SACD vs DVD AUDIO

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Seth, Jun 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jeffrey

    Jeffrey Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    South Texas
    Hi,

    My Phillips SACD 1000 modded by Alex Peychev w/ 4 DAC's per channel and a tube out-stage sounds very nice, especially w/ Pure DSD's. That's what matters to me.

    Take care,
    Jeffrey
     
  2. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Actually there is consensus among the minimalist audiophile engineers in favor of DSD. I talk to many of these people.

    Tony Faulkner, David Chesky, and Barry Wolifson do like 24/96. I think it may often be a function of the quality of the converters people are using.
     
  3. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    That's what a lot of this comes down to. Bob Ludwig told me he thinks all home units, be it SACD or DVD-A, sound horrible and aren't worth people's money. He said he has a preference for one format... but let's not get into that now. :D
     
  4. aashton

    aashton Here for the waters...

    Location:
    Gortshire, England

    How many Million Billion Trillion Godzillion Quantadillion times have I told Bob not to exaggerate :D :D

    Andrew :cool:
     
  5. Tony Plachy

    Tony Plachy Senior Member

    Location:
    Pleasantville, NY
    So what does Bob Ludwig use a home himself?
     
  6. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    It was a rolling eyes moment, to say the least.
     
  7. aashton

    aashton Here for the waters...

    Location:
    Gortshire, England
    Was he really intending to say that what he does for a living is produce a product that he believes will perform unacceptably in its intended environment ;) ?

    Andrew :cool:
     
  8. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    I thought he lived at the studio... I do. :D Besides, engineers are natorious for having crappy home systems.
     
  9. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    During the conference he had other engineers (Chuck Ainley, George Massenburg, Elliot Schiener, etc) agreeing with him. I think they were pleading for the maufacturers to upgrade their converters. These guys are used to Meitners and other top quality conveters so home units probably sound less than stellar but they are certainly worth the money.
     
  10. aashton

    aashton Here for the waters...

    Location:
    Gortshire, England
    ...but until manufacturers bring the converters up to the standards these engineers expect are they suggesting that people shouldn't buy these formats, or is it okay to buy disks that Bob and the others think will "sound horrible" ?

    Andrew :cool:
     
  11. Tony Plachy

    Tony Plachy Senior Member

    Location:
    Pleasantville, NY
    This is clearly a major issue. SACD and DVD-A are basically audiophile niches right now. If these guys are saying that the units we buy to play these media sound terrible how do they expect it to take off. Ed Meitner puts out a modified Phillips SACD player with his converters. Wonder what these guys think of it? :confused:
     
  12. Michael St. Clair

    Michael St. Clair Forum Resident

    Location:
    Funkytown
    If everything sounds so awful, how can so many people claim to hear these huge differences between SACD, DVD-A, Redbook, etc. ;)
     
  13. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    How many kilobucks is it?
     
  14. Jamie Tate

    Jamie Tate New Member

    Location:
    Nashville

    Like Gort Aashton said:

     
  15. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Meitner used to sell the modified Philips SA1000 with two AT&T/ST glass interfaces (one for the digital data and one for the word clock) but now they have their own SACD transport for $6k. They probably have a Philips laser on board, but it's not a modified Philips.
     
  16. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian

    As compared to what?? What constitutes a "home" unit? To state they all sound horrible is absolutely absurd to say the least.

    If, he is hearing stuff that is so much better than what I hear on the best SACDs I have at home then he has access to something new and wonderful that the rest of the world is unaware of. I hope he will share his secret with us. :D
     
  17. Jeffrey

    Jeffrey Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    South Texas
    Hi,

    ........ and so are musicians. It's no wonder there are soooo many crappy recordings in existence. :(

    Take care,
    Jeffrey
     
  18. Jeffrey

    Jeffrey Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    South Texas
    Hi,

    Yesiree, Bob should share........ there's great smoke in Maine. :agree:

