In order of Importance DVD-A,SACD,or HDCD??

[chinets]

Hi everyone,
In order of Importance which is the better sound with respect to quality of sound ??? DVD-A, SACD, or HDCD??? And what are the differences one would expect to hear in these three forms and I urge you to respond In detail please????
Thanks,
Chinets

[Kal Rubinson]

I will not answer the question because the issue of repertoire completely overwhelms the small technical differences between SACD and DVD-A. (HDCD, imho, doesn't count.) Given that both formats are fading from the general market, if, indeed, they ever really penetrated it, the only factor is whether you can buy a disc with music that you want to hear. For me, it is more than 10:1 in favor of SACD and I still get several every week. There are no comparable releases on DVD-A.

Now that's a consequence of my musical preferences. Yours may differ.

Kal

[DifferentLee]

It's great to see Kal here. I really enjoy your writing in Stereophile.

I do agree with Kal as I find many titles in Super Audio I really enjoy and see really no real slowdown at the boutique labels I like.

[chinets]

I understand that there are more titles to choose from in SACD but is the quality of sound of DVD-A better than SACD or the other way round. Now that you have ruled out HDCD from the equation, which format sounds better regardless whether there were more titles in one format than another. Let us asume DVD-A had numerous titles more than SACD would you still choose SACD as your favourite format????

[gd]

the only factor is whether you can buy a disc with music that you want to hear.

On the nose-y!... music first, format second... a distant second.

but is the quality of sound of DVD-A better than SACD or the other way round????

There's no way to answer that unless there are a significant number of titles available in both formats to do a fair comparison... so trying to establish one or the other format as superior is pointless... all you can do is buy music you like on whatever format, and hope someone has mastered it properly (not guaranteed on any format).

Don't worry... high-res something will show up eventually to ride on the coattails of whatever hi-def video format survives.

Or more likely, computers and high-speed connections will become ubiquitous enough for eveyone to access lossless downloads eventually... and ditch physical carriers altogether.

[Kal Rubinson]

I understand that there are more titles to choose from in SACD but is the quality of sound of DVD-A better than SACD or the other way round. Now that you have ruled out HDCD from the equation, which format sounds better regardless whether there were more titles in one format than another. Let us asume DVD-A had numerous titles more than SACD would you still choose SACD as your favourite format????

Note my reference to "small technical differences." They are, to me, inconsequential and, with the lack of much of a duplicate repertoire, irrelevant. I could live happily with either if there is music on them. For me, there's too little on DVD-A and lots on SACD. I own close to 1500 SACDs and about 100 DVD-As.

Kal

[wildfire99]

I didn't know they had 1500 SACD titles in existence... wow.

[Vinny]

I didn't know they had 1500 SACD titles in existence... wow.

More than 3700 SACDs exist :B
Check this out

http://www.sa-cd.net/

They do not include lots of foreign SACDs as well

[JonMarsh]

I'm with Kal on this one, too, though not on the same scale, as a have a few hundred SACD's, and less than 20 DVD-A.

Get a top notch stereo universal player like the Ayre C5xe and you'll get great (and similar) sound with either one.

[DifferentLee]

Get a top notch stereo universal player like the Ayre C5xe

Been thinking about getting that machine but recently I've been auditioning the Marantz SA11 which also sounds great.

[aud19]

Yeah they're both of equivelant quality, myself I own about 15 DVD-A's and only 2 SACD's... :lol:

[gianni]

On the nose-y!... music first, format second... a distant second.

Or more likely, computers and high-speed connections will become ubiquitous enough for eveyone to access lossless downloads eventually... and ditch physical carriers altogether.

I think there are a good many of us, even the ones who are pretty computer literate who are dreading this day. Ditching of physical carriers is the last thing we want. That would indeed be a sad day.

[gd]

I don't like it, either.

But I think it's coming.

With music itself having to share space with an increasing number of entertainment options / diversions, those who distribute such goods will always shoot for the lowest common denominator... most consumers just don't care -- make it cheap, easy and stylish.

What that means for the few of us that really appreciate music and good playback is that we'll always have to go the extra mile to have those things.

And of course, it's always been that way.

[David Meek]

I think that the majority of people - spearheaded by the younger generations - will move almost exclusively to the "downloadable" domain of music. I mean, look at the convenience of it. Look at the ability to download only what you want. Look at the eventual and potential cost-savings of it. You have to admit that it IS attractive in all those respects. However, there will still be a market - albiet niche - comprised of people like us that want a little bit more - okay, maybe a good bit more - in the way of quality and also in collectible artifacts like CDs, SACDs, albums, etc. As long as there is a minimally reasonable market for things, there will be a group of businesses willing to carry it forward. Look at vinyl for a good example. It's been written off for years as a niche, elitist, quirky, difficult-to-use medium, but it's selling better now than it has in decades. Not only media, but new turtables, arms and cartridges.

