[100949football]

Why am I finding it difficult to find SACD's to buy......even on this forum?
Are they obsolete?????

[per-Sony-fied]

Not a widely produced format. It hasn't taken off as the likes of CD... probably because already a very established format and many a CD doesn't really sound that much worse if at all. Good enough for most public ears.

A decent SACD player costs more than average joe public would spend. This is where SACD really starts to shine.

Disc availability is also dependant on the type of music you like. Admittedly finding such in store is almost like finding a needle in a haystack.

[chrissyman]

try play.com

http://play.com/Music/SuperAudioCD/N...egionHome.html

[alexs2]

There are a good number of outlets for SACD's and even DVD-As,but the major problem is the lack of software,with many of the releases being confined to re-issues of major label back catalogues,a good number of which also have awful multichannel remixes.

It does seem currently as if the major players are not pushing either format,and DualDisc seems to have slipped away quietly.

[overkill]

There is actually quite an extensive catalogue of SACD and DVD-A. However, it's all on the other side of the pond. I found a staggering 26 pages of Hi-res on one site alone. The average for the UK is about 4!

Seems the US market is readier for those media than we are.

[PaulBoy]

Originally Posted by overkill

There is actually quite an extensive catalogue of SACD and DVD-A. However, it's all on the other side of the pond. I found a staggering 26 pages of Hi-res on one site alone. The average for the UK is about 4!
Seems the US market is readier for those media than we are.

What overkill said - www.cdpacific.com stock them @ good prices even when u add p&p - mainstream ones like DSOTM Brothers in Arms etc can also be found at CDWow & Blah - worth searching www.find-cd.co.uk before you go Stateside ... Paul

[Floodedstatue]

SACD is seemingly on the brink of collapse. There is currently a petition online to urge the record companies to save the format:

http://www.petitiononline.com/SACD/

I signed it. Feel free to do the same and hopefully keep the format alive!

[per-Sony-fied]

Originally Posted by Floodedstatue

SACD is seemingly on the brink of collapse. There is currently a petition online to urge the record companies to save the format:

http://www.petitiononline.com/SACD/

I signed it. Feel free to do the same and hopefully keep the format alive!

Me too Thanks.

[PaulBoy]

Originally Posted by per-Sony-fied

Me too Thanks.

Me three thanks

[RichardG]

Just read an interview with Bob Stuart of Meridian in HifiNews(?) lunchtime. He said in the format war between SACD and DVD-A, MP3 has won.

Quite astute...

He also predicts the same potential fate for Blu-ray / HD DVD if electronics companies can't agree on a common way forward. He quotes a japanese proverb..."If we all cross the road together, no-one gets run over"!

I didn't know this but Meridian are heavily involved with both formats so they don't care who wins (as long as someone does)

As someone who loves SACD and DVD-A, I don't think an online petition with around 1000 names on it will make the slightest difference, sorry guys

RG

[overkill]

Originally Posted by RichardG

Just read an interview with Bob Stuart of Meridian in HifiNews(?) lunchtime. He said in the format war between SACD and DVD-A, MP3 has won.

Quite astute...

He also predicts the same potential fate for Blu-ray / HD DVD if electronics companies can't agree on a common way forward. He quotes a japanese proverb..."If we all cross the road together, no-one gets run over"!

I didn't know this but Meridian are heavily involved with both formats so they don't care who wins (as long as someone does)

As someone who loves SACD and DVD-A, I don't think an online petition with around 1000 names on it will make the slightest difference, sorry guys

RG

Rather a worrying prediction. Although to be fair, it's an astute one. It also shows, as in the other format wars, the mainstream punter is after convenience and low cost over quality. The convenience of CD won over vinyl, and its superior sound and ease of use won over it's main rival, cassette tape. In the VCR format struggle, VHS, by far the worst of the three, beat the others hands down by being cheaper in both soft and hardware terms.

Sadly, I also agree the last point. The Record moguls wouldn't give a stuff if 500,000 sign up.

[Kenny Glasgow]

Amazon.co.uk have specific SACD, DVD-A and DualDiscs sections on their website :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...736209-3596464

Or you could try amazon.com as the exchnage rate £/$ works well in our favour.

play.com as mentioned also have a good selection

[dvda-sacd]

If you like classical music glance at this site:

http://www.mdt.co.uk

Cheers!

[per-Sony-fied]

Originally Posted by overkill

Sadly, I also agree the last point. The Record moguls wouldn't give a stuff if 500,000 sign up.

Yep petitions normally have little affect on any outcome, even if it were in millions it would still only be a very small percentage of the population. Better to create some fuss tho' than none at all, just for attention.... maybe it'll fire up someones concern.

Unfortunately at the end of the day if sales are not doing their bit to give enough encouragement to keep the format alive it will die. Simply because R&D and manufacture would just be far to costly. It is a shame because along with DVD-A it is the best digital audio format available bar none. It's possible that in the event of death media will remain forsale for sometime but hardware is likely to cease.

[overkill]

Originally Posted by per-Sony-fied

Yep petitions normally have little affect on any outcome, even if it were in millions it would still only be a very small percentage of the population. Better to create some fuss tho' than none at all, just for attention.... maybe it'll fire up someones concern.

Unfortunately at the end of the day if sales are not doing their bit to give enough encouragement to keep the format alive it will die. Simply because R&D and manufacture would just be far to costly. It is a shame because along with DVD-A it is the best digital audio format available bar none. It's possible that in the event of death media will remain forsale for sometime but hardware is likely to cease.

Not sure about that, only because as having worked with them, the CD producers cynicism beggars belief. I agree though, better to make a stand, however small, than go under with a whimper.

Agree with the second point. I wonder how much commitment there has ever been to hi-res? HDCD was damp squib, and the fanfare that announced the latest generation was hardly 'Olympian' in it's stature. Compared with the fuss over CD's launch that is.

I'm not sure about the formats future just yet though. There are a lot of new releases going on stateside for DVD-A in particular, and as that's the biggest market in the World the manufacturers may just be waiting to see how it fares there. If sales there don't make the break even figures, then it will, as you say be left to die out.

I think the hardware will continue to come out, but it will be in multiformat form only, as the companies can then 'hedge'. As you say though, unless a lot of units shift (in the US) then we can expect to see any commitment even to that area dying off.

Pity, as the DVD-A is easily my fave digital format.

[Knyght_byte]

i really dont like it when people say MP3 won over DVDA/SACD....how can they compare them, they exist for totally different reasons! MP3 was there to provide a small file size for transfer and storage on a computer initially, then realised as the perfect format to take over portable tape/CD/MD players............DVDA/SACD is a high resolution, high quality alternative to CD for use in the home, with an added bonus of trying the relatively new wonders of surround sound....(i know about quadrophonics to save people saying surround isnt new, but surround steering as we know it from DD/DTS is new)......and its aimed at people with expensive systems initially, although i guess they figured it would bleed down to cheaper levels on the surround sound side.....but it isnt a competitor to MP3 because MP3 exists for completely opposite reasons.........DVDA/SACD is struggling to stay alive simply because it requires people to buy lots of gear and preferably expensive gear to get the most out of it, and although more people are doing that now, its still not enough, most people are only just realising how good CD can actually sound....lol

oh and yes, Amazon.co.uk or .com is a brilliant place to pick up SACD/DVD-A discs, however be prepared to wait, sometimes its a couple weeks or so....i think one of mine, Bangles greatest Hits took 10 weeks...lol....i didnt mind, it was worth the wait!

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Originally Posted by overkill

There is actually quite an extensive catalogue of SACD and DVD-A. However, it's all on the other side of the pond. I found a staggering 26 pages of Hi-res on one site alone. The average for the UK is about 4!

Seems the US market is readier for those media than we are.

There's a bit of a notion en Estados Unidos that there's more Sack-Dee activity in Europe than north america. The Depeche Mode, Moody Blues, and Kraftwek are all imports here. Jazz, blues, and classical stuff releases here on small labels. The 4 majors have abandoned Sack-Dee here. Sony liscences a few titles to Mobile Fidelity.

I think it was stupid to abort SA-CD for Dual-y Disc here ! Just when SA-CD was making gradual headway they yanked the rug out from underneath the room for Dual-y, I'm too fat for some players and my CD pit size is nonstandard, Disc! What would Forest Gump say, "stupid is as stupid does..."? Yeah!

The 4 majors are looking more and more like junk-y reissue labels. They have no commitment to quality or all that much new music. It's cheap to reissue the usual suspects on Cee-Dee yet again. It's cheaper than signing a group and making a quality recording that can be issued in DSD stereo, DSD M/C, and Redbook all on one little disc. Reissuing is more profitable, why bother. Everybody needs the Doors, one more time, NOT!

Then there is the on-going So-knee versus Warner Brudders fued. Now the HD-DVD versus Blu-ray fray looks like Sony against Warner, one more time! I think that the winner, if any, thinks they can adapt their format for music. Yeah, like I'm supposed to be excited about yet another format after getting jeked around on SACD & DVD-A! I have SACD and DVD-A players that I can't seem to wear out, due to lack of software! These 4 labels must be eye'in that HDMI cable with envy?-! That's where they wanna move to, me thinks.