    Take care,
    Jeffrey
     
  19. Metoo

    Metoo Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Spain (EU)
    After going over this thread for a second time (as well a reading the latest posts) I'd like to comment on a few things:

    a) The menu sailing issue on DVD-As is quite relative. When I want to hear a DVD-A in surround and do not want to turn on my TV, all that I have to do is put the DVD-A on the tray and press 'Play' instead of 'Close' and it will directly start playing the first track, just as a SACD (of course there is the format/video sector/audio sector recognition delay, but this is a non-issue.

    b) I believe both formats a quite good. And I agree with Michael that much depends on how they have been mastered. There is also what you play them in. I have been in a lengthy reflection in an European forum about player quality. We finally agreed that, for the moment, dedicated players are better than universal ones at playing the hi-res formats. The reason seems to lie in their handling of jitter. The more formats and different sampling rates the player has to handle the harder -it seems- it is to control it, not to mention distortions that certain anti-piracy systems can introduce.

    Yet, some companies have gotten quite good results controlling jitter.

    c) To say that it is better to center oneself on how a format sounds than on highly technical discussions makes sense, but aren't we all -to a greater or lesser extent- probably led to believe one sounds might sound better than the other due to how our player/s fare at playing them. And this without mentioning an usually unregarded element: the state of our hearing.

    Once, as the result of a serious discussion that ensued as a result of a blind comparison test, one of the European forum's members pointed out that any setup and procedure used in such a test should include a study of the participants hearing abilities. Wouldn't this make sense? I would also add that it should also take into consideration their 'neurological wiring', which I believe is at the source of some people preferring surround sound to stereo and vice-versa. (This link might shed some light: http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=17568480)

    d) Finally, I do believe that the current hi-res player's quality will be surpassed in the future. The fact that dedicated CD players make so much out of so little information as exists on redbook CDs should serve as a guideline to extrapolate what future players will be able to achieve with formats that have much more audio information with which to work.
     
  20. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Barry Wolifson feels the same way at Chesky. He thinks PCM sounds much better with a Prism converter.

    I have heard superb PCM on Weiss DACs and remarkable DSD on the Meitners. SACD is simply amazing with a proper Meitner rig. That is why I like to say we are still in early days of Super Audio. At some point Meitner designs and implementations will trickle down into more affordable SACD players.

    So I am basically agreeing with Metoo's d) but I do think the menu problem is real. DVDA needs audiophile support since it is on life support. To get that, they should make it more convenient for the 2 channel fans out there.
     
  21. LeeS

    LeeS Music Fan

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Simple. There are degrees of less awefulness (inaccuracy).

    :)
     
  22. My only gripe with DVD-A is that the Stereo mix often sounds radically different from the original LP or CD version I know and love. Since I'm still a 2-channel guy, I prefer SACD since it's (usually) faithful to the original mix.

    Does anyone else have this problem with DVD-A? Or do DVD-A proponents base their opinions strictly on the surround mix? Do I need 5.1 and a DVD-Audio player to truly enjoy this format?
     
  23. GabeG

    GabeG New Member

    Location:
    NYC
    What sampling are you basing this on? Of the dvd-a's that I own, the only ones that have stereo mixes that are different then the original are the two Greatfull Dead albums (which the same mixes are now on the reissued cds). Everything else that I own has the original stereo mix.
     
  24. RetroSmith

    RetroSmith Forum Hall Of Fame<br>(Formerly Mikey5967)

    Location:
    East Coast

    >>>>>>>Well, SACD is also on life support. The very few titles being released here in the US tells ya that. I dont care what SONY says publically, the lack of releases says it for them. If they were selling there would be MORE releases, not less.

    My local Virgin has some SACDs for 39.99.......and they sit untouched on the shelf, and rightly so. What kind of price point is that?


    As far as the record companies are concerned, no one is buying Hi Res. How much longer do you think they can keep beating the horse. Not much. I'm afraid.

    I think the Dual DvD-CD is going to win the hi res war. It gives consumers a lot of percieved value, and this time they got the prices right.. My assumption is there is a Hi Res DD layer written into the spec. No, its not ideal for audiophiles, but it isnt really being marketed to audiophiles, but to the mass market. We are just being thrown a bone.
     
  25. Jeffrey

    Jeffrey Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    South Texas
    Who??? :confused:

    -Jeffrey
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine