Looking to compare SACD sound with redbook

If you have an extensive CD collection, you can't replace it with SACD, because the SACD versions of 95% of it don't exist, and never will. I second Big's comment that the major difference is in the remastering, not the higher resolution. And remember that in the vast majority of hybrids, the SACD and Redbook layers use different masters, so when you compare them you're comparing the mastering, not the bits.

I had an ear opening experience this weekend during a comparative listening session when a fellow Audiogoner brought over his hybrid SACD/CD copy of Pink Floyd's DSOTM. He wanted to demonstrate how you could clearly hear the distant voices at the beginning of the album. He played the multi track SACD layer and sure enough the voices could be clearly heard, and there was very, very little noise in the track. When we swtiched to the 2 channel SACD layer, there was a significant amount of hiss and the voices couldn't be heard nearly as well. The redbook layer was quite close in quality to the 2 channel SACD version. I mention this as an example of how SACD vs. Redbook can be nearly indistinguishable if no attention is paid to the SACD re-master. On the other hand, when care is taken to re-master the original tape...as was obviously done for the multi-track layer...the results can be stunning. But I wonder how the redbook layer would've compared had the same attention to detail been paid to the redbook layer as to the multi track SACD layer?

Thanks to Stehno, Bignerd100, pabelson and Tvad for your comments -t is helping me get a better feel for what is going on.
Stehno, do you have a player in mind that does this (emphasizes high quality rebook play, yet play SACD for less than 2K)
Sound like the ocnsensus so far is that if you stuck to very carefully done redbooks, they would near SACD quality, but human nature being what it is we can expect good improvements such as Pink Floyd's on reissues because of the extra care given to SACD.
Gammajo

There is no point in paying extra for SACD, in my opinion. It's nice to have as a curiosity for those certain SACDs that are exceptionally well produced. But, SACD and DVD-A are dead for all practical purposes. The next step is hi-rez downloadable music files and players. There are several good CD/SACD players that do redbook very well and offer SACD as a bonus. If you can pick up an Exemplar Denon 2900 for $2000-$2300, that would be my first choice. The Sony SCD-1 would be my second choice if for no other reason than it's status as the first true statement CD/SACD player, and the resultant strong re-sale value.

I have a question that is directly related to this topic. I got into SACD because some of my favorite artists were being remastered (Police, Peter Gabriel, Dylan, Miles Davis, etc.) into the format. To my ears, the SACD of Ghost in the Machine is far better than one of the earlier redbook versions of that same album. Now, sticking with the Police for the moment, there discs have been remasterd several times since there original transfer into digital back in the 80's. So, in cases where discs are hybrids and contain both SACD layers and redbook layers, is the redbook layer the most recent remastering pre SACD?

I owned an Exemplar Denon 2900 for 5 months before I just sold it. Before that I owned the Sony XA777. The Exemplar completely bested the XA777 on redbook, but I found the two equivalent on SACD. The redbook performance of the Exemplar 2900 had me buying the recently remastered version of several Miles Davis CD's instead of looking for the SACD's. That player made me think twice about my investment in SACD.

I have about 140 SACD's now, and only about 25 of them are non-hybrid. Most of it is music I did not repurchase but was new music to me. My experience with the Exemplar Denon 2900 has me questioning what kind of player will be next for me, an awesome redbook player, or, a Universal of some kind.

Good thread, thanks,