I think the majors are a lost cause these dayz....It's nice to have Groove Note, Chesky, JSP, and such releasing quality stuff. The majors are stingy as hell about what scraps they throw Mobile Fidelity too, so, they go at a snail's pace.

'An everybody over here thinks SACD is doing better over 'thar....in Europe, in general.

[Arfa]

Am I right in saying all the Dualdisc releases from SonyBMG haven't been particularly hi-rez on the dvd-audio layer, only 48khz, 16bit? Its as though they wanted to reserve the best quality stuff for SACD... Yet we still aren't seeing that many releases.

The Warner vs Sony thing is an interesting one. I actually work for Sony (in the SCEE division), got no idea what the Music lot are up to though. Eitherway we are able to get CDs on staff sales cheap. Up until last year we had a reciprical deal going so we could get titles on Warner too through staff sales. However after the BMG merge, that all went up in smoke. Can only get stuff on Sony/BMG now.

I guess until one format overnight becomes a massive hit and sells shed loads, everyone and their dog is going to try putting out a new format to capture the market and win themselves the golden prize of a license fee per disc printed...

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Originally Posted by Arfa

I guess until one format overnight becomes a massive hit and sells shed loads, everyone and their dog is going to try putting out a new format to capture the market and win themselves the golden prize of a license fee per disc printed...

You're absolutely right all Sony Dual-y Disc DVD sides are about 2% improved audio over the defective CD side, if it happens to play close to correctly. So-knee Mu-sick has only put out a token number of SA-CD's in the last 2 years. They frequently failed to bother with about half the titles they've announced for SA-CD. Anybody stille waiting for George Benson's White Rabbit?

I'm far more cynical than you. I think it goes beyond they're looking for a format we consumers would buy and suppourt. I think their actions speak for themselves. It certainly it looks as though, they lose intrest in every new format they try, as soon as it becomes apparent folks won't get in long lines to pay atleast $20 for it. Listen closely to their very own press releases. They're always talking about "value added content". It's as if they actually believe, or wish, that if they give us a big dose of this value added content, somehow they'll find media we'd gladly pay more for.


Here, en Estadios Unidos, when the Dual-y disc gambit was first played, they were mostly close to the average for, new-ish, CD's....$12.99-$14.99. Soon after that, those Dual-y Discs full of valued added nougut were $19.99.

It looks like SACD is the only new format that they've created that really had any potential besides DVD-A + CD packets. They just tossed these formats like they were paper towells and their customers were expendable!

Look for Sony's next move to be to try and convince us that we need Blu-way Mu-sick discs that are kopy-poofed royally to the point they hardly play on anything, except devices with an HDMI input. They'll, of course, want atleast $20 for the discs... Unless Blu-rage loses to HD-DVD. Stranger things have happened. Remember David and Goliath, and the Alamo too!

I think Sony's Music Division decided SACD was a failure right off when folks balked on single-layer discs during the smash PCM campaign. ...and higher prices too.

Just look at these giant's actions and extrapolate why did they did such and such? Then you can easily come up with the sorts of conclusions I arrive at. Lately, the big four have been agressively buying up as many of the remaining independents as they can, especially Universal and Sony. That doesn't bode well to me.

The destruction of DVD-A and SA-CD is more like infanticide, IMO.

[RichardG]

Originally Posted by Knyght_byte

i really dont like it when people say MP3 won over DVDA/SACD....how can they compare them, they exist for totally different reasons! MP3 was there to provide a small file size for transfer and storage on a computer initially, then realised as the perfect format to take over portable tape/CD/MD players............DVDA/SACD is a high resolution, high quality alternative to CD for use in the home, with an added bonus of trying the relatively new wonders of surround sound....(i know about quadrophonics to save people saying surround isnt new, but surround steering as we know it from DD/DTS is new)......and its aimed at people with expensive systems initially, although i guess they figured it would bleed down to cheaper levels on the surround sound side.....but it isnt a competitor to MP3 because MP3 exists for completely opposite reasons.........DVDA/SACD is struggling to stay alive simply because it requires people to buy lots of gear and preferably expensive gear to get the most out of it, and although more people are doing that now, its still not enough, most people are only just realising how good CD can actually sound....lol

oh and yes, Amazon.co.uk or .com is a brilliant place to pick up SACD/DVD-A discs, however be prepared to wait, sometimes its a couple weeks or so....i think one of mine, Bangles greatest Hits took 10 weeks...lol....i didnt mind, it was worth the wait!

