The best CD Player for the money

mtkh, I think I start to agree w you. When my system getting better and more revealing. I start to find that the DSD or XRCD format getting less natural. Its sound fake compare to the normal cd. Though I think some redbook do sound bad. But with the good company production, it sound way more natural than highly 'markup' cd format. Are DSD or XRCD are markup' version?

Opinion?

Sorry for going off topic.

The problem with SACD is that your choice of machines is limited. None are non-oversampling, and if you want to hear it all (believe me, there is a whole lot more contained in 16 bit than most people know), try a really good non-oversampler.

Milen007, DSD is a fundamentally different way of reading the bits of a disc than PCM. The laser is thinner and the bits are smaller so hence can read more data. XRCD is a recording process, I think owned by JVC, that optimizes the recording and transfer via supreme wordclocking tools. Its a bit technical here, but it fundamentally increases the timing accuracy, which benefits soundstage clarity, micro resolution, tonal definition, providing a more analog listening experience. Diana Krall's Look Of Love is a good example, I have RBCD, SACD and XRCD and the XRCD sounds the most analog of them all, and most satisfying.

I agree with Muralman on the fact that its not really the format, but the recording and transfer process that defines how good it sounds. If both come together than DSD well recorded can sound out of this world, for example the Blue Coast Records ESE sessions is an excellent DSD recording.

Muralman1, what do you mean by oversampling? its 24/128 means oversampling?

Mtkhl567, i have few DSD that sound good but some worse. i might be the same case with redbook. as come recording company make better recording than other.

Milen007, check out Kusunoki's explanation.

http://www.sakurasystems.com/articles/Kusunoki.html