SACD - Sacre Bleu !

RobinKidderminster

New member
May 27, 2009
582
0
0
Visit site
My first - Dark Side & War of the Worlds.

Absolutely amazing sound. Clear & detailed. Solid base. Superb surround.

I won't be buying any more CDs. If you have never tried a SACD and u have the equipment then get yourself a Xmas present.

Brilliant.

PS - Sorry about the french !
 

ID.

New member
Feb 22, 2010
207
1
0
Visit site
RobinKidderminster:
I won't be buying any more CDs.

That's a shame, because the selection on SACD is pretty limited unless you mainly listen to classical.
 

Petruchio

Well-known member
Mar 16, 2009
27
0
18,540
Visit site
I have a few SACDs and they sound great. However, why isn't there a bluray audio format? If there is, why isn't it more prominent?Would BD-Audio in theory be better than SACD (more storage space, DolbyTrue-HD and DTS-HD sound etc etc)?
 

RobinKidderminster

New member
May 27, 2009
582
0
0
Visit site
Guess someone could tell us the bandwidth, frequency response, sample bit rate etc of comparable formats. I just recon that the SACD is the best sound thats ever crawled through my system. Ever !

Sounds good too
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Petruchio:
However, why isn't there a bluray audio format? If there is, why isn't it more prominent?

There are BD-Audio discs, I have two myself. I have not heard better music coming out of my system. Still a very niche product but they are out there.

Rich
 

michael hoy

Well-known member
R_Burdett:Petruchio:
However, why isn't there a bluray audio format? If there is, why isn't it more prominent?

There are BD-Audio discs, I have two myself. I have not heard better music coming out of my system. Still a very niche product but they are out there.

Rich

One site here if your interested.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Welcome to the club a bit late but as you would say :" Mieux vaut tard que jamais"

SACD has been my format of choice since 2002; at first I was amazed by the multichannel effects but with time high quality and details became my priority.

Currently I enjoy SACD on my Arcam CD37, it's true to enjoy SACD you will need a system that can dig out the details and speakers that can coop with dynamics.

If we put multichannel on the side I believe SACD shines more with classical, jazz, vocals , Blues more than with Techno and Rock music, reason is in loud and highly compressed music a lot is happening and don't believe anyone would be sitting on a lazy boy chair listening to Hard rock music focusing on every note played by a guitar or the shimmering of cymbals.

No doubt MP3 and other digital music format helped kill the SACD, and no doubt Sony being a huge multinational lost interest in the format, but as you know " le malheur des uns fait le bonheur des autres" so some medium sized and small companies found an opportunity in this niche market referred to as "Audiophile". new SACDs are released on weekly basis.

To find out what is availabe in the market and the latest releases check sa-cd.net .

Price issue: For some reason the last 4 months witnessed a high jump in SACDs prices, no doubt someone is trying to maximize his profit by taking advantage of the Audiophiles who would pay a premium to secure a copy of what is believed to be a dying format.

Below some SACDs I own that really show the superiority of the format in 2 Channel configuration-

-Time Out (The Dave Brubeck Quartet)

-Shangri-la Mark Knofler

-Somethin' ELSE (Cannonball Adderley) : I have the remastered CD version of this Album, and the difference between SACD and CD version is like the difference between Day and Night.

-Come away with me (Norah Jones)

-Live on the BBC (Deep Purple)

-Jazz in the key of Blue (Jimmy Cobb)

-Secret Love (Claire Martin)

- Beethoven Symphoines N1-9 (LSO)

-Mozart Requiem (Deutshe Grammophon)

One final note: some but very few Labels have very high standard recordings and anyone who is into jazz should check records from Naim, Chesky records and ECM.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I've only got a few of these, but probably most played is the Moody Blues - Every Good Boy Deserves Favour - which is I think fantastic.
 

manicm

Well-known member
Petruchio:

I have a few SACDs and they sound great. However, why isn't there a bluray audio format? If there is, why isn't it more prominent?Would BD-Audio in theory be better than SACD (more storage space, DolbyTrue-HD and DTS-HD sound etc etc)?

Neil Young has just released a box-set with Blu-ray audio 24/192 in stereo. Should thus in my mind need no AV receiver to play as most Blu-ray players' internal DACs should handle it. My Sony BDP-S370 should anyway if the specs are to be believed. Or am I wrong WHF? Will such Blu-ray audio discs require full-blown AV amps to get the most out of them?
 

Trefor Patten

Well-known member
Mar 31, 2008
40
0
18,540
Visit site
I was waiting to say that all these plastic formats will become redundant as hi-bitrate downloads become the norm when we all have fibre-optic broadband. For a comparison between formats that a look at HDtracks.com. For example 24bit 96 is a little better than SACD at 24bit 88.2
 

The_Lhc

Well-known member
Oct 16, 2008
1,176
1
19,195
Visit site
Trefor Patten:I was waiting to say that all these plastic formats will become redundant as hi-bitrate downloads become the norm when we all have fibre-optic broadband. For a comparison between formats that a look at HDtracks.com. For example 24bit 96 is a little better than SACD at 24bit 88.2

SACD isn't 24-bit though. Or 88.2khz.
 

Petherick

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2008
122
5
18,595
Visit site
Trefor Patten:all these plastic formats will become redundant as hi-bitrate downloads become the norm when we all have fibre-optic broadband

So those of us in the sticks don't need to throw away our CD/DVD/BD players for a while yet then.
 

6th.replicant

Well-known member
Oct 26, 2007
292
0
18,890
Visit site
the_lhc:Trefor Patten:I was waiting to say that all these plastic formats will become redundant as hi-bitrate downloads become the norm when we all have fibre-optic broadband. For a comparison between formats that a look at HDtracks.com. For example 24bit 96 is a little better than SACD at 24bit 88.2

SACD isn't 24-bit though. Or 88.2khz.
Please elaborate. How does SACD's 'bandwidth' compare with 24/96 and how's it measured?

Ta
emotion-1.gif
 

The_Lhc

Well-known member
Oct 16, 2008
1,176
1
19,195
Visit site
It's deja vu all over again... SACD is 1-bit and 2.8224 MHz (that's Mega, not Kilo) DSD.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD but they reckon it roughly equates to 20-bit 96KHz PCM, although it uses slightly more bandwidth.
 
T

the record spot

Guest
Just a quick addendum to Le Robert's post above - ECM don't issue their recordings on SACD. Redbook CD only.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
They convert DSD/SACD tracks to 88.2kHz 24-bit (or sometimes 176.4kHz 24-bit) because it's easier that way (DSD64's frequency is a multiple of 88.2kHz and 176.4kHz). This is also Linn's practice. They have to convert the material from DSD to PCM because most personal computers and music streamers could not handle DSD (few select ones like those from dCS can handle DSD).

Aside from DSD64 (used in SACDs), there are higher quality pro formats from the same family (DSD128 and DXD). 2L distributes some music in these higher formats (many recording companies use these formats for their digital masters). Whether recording instruments or hifi can take advantage of these formats is another matter (they do offer plenty of resolution to minimize losses from data manipulation).

The same is true for even higher resolution PCM formats (32/768 and 64/768 PCM exists).

DSD vs. high bitrate PCM (24/96 or higher) is a long debate. DSD supposedly has better impulse response, while high bitrate PCM supposedly has better resolution (especially for higher freqs).

Either way, they are both truly superior to redbook CDs.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts