Am I really going to like SACD?

For years I have avoided anything to to do w/ these little digital discs in any format. But the more I read about the smoothness of this new format, the more I am leaning toward it. Are there any other members who are vinyl devotees who are really happy with SACD and/or DVD-A?

 

I am not a vinyl devotee, but to my ears SACD does have an analog sound. I am very old and most digital bothers my ears.

 

I love SACD. The catalog of music available on the format is very attractive, but a lot of us want more.

For Jazz, I have to say, there's a lot out there, especially Sony stuff, that should never be missed.

 

Hey, thanks for the feedback. I welcome any other input pro or con. In particular, I am curious about the classical music that is being reissued in these formats. Are they engaging musically or is there still some of that "glare" that I found unacceptable.

 

I stopped buying classical music 10 years ago (with the exception of Reference Recording CD's) because I thought almost all of it sounded muddy to me - I could not seperate the instruments properly, nor feel the hall as much as I can at a live venue. Since I bought my SACD player a year ago, I have bought about 50 classical discs - 90% of those are superb and give me a palpable feel for each instrument and the ambiance of the hall it was recorded in. (I listen in Stereo). Well done older recordings really make me feel like I'm in a time-machine and am at the venue.
Use www.sa-cd.net as a reference when buying classical discs - that site has a good track record in my books separating the wheat from the chaff.

 

(a) depends on the performance (b) no

 

To me, the only thing that really sounds like analog IS analog. YMMV, natch.

 

I suppose I would qualify as a vinyl devotee who has dabbled in both of the hi-rez formats. To my ears both are very good sounding CD's, nothing more or nothing less. I have several that I would say sound very close to their vinyl counterpart, but I don't think I own a single one that I consider clearly superior to the LP. If I had it to do over again I would pass, but I know a lot of people here would say the opposite. I think it is very hard to advise you how to spend your money, but if you are truly happy with your vinyl playback system I don't think the hi-rez formats offer any "Oh my God" level experience. The other variable would be surround sound. If you think that is something you want, then that changes things greatly. Good luck whatever you decide.

 

You can probably add me to the "I could have passed" category. The software has just been way to slow for me. I spent a good amount on a universal player and have about 20-30 DVD-A and SACD each. The investment has not been worth the return. I now play LP's 80% of the time I play music.

 

I sold off my 800 LP's a couple years ago and do regret that but I will say since buying a universal player that I am so hooked on both Hi Rez formats. I have an ear that is tinny sometimes and most cd's really bothered this ear. Well, SACD and DVD audio sound much more clean or analog if you will. I fell in love with surround sound so that also changes things. If you can get into a nice listenting environment and put in American Beauty by The Dead and listen in surround sound. It is almost as if you are there with the band playing. I demo'd this last night to a couple friends who are huge dead fans and wow did they just about fall over listening to this. Good luck on your choice if you choose to have another option of listening to what moves your soul....Keith

 

This may make me sound crazy, but sometimes when I'm listening to SACDs with my Grado headphones, I get so caught up in the smoothness and richness of the music's reproduction that I occasionally will glance up at my turntable to see whether the LP side is about to finish. . . !

SACD is not a perfect replacement for vinyl, but it has the potential to come a heck of a lot closer in my opinion than CD ever could.

 

You can check my profile to see what I use for vinyl and SACD. (I suggest you fill in yours.)
To me SACD is what CD's should have been, a portable, convenient, reasonably good substitute for vinyl. I was to the point were I could not listen to CD's for more than an hour or so because digital fatigue would set in. I can listen to SACD all day. I can tell the difference between vinyl and SACD (I still like vinyl the best) but they are much closer than vinyl and CD's.

 

I am not a "vinyl devotee" per se, but I also avoided SACD and DVD-A until about 8 months ago. Now I have a ton of them. The sound is great and I really like the multi-channel SACDs. I was also slow to buy the stereo single layer SACDs. However, many forum members encouraged me to try them, so I did. I have picked up a lot of those too and I have to say in most cases they sound great as well.

 

The biggest problem with the format(s) is(are) the lack of depth of titles. Sure, there are "2500" SACDs and around 850 DVD-A's, but the output this year has been slowed due to publisher problems.

TOMORROW!! will be "SuperACD Tuesday", however, as many great discs, pop, classical, and jazz are slated to appear.

You need a player to enjoy tomorrow (as well as a Visa or MasterCard!)

 

I love having all the formats, it seems each get better and better too me.

 

Hi,

I'm thrilled i went into SACD. I don't like the sonics of most redbooks BUT i like the sonics of almost all of my SACDs. I doubt it's just because of the SACD mastering.... i suspect DSD is a significant factor.

Take care,
Jeffrey

 

Just keep avoiding these two slow dying formats, I learned my lesson about early adopting the hard and expensive way. Blue ray is almost here and I think it will be more popular with the public in general, hence more software available and cheaper players.

 

How will blue ray be sonically superior to SACD?

 

Yes, you will like SACD!

Vinyl is still my favorite format, it simply sounds the best to me. However, SACD is the first format that I have heard, that can actually compare to vinyl. IMO, RedBook CD's can not compare with vinyl, vinyl wins hands down. But SACD comes very close to the sound of vinyl. I Consider SACD a viable alternative to vinyl.

 

The frontiers of vinyl and SACD have one similarity, as you'd expect:

The source, mastering and effective time spent on the project means everything. There are lots of vinyl that sounds amazing, just like SACD. Klunkers? Sure. Sometimes accidental miracles? Yep.

If a lot of the material available on SACD seems attractive to you - go for it. Right now, the Sony online store is still selling many of their 1st SACDs for $13.98. They will not last forever.

If you like Miles Davis, it should be a no-brainer. Miles has never sounded better on any format. A lot of time went into DSD mastering while the recent Miles remasters were done. For people still using CD, the benefits are there (under DSD), but SACD brings a real solid dynamic feel. It has presence that's hard to describe.

If you don't like Miles Davis, get the SACD of Kind Of Blue anyway.

 

Nether will I!!!

 

Nor I.

 

Yes, they are musically engaging. No, they do not have "that glare". I suspect that in a few years red book won't have "that glare" either, at least not on half-way decent equipment.

I'm listening to Reiner's "Pictures at an Exhibition". December 7, 1957. If anythings gonna have glare it's the brass section of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra in a nearly 50 year old recording. SACD would be such a great medium for 78's!!!

I listen to classical music all the time. I used to be a recording engineer of the stuff. I listen to LPs all the time. I'm trying to get together a complete collection of the Beatles on Parlophone. My favorite venue (sonically) for music is live and un-amplified.

I bought a dirt-cheap SACD machine, a Sony DVP NS775V. The SACD layer does not sound "Digital". It has resolution waaaaaaay down into the echo and overall sounds more stable (as regards pitch) than vinyl. It dosn't mess with perceived pitch (particularly in the bass) the way red-book cds do. It's not perfect, but it's more perfect than my turntable. By the way, I have 2000 lps and play them all the time.

I don't have surround sound and don't intend to. In the month and 1/2 since getting the player I've managed to acquire 20 SACDs. 'Nuff said. You could find worse ways to spend your money.

 

First off, RedBook CD's can only get so good. They will always sound distinctly digital.

Second off, those old RCA recordings never had glare to begin with. Those recordings are fantastic, and for the first time, have been able to be heard in their full three track glory! SACD is like a window to the master tape. It is not as transparent as vinyl, but its not as fuzzy as RedBook.

If you put a 78 on an SACD, its going to sound like just that, a 78.