I know what you’re saying, but I don’t agree, sorry.

The reasons for MP3 (or any other lossy data system) winning out over DVDA and SACD is PROVEN by the reasons they exist. Whilst at their inception I agree those reasons were different, now the reasons they exist are EXACTLY the same – to make money for the copyright holder. Initially the record companies wanted to do this by offering better quality at a higher price, but once the internet made sharing music free (rightly or wrongly), it became much more difficult to get people to pay for it, even if it did sound better, hence the lack of enthusiasm for a diminishing market. Increased affordable internet speeds means that digital music at much better resolutions can be sent quickly. The push for record companies is now downloads (iTunes disgusts me) rather than a physical artefact to be owned and admired. This is as true of CD as it is for HiRes formats.

As an early adopter of DVDA and SACD (I bought a universal player from new), I was expecting fireworks, and there weren’t any. Sure, surround music (£19.99 just to hear the thunder at the beginning of Riders On The Storm – bargain!) was a bit of fun, but having lived with them for about 5yrs, I just don’t think they are SUFFICIENTLY superior to tempt people who only have a passing interest in music (remember, we’re all enthusiasts here, and there’s A LOT more of them than there is of us!) to take them up.

And I don’t actually understand where they are supposed to fit. Are they HiRes formats for enthusiasts to achieve the very best in musical reproduction? Nope – cos we’ve already got that, they’re called records - remember any digital wave is only an approximation of the analogue wave your ear hears, which is extracted and presented more accurately by vinyl than any digital format (especially for “classic” music recorded with care in the analogue domain) – even HiRes. Is it a mass population format so that everyone can enjoy better quality music? Uh nope to that too. I’ve just replaced a 10yr old CD player with a decent 2 channel amp that whoops my dedicated 2 channel SACD DVDA playback system. Or is it a “novelty” of multichannel surround, with video footage/photo galleries/lyrics? Uh isn’t that just a DVD?

I have a Pioneer universal player that cost £700 when I bought it and was (supposedly) one of the better ones. I also have a Sony cinema in a box sub sat system in the bedroom. BOTH of these proudly proclaim SACD. So it’s NOT an enthusiast’s format at all. It’s supposed to be mass market, but then it’s biggest selling point (“better than CD”) is wrong, because in a £300 sub sat system it clearly isn’t!

So that’s why I think they’ve failed. As someone who knows a bit about hifi and music (I listen to a lot of it…!), I was confused what to expect, disappointed with the quality (which isn’t better than my modest hifi) and confused how to get the best from it. If the format is inherently better than CD, why doesn’t it SOUND better on the kit I bought at launch which should be somewhere near the best quality available to the home market?

I should say I’ve heard an SACD demo by Sony and a DVDA demo by Pioneer (which got me excited in the first place) that were very, very impressive, but it was £20k of kit. Have you heard what standard of CD/vinyl based hifi you can get for £20k, it’s (to my ears) the equal. I’m just coming round to the emperor’s new clothes argument. It’s better because we tell you it’s better.

So why has MP3 stolen their thunder… it’s free (or at least it was when SACD and DVDA were trying to gain a foothold). And uh that’s it, it certainly wasn’t better quality. Now, it has established its convenience credentials (track names, genres, playlists) for people with large collections. Music servers are now high end devices, not frowned upon by audiophiles. And with the extent of internet usage growing exponentially in the last few years, it’s a perfect marriage of compromise with convenience. With varying levels of lossiness, it’s possible to get close to CD quality with much smaller file sizes. Most people know they aren’t getting CD quality, and they don’t care either!

Also, we seem to be obsessed with volume (amount) of “stuff” we can have, We’ve got a fella in work that brings in the top 50 albums every month on a DVDR at shocking bitrates (96kbps?) and people are falling over themselves to get their hands on it. There physically isn’t enough time to listen to it but they’ve gotta have it! This is the same with digital TV (how may channels?) and digital radio – all very poor quality compared to their analogue equivalent – DAB Vs. FM is a real waste of a good (but aged) system. It’s called choice, but you can have too much of a good thing, and people who care about sound quality are at the bottom of the marketing department’s pecking order (except with vinyl).

“most people are only just realising how good CD can actually sound”

I ABSOLUTELY agree with that! I’ve just bought a new CD player. I spent £1300 second hand. As someone with around 2000 CDs, I figured I wanted the best (within my budget) that my existing library could give me, so instead of a better universal player, I’ve gone 2 channel and I’m amazed at how good CD can sound.