High-def dead? No, not by a long shot. But, if the studios and manufacturers don't get their act together and offer a single superior product, it'll languish as a niche forever.

[Kal Rubinson]

I think that the majority of people - spearheaded by the younger generations - will move almost exclusively to the "downloadable" domain of music. I mean, look at the convenience of it. Look at the ability to download only what you want. Look at the eventual and potential cost-savings of it. You have to admit that it IS attractive in all those respects.

For some. I have no problem with the physical discs containing what I want and, generally, nothing I want to exclude. Of course, I listen, almost exclusively, to classical music. As for convenience, this would require me to add computers to my systems and they would have to be remarkably quiet (acoustically and electrically), unlike the ones in my offices.

Downloads? Yeah but I ain't seen anyplace with what I want and can get on disc.

Now, I will admit that I agree with you about the inevitability of this becoming the standard delivery system but not for me for quite a while.

Kal

[JonMarsh]

Remarkably quiet? Yeah, something like an iMac G5, with digital outputs driving a Benchmark DAC1, Front Row software with remote control playing albums/playlists/songs using Apple Lossless encoded CD's?



It works rather well, especially in comparison to all the possible PC based server configurations I've researched over the last two years before buying this.

Internal storage is 250 GB, but it's also easy to extend with Firewire or USB 2 externally. Apple losses reduces file sizes by about 40% compared with the original uncompressed .WAV format; works like Meridian lossless, with 16 bit CD data.

[Kal Rubinson]

Remarkably quiet? Yeah, something like an iMac G5, with digital outputs driving a Benchmark DAC1, Front Row software with remote control playing albums/playlists/songs using Apple Lossless encoded CD's?

2 channel only and not compatible with any of my acoustical analysis software. I'd also have to find a source of downloadable MCH music (that's promised, I understand.). Since I never got around to digitizing my LPs, I doubt if I'd have the patience to record/store the silver discs I have. Too lazy.

Also, there's no place in the room for it although, if it could replace some of the present components, I might be able to squeeze it into the rack. Oh, and I have no high speed internet access at the house, only the apartment.

Just not for me at the present state of the art.

Kal (now on dial-up)

[sokoban]

If you Don't have the space for a full sized computer, check out apple's "Airport Express". It is a wall-wart sized 802.11 hub that can be connected to a USB Printer, Ethernet, or aduio in the form of a 1/8 inch mini headphone/optical jack. The headphone out is unremarkable, but the optical out sounds great. Only problem is that the Airport Express is only designed to use iTunes, so ALAC is your only choice of lossless codec (no FLAC or SHN support).

[Kal Rubinson]

If you Don't have the space for a full sized computer, check out apple's "Airport Express". It is a wall-wart sized 802.11 hub that can be connected to a USB Printer, Ethernet, or aduio in the form of a 1/8 inch mini headphone/optical jack. The headphone out is unremarkable, but the optical out sounds great. Only problem is that the Airport Express is only designed to use iTunes, so ALAC is your only choice of lossless codec (no FLAC or SHN support).

OK but this only addresses one of the problems I have with using a computer as a music source. Frankly, there's too much fuss necessary at this stage of developments.

Kal

[alebonau]

OK but this only addresses one of the problems I have with using a computer as a music source. Frankly, there's too much fuss necessary at this stage of developments.

Kal

I find it pretty conveneint to just load a plain old cd or LP I want to listen to, listen to the tracks I want and then change to another disc if I want to listen to anything else. Honestly don't know why people find that such a hassle. I find it handy to have the disc cover in the hand at the time, can check over track names an additional info etc.

[Kal Rubinson]

I find it pretty conveneint to just load a plain old cd or LP I want to listen to, listen to the tracks I want and then change to another disc if I want to listen to anything else. Honestly don't know why people find that such a hassle. I find it handy to have the disc cover in the hand at the time, can check over track names an additional info etc.

First, that assumes one has a PC in the listening room but I will grant that point even though I do not have one in either listening room. Second, I may only want to hear a part of the CD or LP now (and that's usual) but that means that the disc is half stored and half not. Makes finding it later more complex. Third, it requires me to enter data, something I am not interested in doing, especially when I want to listen to music. Fourth, it's still 2-CHANNEL ONLY! I listen mostly to SACD and DVD-A.

