SACD Opinions: Gimmick? Like it? Don't? Why?

Rsbeck...I'm not going to get involved with the argument about whether single media players are better than universal ones, but if you are correct about that, the explanation you cite is not the reason. "Stuff everything into one box". Practically everything necessary for one media is necessary for the others, and there is lots of empty space inside even a universal player. There is absolutely no technical reason why universal players should be inferior to single media ones, and there is certainly oportunity for cost reduction. Put the $ that would go for an extra transport, power supply, chassis, marketing, etc. into better clock and analog output circuits.

Well Eldartford, if that is the case...then why do almost all redbook player only lovers report that sacd players have poor redbook playback when compared to their beloved redbook only players? Help us out here!!

Dave

The best SACD setup I heard was no better than the best CDPs I have heard to date. Im sure SACD has better future potential no question, but we have still yet to find the true limits of basic 16bit 44.1khz players. Ive heard a few stunning CD players that were just plain incredible.

I have heard SACD and DVD-Audio extensively through different players and systems.Players I have used or heard are:Stock Pioneer DV-47A and DV-47Ai, stock and modified.A Sony DVP-999ES, and a Rotel unit[DVD-AUDIO].My opinion is that SACD is great, better than CD.Warmer, denser, more open, and detailed, without HF grain and edge, and generally smoother and slightly more laid-back than CD's.But to my ears DVD-Audio is as good or better.I was much more impressed the first time I heard Dvd-Audio!To me and my friends it sounds even more open,had better impact, better focus, and was slightly more dynamic and immediate.On the other hand, some of the discs had a little grain in the highs.
If I had my choice, I would choose DVD-Audio as the medium of the future.I get more excited and involved emotionally in the music when I listen to DVD-Audio over all other formats.I would recommend a good universal player such as a Denon DVD-2900 or better,a Denon DVD-5900 or a Marantz DV-8400.That way you can play all formats and choose for yourself.I think you would like both SACD and DVD-Audio over regular CD's if you have a good system.

Eldart -- I understand what you're saying, but I think we're talking about the difference between theory and reality. In theory, there
*may* be no reason a U-player like the Yamaha or the Denon
should be sonically inferior to a dedicated CD/SACD player like the Sony SCD XA 777ES. In fact, with all of the theoretical savings
in production costs, it *may* be that the less expensive U-Player
*should* be sonically competitive with the more expensive Sony.
But, in reality, there's no competition. The dedicated CD/SACD player is a quantum leap forward. So, I don't recommend the
U-Players. Perhaps the producers of the Universal Players are
charging a premium for putting everything in one box rather than
using the theoretical savings to increase the quality of the parts.
The Sony did MSRP for $3,000 which is three times the price of
these U-players and doesn't have DVD or DVD-A play-back, so
perhaps that explains it. Bottom line -- I still don't recommend the Universal Players -- I recommend spending a little more money to get player like the Sony, used, and combine it with something like a Denon 1200. You'll get much better sound, you'll have all your
formats covered, top notch DVD play-back, and your upgrade path will be easier and more cost effective. So, I will concede your point
that theoretically there should be enough room inside a U-player
to produce quality sound, but in reality, it doesn't work out that way.