DualDiscs are the best compromise I suppose, but only if you want the surround mixes? I dunno – I’ve got a few (Nine Inch Nails – great, Pink – rubbish) so I guess it’s the same as CDs, DVDs, SACDs and DVDAs – they can all sound great, but it relies on people taking the time, effort and care to do them properly. And with the majority of “customers” happy with 128kbps MP3, why oh why should they bother?

OK, who’s waiting for HD-DVDA??????

Sorry for going on, and these are just my opinions obviously, but I think they hold some water…

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Richard, I'm higher on SACD stereo than you are. It can rival vinyl with the better Sony and Marantz players. Th majors have kissed off the hi-rez formats because they have to lift a finger to release them. They sure as hell don't wanna be bothered to create any more 5.1 mixes unless they can get folks to pay plenty for their mostly junky mixing. I always thought it was a mistake to push DVD-A and SACD down the M/C road. Most of the 5.1 mixes I've heard worth the time of day came from independent labels.

Selling downloads is so-oooo cheap for them. Nothing but really high priced physical media, comes close to being as profitable for them, by all appearances...

All of which has left me feeling stalemated...

[overkill]

Originally Posted by Rachael Bitchlist

Richard, I'm higher on SACD stereo than you are. It can rival vinyl with the better Sony and Marantz players. Th majors have kissed off the hi-rez formats because they have to lift a finger to release them. They sure as hell don't wanna be bothered to create any more 5.1 mixes unless they can get folks to pay plenty for their mostly junky mixing. I always thought it was a mistake to push DVD-A and SACD down the M/C road. Most of the 5.1 mixes I've heard worth the time of day came from independent labels.

Selling downloads is so-oooo cheap for them. Nothing but really high priced physical media, comes close to being as profitable for them, by all appearances...

All of which has left me feeling stalemated...

I'm pretty high on the hi-res ladder myself. However, I wouldn't describe 'SACD as close to vinyl'. While I have plenty to gripe about with the analogue medium, it still produces the best reproduction (according to software) bar none I have heard. CD is also highly capable, new releases that have been well produced have me agreeing with CJ on this, and re-apprasing that media. I do enjoy hi-res, as it can be the best digital medium, however, even with the best players I have used, the SACD's in particular still sound fatiguing after prolonged listening. DVD-A not so much. I agree on the 5.1 mixes, most of them are utter toot.

I was also surprised by your comments about US hi-res releases. On one website alone I found more current issues than six UK ones. I also found, again on one fairly obscure website ten times more hires than on one of our majors! Still, it's what you are used to I suppose.

On downloads, with you all the way. Once they were able to squeeze the little guy, they were bound to make a mint on poor quality, 'chuck em' out as fast as you can' mp3's.

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Originally Posted by overkill

I'm pretty high on the hi-res ladder myself. However, I wouldn't describe 'SACD as close to vinyl'. While I have plenty to gripe about with the analogue medium, it still produces the best reproduction (according to software) bar none I have heard. CD is also highly capable, new releases that have been well produced have me agreeing with CJ on this, and re-apprasing that media. I do enjoy hi-res, as it can be the best digital medium, however, even with the best players I have used, the SACD's in particular still sound fatiguing after prolonged listening. DVD-A not so much. I agree on the 5.1 mixes, most of them are utter toot.

I was also surprised by your comments about US hi-res releases. On one website alone I found more current issues than six UK ones. I also found, again on one fairly obscure website ten times more hires than on one of our majors! Still, it's what you are used to I suppose.

On downloads, with you all the way. Once they were able to squeeze the little guy, they were bound to make a mint on poor quality, 'chuck em' out as fast as you can' mp3's.

I may have a nicer SACD player, Sony SCD-XA777ES, than record player, Pro-Ject RMB-6SB wit Shure V-15MXR cart...? I thinkl vinyl has a theoretical edge but maybe not so much with my stuff? I'm so tired of poppin' vinyl. I'd settle for SA-CD even knowing vinyl has slightly more potential. Well, I have 12" singles that really do smoke, anything. I've heard my share of mediocre Sack-Dee's like most of the Koch Kink's discs. Sony's Blue Oyster Cult SACD sounds identical to the original vinyl except that the SACD cleans up some distortion on one song, advantage SACD. Where I've really heard Sack-Dee shine is on labels like Telarc, DMP, Analogue Productions, Mofi, Eighty Eights, JSP, Chesky, and Groove Note. I don't get any digital fatigue from high quality DSD & analog tape recordings, or conversions from hi-bit PCM recordings.