Kal

[alebonau]

First, that assumes one has a PC in the listening room but I will grant that point even though I do not have one in either listening room. Second, I may only want to hear a part of the CD or LP now (and that's usual) but that means that the disc is half stored and half not. Makes finding it later more complex. Third, it requires me to enter data, something I am not interested in doing, especially when I want to listen to music. Fourth, it's still 2-CHANNEL ONLY! I listen mostly to SACD and DVD-A.

Kal

hehehe I was actually saying I prefer just playing the discs themselves rather than getting a pc involved in the process.

yes I quite often just play part cd or lp too, certain tracks that might be favourites

[Herbonbay]

How about the lost pleasure of wandering around a good record store? Funny, I still call them record stores. Disk store just doesn't feel right. How many times have you simply discovered a recording, one by a known artist that you weren't aware of, one you had forgotten about, one you had never heard of but it just looked interesting. Down loading will never share that serendipity. Some of my favorite recordings were stumbled upon. Have you ever bought a recording simply because the cover impressed you. Guilty. I'll also buy a bottle of wine based on nothing more than the lable. Simple minded? Shallow? Maybe, but I've always figured that art is art. I assume that the vintners aesthetic sensibilities as reflected by his lable might shine some light on his dedication to the grape. Following this admittedly limited philosophy, I have purchased quite a lot of undrinkable wine and music that I don't listen to. But! Occasionally you find that gem! The point, I think I'm attempting to make, is concerning the loss of this enjoyable stumbling. Down loading is so directed. You go online to down load cut 2 , and what, if anything, do you happen upon in the process? When everything becomes down loadable, what will everything be, and who will decide what everything is? 8O

[Kal Rubinson]

hehehe I was actually saying I prefer just playing the discs themselves rather than getting a pc involved in the process.
yes I quite often just play part cd or lp too, certain tracks that might be favourites

Hah! Did I misread you!! Yes, I prefer to play the music and do as little else as possible in the process. Sure, my setups are somewhat complex and required a lot of time to configure but use is simple (except for my wife).

When I want to hear a piece of music, I don't want to have to do anything else. Pop in the disc or drop the tone arm and we're off!

Kal

[alebonau]

Hah! Did I misread you!! ~

Kal

hehehe I thought you might have. What disc player do you use Kal for CD/SACD/DVDA replay ?

does sony's apparent abandonement of SACD and DVD-A material's absolute lack of presence in the market place worry you ?

[Kal Rubinson]

hehehe I thought you might have. What disc player do you use Kal for CD/SACD/DVDA replay ?

Sony XA9000EX
Sony XA777EX
BelCanto PL-1A
Sim Moon Orbiter
Denon DVD-3910

does sony's apparent abandonement of SACD and DVD-A material's absolute lack of presence in the market place worry you ?

It did but (1) Sony released so few SACDs that I cared about that they were never anything but a cheerleader and (2) DVD-A repertoire never matched my interests anyway. Yes, it is depressing but I still get more than a half dozen new SACD releases a week and that's only because I am selective. :B

Kal

[alebonau]

Sony XA9000EX
Sony XA777EX
BelCanto PL-1A
Sim Moon Orbiter
Denon DVD-3910


It did but (1) Sony released so few SACDs that I cared about that they were never anything but a cheerleader and (2) DVD-A repertoire never matched my interests anyway. Yes, it is depressing but I still get more than a half dozen new SACD releases a week and that's only because I am selective. :B

Kal

hehehe you are certainly spoilt for choice with a beautifull collection of disc players that you have there.

I had to ask you see as had this sacd bee thats been buzzing around my brain though think I might have left it a bit late to make the jump. My denon 2900 & my dedicated CD & LP setup might just have to play the discs I have in these formats.

Anyway glad to hear your enjoying music in all the formats that we have at present.

[Kal Rubinson]

Anyway glad to hear your enjoying music in all the formats that we have at present.

Some more than others. 8)

Kal

[DifferentLee]

I am probably buying 6 SACDs a week as well as we still are getting great pop titles also like the new Byrds Notorious from MoFi on May 23rd.

[DifferentLee]

Look at vinyl for a good example. It's been written off for years as a niche, elitist, quirky, difficult-to-use medium, but it's selling better now than it has in decades. Not only media, but new turtables, arms and cartridges.

Yes, and why couldn't SACD perhaps remain in a similar thriving niche if the boutiques keep releasing product? Still tons of releases in classical and jazz fortunately.