SACD - what gives?

Detlof, your comments above are VERY interesting, indeed I had wanted to ask you about this upper end /hi-rez point.
I've had a similar misgiving about the upper end reproduction. This I attributed to my less-than-stellar tweets (even though my electronics are wide-bandwidth). Although the analogue sounded subjectively better --through the same speakers, of course-- I assumed this was due to loss of detail on the sacd format... (even though, SUPPOSEDLY, my tweets lose their proverbial 3db at 36kHz.)

It's good to know that a mega system like yours (with upper tweets worth their salt!) gives the same experience. Elsewhere, I read a post by Mikelavigne (also the owner of a world class system) comparing his top Rockport, to a new digital set-up. He found the analogue still overall superior to the digital set-up (he didn't go into details).

On a side note, and strangely, I've found that the redbook layer on certain (dual layer) sacd's sounds better than the older single-layer redbook ??!!?

Hello Greg, good to hear from you and that you've made the same experience, regarding high-end resolution of the SACD processing. As I remember now-and if I recall right - there was a technical discussion here on these pages about 3 months ago about the very same topic, giving objective reasons for what both of us seem to hear. Sorry, for being a tad off topic, by the way. But I thought we have a point here, interesting enough to be worth mentioning.
P.S. By the way, have not listened to the Meitner DAC6 by the way, which seems to be the latest king of the SACD hill.
I own a Sony SCD XA777ES with the 4k Audience mod. Cheers,

The software also drives the hatdware. If there's nothing to justify or play on the latest and greatest peice of equipment, then there is no reason to buy it. Imagine what would have happened to the original Apple computer if there wasn't a program called Visicalc (spreadsheet). Apple would be out of business and Steve Jobs would be bagging groceries at the local market.

I'm not going to buy music I'm not familiar with, or haven't heard yet, just to have the latest and greatest.

Thanks for all the great post and insight.

prpixel

I get the feeling of being in the minority (or perhaps composing it myself). I have neither an analog rig nor good tweeters which perhaps makes me more satisfied with SACD than I should be but I am reasonably happy with SACD so far.

Perhaps my age and the fact that my financial ability to support a music habit (no real access to used software) is somewhat recent have something to do with it but most of the older re-issues I've bought have been first-time purchases of that particular music), especially in the jazz category (grew up listening to others' copies).

Some new issues are absolutely fabulous - musically and sonically. e.g. Prieres Sans Paroles (BIS), the Eric Bibb discs (Opus 3), Wispelwey playing Britten cello concertos (Channel Classics), and the list goes on.

Gregm, the redbook layer being better... I've noticed it too. perhaps due to the re-mastering? A lot of the re-issues I've seen have been 20-24-bit re-masters on the redbook layer.

Detlof, I too remember a thread or two about the limitations of SACD at high frequencies. At least one of the threads is here.

This and 2cts will get you 2cts. Travis

Needs more time. I remember when DVD was never going catch on. SACD is better than CD on my system. I look forward to some new tune being recorded in DSD.

Tim