There are lots of U.S. releases but about 90% are classical which is not my forte. Even the jazz releases have slowed down at this point.

Downloads don't crank my tractor neither!

[CJROSS]

Originally Posted by overkill

I'm pretty high on the hi-res ladder myself. However, I wouldn't describe 'SACD as close to vinyl'. While I have plenty to gripe about with the analogue medium, it still produces the best reproduction (according to software) bar none I have heard. CD is also highly capable, new releases that have been well produced have me agreeing with CJ on this, and re-apprasing that media. I do enjoy hi-res, as it can be the best digital medium, however, even with the best players I have used, the SACD's in particular still sound fatiguing after prolonged listening. DVD-A not so much. I agree on the 5.1 mixes, most of them are utter toot.

Possibly stupid question - SACD/DVD-A stereo benefits?

Great thread highlighting the dubious ruinatious route that "hi-res" music took by going 5.1. Worth a read Rachael.

OKill - Now been living with the SACD player for a good while does a lot of thing very nicely, but its an attention grabbing sort of listen still getting my head round it, give me Rumours on DVD-A anyday, for an all night repeat listen of hi-res vinylish quality.

Stereo chaps, power to stereo. If its got even an inkling of 5.1 in it, its bargepole time for me, same with Duddisc 16/48 etc. Have heard some great stuff on SACD, but Ive said it all along, there is a carrier in DVD-V that can sound stunning in good old stereo too. To my ears up there with SACD or DVD-A. But nobody is listening to me. Or that poll to save SACD either.

[overkill]

Originally Posted by Rachael Bitchlist

I may have a nicer SACD player, Sony SCD-XA777ES, than record player, Pro-Ject RMB-6SB wit Shure V-15MXR cart...? I thinkl vinyl has a theoretical edge but maybe not so much with my stuff? I'm so tired of poppin' vinyl. I'd settle for SA-CD even knowing vinyl has slightly more potential. Well, I have 12" singles that really do smoke, anything. I've heard my share of mediocre Sack-Dee's like most of the Koch Kink's discs. Sony's Blue Oyster Cult SACD sounds identical to the original vinyl except that the SACD cleans up some distortion on one song, advantage SACD. Where I've really heard Sack-Dee shine is on labels like Telarc, DMP, Analogue Productions, Mofi, Eighty Eights, JSP, Chesky, and Groove Note. I don't get any digital fatigue from high quality DSD & analog tape recordings, or conversions from hi-bit PCM recordings.

There are lots of U.S. releases but about 90% are classical which is not my forte. Even the jazz releases have slowed down at this point.

Downloads don't crank my tractor neither!

Methinks therein lies the problem! I love the 777ES, it's a top SACD player. Not bad on CD either, although I don't enjoy the noise shaping Sony do on CD. With Vinyl it's an all or nothing thing I'm afraid. My TT is up there with the best, so it can easily outpace it's digital rivals (the ones I have!). A decent cartridge and phono stage mean that even with quite badly scratched vinyl, surface noise is minimal. The bulk of the remaining noise is down to deep groove contamination something I will be looking to deal with soon (finally going to invest in a RCM.).

I do enjoy SACD, don't get me wrong, just not as much as the DVD-A's I have. As CJ says, its probably because they do have a 'vinyl like' reproduction. SACD sounds more like a more informative CD.

Agree 100% with CJ on the 5.1 issue. Many of the multi channel mixes are so rank I nearly dumped the disc - until I checked out the stereo versions! Agree again on the DVD-V, some of the live DVD's are excellent in stereo!

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Originally Posted by CJROSS

Possibly stupid question - SACD/DVD-A stereo benefits?

Great thread highlighting the dubious ruinatious route that "hi-res" music took by going 5.1. Worth a read Rachael.

OKill - Now been living with the SACD player for a good while does a lot of thing very nicely, but its an attention grabbing sort of listen still getting my head round it, give me Rumours on DVD-A anyday, for an all night repeat listen of hi-res vinylish quality.

Stereo chaps, power to stereo. If its got even an inkling of 5.1 in it, its bargepole time for me, same with Duddisc 16/48 etc. Have heard some great stuff on SACD, but Ive said it all along, there is a carrier in DVD-V that can sound stunning in good old stereo too. To my ears up there with SACD or DVD-A. But nobody is listening to me. Or that poll to save SACD either.

I'll take a look at the thread. I think I can well imagine the reasons. I had Quad for a year when I was a teenager. It was expensive to set up and the mixes were mostly nonsensical. The only Quad record I really loved was Firesign Theatre's Every Thing You Know Is Wrong, which of course, is partially organized nonsense!

