CD vs SACD source dilemma

[NonSense]

I am looking to get some feedback from those who have been fortunate enough to have experimented with the SACD format. More specifically with a 2CH playback of SACD.


I am slowly trying to piece together a system for a sitting room, that I hope will result in excellent sound reproduction. However, I am currently torn between format capability of the source device.

Some background:

I have a mid level home theater settup in the basement, which I am completely satisfied with its' multi-channel performance. I have also come to the conclusion, that some of the tradoffs made when stringing a budget out over a 5 channel system, are the comprimises I now wish to avoid. (Not to mention having a large display device smack in the middle of the soundstage)

This system will be a dedicated 2CH, and with the nature of the room, it will be unlikely that any additional channels will be added.


First question. How available is SACD in a 2 channel format. Moving forward, does this seem to be a supported format. (From what I've read, the regular SACD seems to be having enough trouble.) I've been looking at player's with 2Ch playback, with most having 5 channel capability. Are 2CH players capable of playback of any SACD or only those with specific 2CH track formatting. I have flipped through the racks at the local "record" shop and most of the jacketing list 5.1 format encoding with no mention of a 2CH format. I wouldn't expect the unit could pre-process a 5CH signal into 2CH's. I have also heard that some SACD with 2CH encoding are just that, Redbood CD mastering encoded into 2Ch format. Therefore, sounding exactly like the CD. But, none the less, several upscale manufacturers have moved to universal players, limiting their CD offerings.

Next question. I know this question totally depends on any given implementation. However, would you say that there is usually a compromise of redbook playback on SACD players? Would you still recommend a dedicated CD source, or do SACD players generally produce a considerably close performance that the compromise is worth the future frexibilty. I have a reasonbly large redbook CD collection that would be getting the bulk of the the usage in the near future anyway.


Thanks

[Bam!]

Hi there!

I'll throw in my 2 cents here.....

I was once thinking of SACD.....and here's what I have come to realize...

The one thing you can do is buy a good redbook player that does SACD also....like the Maverick let's say......

The problem is SACD is almost as good as vinyl (IMO) as far as sound goes....without all the hassles of vinyl.....the only problems are the future of SACD and the available software.

2 channel SACD's are not a problem to find....how many are there.....well that's the problem...and they are quite pricey.

Seems like future is going to be Blu Ray or HD DVD....not sure on how close they are but that's what some companies are focusing on.

So...as for me, I went with a decent redbook player....and a decent TT....

Just my 2 cents...

[Evil Twin]

Well, I've had SACD almost since it was introduced; have a pretty good size collection of disks.

Now, I wouldn't say that SACD players compromise CD playback. OTOH, a $2K - $3K SACD player can have pretty good SACD playback, but still not equal an optimal choice in a $1K DAC. This is true of dedicated CD players also, though.

There's a much wider selection of SACD disks then in the first year or two, but there are still questions about the format; it may continue as a niche specialty, or who knows, it may die.. the latter would be most unfortunate, IMO.

My choice, given there are so many interesting CDs and SACDs, I can't possibly buy all that I like. So, I tend to focus on hybrid SACDs, where I can get both SACD and a usually excellent CD layer.

I have a few DVD-A disks, and one player, but it doesn't hold the same interest for me.

SACD is as close as you'll get to good vinyl with a commerically available digital format. But a top flight player, that reaches the level of potential for SACD that something like the Benchmark DAC1 reaches for CD will set you back quite a bit of money. The Krell SACD Standard used to be a good recommendation at $4K, but due to transport availability issues, hasn't been available for a while. For a first tier SACD player, especially a universal type player, the Esoteric DV 50 would be my recommendation, though for "dedicated SACD", I'd recommend the Esoteric X-01 over it. It also has very good CD playback.

Esoteric X-01 Review

Lest this seem too pricey, check out what Elgar charges.

If you have limited funds, say, only $1K or so, my best advice for current musical enjoyment would be getting a DAC1 to enjoy your CD's ahd the CD layer of SACD hybrids, and start collecting hybrid SACDs in music genre's you like. I can't think of a sub $1K SACD player I'd recommend very whole heartedly at this point. Most won't sound as good on SACD as a DAC1 will with the CD hybrid layer.

But perhaps some other folks on the forum know one they're happy with.

[Kevin P]

All SACDs, multichannel or not, should also have a 2-channel track that can be played on 2-channel or multi-channel SACD players.

2-channel-only SACD players can only play the 2-channel track on SACDs. They won't play the multi-channel track.

If you're looking for a quality 2-channel SACD player on a budget, your best bet might be to find a used one on Audiogon or Ebay. Most newer players are multichannel, and (unless you go with one of the big-$ models) are either cheaply made and/or probably don't have the quality DACs that the early-generation Sony ES and Philips players had. Look for something like the Sony SCD-1ES, SCD-777ES or DVP-S9000ES (I have the latter and it sounds wonderful with SACD, and it's no slouch of a CD player either). Another decent SACD unit, if you're looking for a carousel, is a used SCD-C555ES or SCD-C222ES.

[NonSense]

Thanks for all your great input.

I'm not really on a tight buget for this settup.

The main issue that I am facing is that the units that I am comparing offer excellent CD playback at around 2K+ with its SACD capable sibling pushing 3.5K after all is said and done. It's still a chunk of change, so future proofing is somewhere on the checklist, but I'm not convinced that the 2CH SACD is a good bet on the future. The sample SACD's that I've heard were outstanding, but not titles I am interested in purchasing. Jazz seems to have embraced this format, however, more mainstream music is found to be lacking, especially in the 2CH SACD format. If the 2CH layer of the SACD is generally in CD format to offer compatability for the bulk of the users(car stereo etc), I must conclude that the 2CH SACD is indeed a nitch product and likely not worth with the extra right now.

Any addition feedback would be great!


Thanks

[audiofan]

I have denon dvd-2200 which plays both CD, SACD, and DVD-A. I first don't like the sound of SACD coming from my player. But after tweakling here and there and a new set of interconnect, the sound now comes back to life. I like it. I know it's not perfect, but i'm happy where i am right now and like Bam mentioned, I'm waiting for HD-DVD...

DAC-1 is also on my list but its price is over my budget right now.

[shokhead]

Lets see,4 trackers waited for 8 track and 8 trackers waited for cassette and they waited for CD's and the waited for DVD-A and SACD and now blue-ray and HD-DVD and as soon as you get that,all discs will be on the out and it will be all hard drive or mirco chip so it will never stop for us to catch up. They really have us by the Ba$$s.