When does SACD make sense - my theory

I certainly hope you're right about Mr.Meitner's magic moving downstream.

Thanks for sharing your list.

Look forward to some feedback after you get the 6.

I don't have $15,000 invested in my digitial, $2,500 for my SCD-1 and $2,500 for my modifications. $5,000 total. The same $5,000 would hardly begin to buy the phono pre-amp, table, arm and cartrige I'd need to justify my equipment. Even at $5,000 the quality of most SACD playback is very noticable and well worth the money. SACD at least half the time is equal in cost to CD, so that issue is over. Vinyl is still about $30.
I just got Nora Jones on SACD last week. The improvement is amazing. The imaging of Nora's voice is so real. Great soundstage and much less harsh on the piano.
This "SACD make sense" discussion has raged for three years now. Some who "would never" buy SACD have and are now writting about how great it is. I have spent three years enjoying the great but limited library and have no regrets. The improvement in CD playback alone has justified every dime spent.
Oh yea, "Best Buy" or on line "Music Direct", Elusive Disc" and "Acoustic Sounds". The same places you should have been shopping for vinal.

Certainly going back to the original digital tapes and remastering a lousy 80s CD release in DSD will yield a huge improvement, much more than doing the same with a (really good) analogue master tape from the same era.

It all depends on the quality of the original master tape (and not all reissue-ers have access to the original masters).

And it's also important to note that, in the early to mid 80s, engineers and designers had already refined analogue recording and reproduction to a very high degree: it was a mature technology. At that time, PCM digital was new and, by comparison, raw.

DSD itself is already evolving: Meitner's Mk IV ADCs have already doubled the original DSD sampling rate.

I myself only have one SACD that was made in DSD from beginning to end of the recording chain--and it's not music I like that much--all the others are reissues, mostly from vinyl.

I'm hoping for a big increase in SACDs made from original DSD, and not analogue or PCM, masters. Until then I don't think the technology can demonstrate its true potential.

Ideally, all new recordings should be mastered in DSD, but released in a dual-layer SACD/CD (and, later, SACD/DVD-A). It's easy to convert to analogue or PCM digital from DSD.

But, when I think of it, none of the new releases I've bought in the last year were available as SACDs (or DVD-A for that matter). The expection might be Patricia Barber, but I do balk somewhat at paying virtually double.

I think the early Stones reissues were very well done. I have most of it on vinyl, though some in very bad shape and I really appreciate the SACDs: they're certainly a few cuts above the same albums I have in early CD versions. Even the PCM layer on the hybrids is better than the earlier CD versions.

Happy listening all!

Joel.

I agree, DSD recording do need to become more common. I also don't relish buying a CD and then finding out that they are releasing it on SACD, so I have to buy it again.

And RSBeck, I dont know if you know this or not, but I am your long lost brother! My birthday was April 29th, so anytime you need to get rid of any other equipment, I won't feel hurt by the belated gift.

Justin

Justin -- LOL.