I've never had a problem with DVD-A sound....well, except for that Silverlne crap! I was twice burned! I own about 40. I've always hated that the format was on the back of DVD-V and subject to it's ergonomic confines. I'm forgettin' which one but one of the hi-end manufacturers has finally made a stand-alone DVD-A player. I sure wanted one of them when the format was younger and seemed more full of promise, well some.

My fav DVD-A's are the Neil Young ones that are only stereo. The records didn't sound that good, I have 'em. My Denon 2900 is on leave from my home theatre and on my stereo for now. If it wasn't for the HD-DVD distraction I have going on presently, I'd proably be listening to it more. I feel certain that DVD-A has a better top end than Sack-Dee but sometimes it seems a bit bright. Maybe it was the engineer that did that? Maybe the habitual sound of other formats and relatively few numbers of DVD-A's has left me with, well, let's just call it imcomplete conclusions. There was a point when I thought DVD-A might take off, I was seriously considering getting a Pioneer DV-AX10 to spin 'em with. I'd demoed it for video and audio about a year earlier. It's stille the best sounding DVD-A player I've heard. I don't get out to ultra high end dealers all that much either since my fav closed it's doors, sadly. The durn'd only one in this city!

I'm tempted to believe that HDAD is a slightly better format than DVD-A by the 3 that I own. More incomplete data files on that one for me. It could be the engineering though...? Mas data por favor! I wish. The Alan Parson's I Robot that I have begs me to jump to conclusions.

I have collected 580 Sack-Dee's on the other hand. I've heard the good, the bad, and everything inbetween. I like Sack-Dee on the better players. I've always thought it had a sound very similar to vinyl, maybe by design intent? I wouldn't put much of anything past Sony. In another reality, I imagine I could of ended up with 580 DVD-A's...just like alternate Star Trek timelines. I've had to order so many of my rock and pop titles from Europe or Japan. Well, and even some of the jazz...

Soon I fear we won't have SACD or DVD-A to kick around anymore. Soon, I fear we'll have either Toshiba or Sony telling us what we really need is a new HD-musick format that only works over HDMI and has really expensive discs.

About the DVD-V spec. I'm not too good on tech stuff but I know DVD-V can carry up to 640 kps Dolby. That's stille lossy but it's a bit-rate where things are starting to sound pretty good. I've been impressed with it on D-VHS and now again on HD-DVD. Is DVD-V capable of something beyond that, that is not DVD-A? DVD has always been allowed to use up to 640 kps but never has as far as I know.

[Rachael Bitchlist]

Originally Posted by overkill

Methinks therein lies the problem! I love the 777ES, it's a top SACD player. Not bad on CD either....I do enjoy SACD, don't get me wrong, just not as much as the DVD-A's I have. As CJ says, its probably because they do have a 'vinyl like' reproduction. SACD sounds more like a more informative CD.

You do understand that I have the XA777ES, not the top-loading 777ES. Why does Sony reuse the same numbers over and over? Where these numbers voted most popular and most likely to succeed by their high school class, or what? They have a thing about 9000 too! I wish I had the 777ES or SCD-1 which is the same thing more or less...or that big fat gold Marantz hog. A friend has the 777ES and I don't care for his speakers but I love the player. My player ain't half bad though. I can live with it!

I highly recommend that you buy a record cleaning machine. I bought the cheapest VIP machine a few years back, no regrets! I just got the attachment for 7" 45's recently. It's done wonders for my records which are mostly old. Most of my new records are old records, new to me. I buy a few new records every year. Right now I'm considering Roddy Frame's Western Skies which sounds amazingly good on CD off it's analogue tape master. The LP might put me into a trance?

I'm just hessitant to buy alot of records. Local availability of new records is very limited. It's such a hassle to mail back crap LP's! I've had to do it so many times. The pressing quality of today's records is so up and down. I hate the 180 gram, or more, records. They seem unable to make them flat at any price, that we get charged. It's a hassle to adjust my TT's height for them. It's just not fun buying records that have a substantial chance of needing to be shipped back. Then there's the prices. Stille I do so on ocassion.

I can have fun buying inexpensive, used records and get a handful of 'em for the price of one $39.99 new record, Yes, many releases are that high here. In my experience, the expensive records seem to have more bad ones than the the $15 or less ones. So many of the expensive ones are fatburger 180's and warped.

