearing a sampled re-creation of an analog signal. A chipset is filling in the blanks based on a mathematical algorythm. The results depend on your system and your ears.

SACD will never be an analog system. Neither will DVD-A.

I always hear music in analog - how about you?

 

I bought Blonde on Blonde and I don't have an SACD player yet. Hoping my CD player holds up till the price of a SACD/CD/DVD/MP3 player comes down to somewhere between resonable and cheap.

 

The assumption that one hears in "analog" is just that. Our brain is quite a computer and the processing it does on sound is anything but analog. I expect that the closer we get to organic DNA multi-processing the closer we will get to an audio storage system that outperforms anything we can approach today.

But don't get me wrong, I love my SACD player, I also love the sound I enjoy listening to 5.1 Dolby Digital and DTS movie tracks. MP3 you can keep. With Dolby Pro Logic II and digital AM and FM and the two digital nationwide serivces and with the potential for many cars to be equiped with 5.1 systems there may be potential in them hills afterall. But a single retail stock of hybred CD/SACD disks is essential and at that point DVD-A will be rendered a nich product stocked with the music videos and DTS 5.1 audio disks. Any other approach by SACD will spell its doom. Retailers and buyers do not understand.

 

Larry, you can pick up a Sony 500V for $200 at Best Buy. Superb DVD and great SACD/CD/CD-R and CD-RW. Multi-channel to boot and it does basic SACD bass managment. No MP3. My late APEX 7701 did that but that unit was very bad in quality.

 

I got my Sony SCD777ES when my old CD player gave it up and no regrets here because its one heckuva machine.So far,I only have seven SACD's.I'm patient though,I think it's an evolution.And why the single layer?Must have been marketing,they thought everyone would start all over again.It ain't happening.Time for Plan B,if they want to make it go everything must be dual layer and all players down to the walkman must be SACD capable.Anything else is half hearted. In the meantime I'm buying DCC that I can find and vinyl.I won't go wrong there.

 

Here is a link to an interesting editorial on this subject. It presents some food for thought:


http://www.audaud.com/audaud/MAR01/savesound.html