SACD - what gives?

Ever since I first heard about SACD, I have thought it had promise. But, I too have observed that most SACD releases are older material. Which is one reason why I haven't jumped on the SACD boat. I figure I can get these recordings on LP (either original or reissue). This saves me the cost of a SACD player. The money saved could be used for turntable upgrades, which would be good for my entire record collection.

In a way, I'm reminded of the line that the electronics industry keeps coming up with new formats just so they can sell the same recordings over and over again.

I have to agree with all of the points being made. I probably have about a half dozen SACD's and that's it. I'm not buying recordings that i don't want to listen to, regardless of how good they are supposed to sound and / or the quality of "re-mastering". We want / need new music on these formats if you want new people to invest in the technology. Sean
>

C'mon you middle age men, buy more SACDs. If there is demand, then there will be more SACD titles in the future. Afterwards, when I can get all my favorite bands on SACD, I'll jump in.

I feel I have to chime in here as well and feel compelled to add, that apart from being of the same opinion with everything said above, I feel that SACD -even with the "best" players - is a distinct disappointment as far as the upper highs are concerned and considering the financial state of the larger recording companies, we can wait a long time for new issues, which are musically or sonically worth their money. I own about 6 new issue discs and found them mostly lacking artistically and sometimes also sonically (high end of the spectrum). As far as the reissues are concerned, I must bluntly state, that my old LPs sound worlds better on my rig. ( They "breathe", whereas with SACD the highs are "dead" or blotted out by that omnipresent hiss, which you invariably get, if you have tweaters worth writing home about ) A disappointment, because I had put high hopes in this technology. So my SACD players is collecting dust and no Vigggen, no way, nor more SACDs, at least not for the time being.... (-:

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 ??!!?