I know records are better when ya got good pressing of well done ones but I'd trade that for a convient digital format that comes close. That all seems like dust in the wind at this point. I might move back towards vinyl as decent digital is spinning down the drain? I hang around some vinyl purists over at the Hoffman Forum. Who knows, maybe I'll be a Scoutmaster someday?

I have sort of a love-hate thing about vinyl. I've returnd more records than most people have bought. It's so depressing to put a brand new record on that pops and doesn't even have one good play in it, after a VPI "bath".

It's funny ya'all think DVD-A is more vinyl soundin' than Sack-Dee. Ya'all proably have nicer equipment than mine but mine ain't slouchy. I have some Sony SACD's that so sound like their vinyl counter-parts. My DVD-A experience is much too limited to have strong opinions. I do know I'd rather have 'em than CD's if they have a stereo program!

I've become more and more disallusioned by M/C the more I've heard it, particularly big 4 M/C. Most of these M/C mixes are just laughable. Is rank a strong enough adjetive? How 'bout rancorous? It just sounds nastier!

[gavan]

Originally Posted by Knyght_byte

i really dont like it when people say MP3 won over DVDA/SACD....how can they compare them, they exist for totally different reasons! MP3 was there to provide a small file size for transfer and storage on a computer initially, then realised as the perfect format to take over portable tape/CD/MD players............DVDA/SACD is a high resolution, high quality alternative to CD for use in the home, with an added bonus of trying the relatively new wonders of surround sound....(i know about quadrophonics to save people saying surround isnt new, but surround steering as we know it from DD/DTS is new)......and its aimed at people with expensive systems initially, although i guess they figured it would bleed down to cheaper levels on the surround sound side.....but it isnt a competitor to MP3 because MP3 exists for completely opposite reasons.........DVDA/SACD is struggling to stay alive simply because it requires people to buy lots of gear and preferably expensive gear to get the most out of it, and although more people are doing that now, its still not enough, most people are only just realising how good CD can actually sound....lol

Although SACD/DVD-A and mp3 may be aiming for different kinds of people, the battle was to get the public to accept a new format to replace listening to music on audio CDs.

SACD and DVD-A have failed to make it to the mainstream (and show little signs of ever doing so) but 'mp3' is now ubiquitous without really trying.

Unfortunately for the record companies, it's driven largely by people wanting to make their existing music collections portable or to get hold of music for free over the internet. So even though it's widely supported in hardware, it represents a really small amount of music sales. And since it is not a copy protected format, the mainstream music companies don't want to use it.

However, it does show how a format can suceed if it offers the public something that they want, even if the record companies don't want to support it.


Gav

[CJROSS]

Originally Posted by overkill

I do enjoy SACD, don't get me wrong, just not as much as the DVD-A's I have. As CJ says, its probably because they do have a 'vinyl like' reproduction. SACD sounds more like a more informative CD.

Agree 100% with CJ on the 5.1 issue. Many of the multi channel mixes are so rank I nearly dumped the disc - until I checked out the stereo versions! Agree again on the DVD-V, some of the live DVD's are excellent in stereo!

Good shout on the SACD difference to DVD-A there Okill. And DVD-V in stereo LPCM can sound excellent too. Dave Gilmours Meltdown is a case in point 24 Bit – 48Khz LPCM as hi-res as my ears get.

Originally Posted by Rachael Bitchlist

About the DVD-V spec. I'm not too good on tech stuff but I know DVD-V can carry up to 640 kps Dolby. That's stille lossy but it's a bit-rate where things are starting to sound pretty good. I've been impressed with it on D-VHS and now again on HD-DVD. Is DVD-V capable of something beyond that, that is not DVD-A? DVD has always been allowed to use up to 640 kps but never has as far as I know.

Linear PCM wise is where DVD-V can really kick some hi-res sand IMHO, for example the old DAD DVD-V based system was stereo LPCM 24/96, which in effect is what 24/96 & 24/192 stereo PCM from DVD-A are too 192 obviosuly a higher sampling rate. I have heard some DVD-A 5.1 stuff when downsampled and listened to in stereo for example Porcupine Tree – In Absentia 5.1-24/48 sounding excellent in stereo (down to the hardware of course and recording matsering). I think the main point about getting good stereo from DVD-V is getting onto the 24 Bit LPCM plane, I am a huge fan of HDCD and its 20 Bit resolution give

DVD-V can sound excellent even 5.1 mixes – Check out Goldfrapps latest DVD-V excellent to my ears, sometimes I prefer a 5.1 DD mix – via stereo output than I do of the 16/48 LPCM mix. Baffling this hobby IMHO.


Gav excellent post BTW.