2. misc-audio
  3. 978823629

SACD WINS!

I advise all those who have spent time researching or trashing SACD to visit www.stereophile.com and learn what the industry is talking about todat at the Consumer Electronics Show in LasVegas. Here is a short portion or the current artical "Record labels strongly support the format. More than 235 SACD titles are now available, encompassing "all types of music by major artists," in Demuynck's words, "and all of [it] compatible with existing CD players. We believe in exponential growth for the SACD hybrid." The SACD-1000 should appear in showrooms toward the end of January. At the Philips conference, no mention was made of DVD-Audio, a promising format that seemed to be missing in action so far at CES, at least on the day before the Show officially opens."
128x128jadem6
djs
13 posts
 
P.S. the resolution of a system is easily calculated. For PCM represented with binary numbers you can figure the resolution by raising 2 to the number of bits in a single word. An 8 bit system has 256 possible levels, a 16 bit system has 65,536 possible levels, and a 24 bit system has 16,777,216 possible levels to describe. A 1 bit system like 1 bit Delta Sigma or SACD has only 2 possible levels therefor you must average some pulses to reproduce any given level. If I want a 1 bit system with a resolution the same as an 8 bit system I would need to average 256 pulses, a 16 bit system would need 65,536 pulses to be averaged. (For 8 bit resolution, If I want a "1" I would turn on 1 pulse and turn off the 255, if I wanted a "200" I would turn on 200 pulses and turn off 56, ect...) So to calculate the resolution of a 1 bit system at any frequency just calculate how many pulses it can produce at that frequency.
djs
13 posts
 
SACD still has roughly 5 bits of resolution at 100Khz while conventional PCM is limited to the niquist frequency of half its sampling rate, 22.05Khz for a CD. The Nyquist frequency for SACD is also half of its sampling rate, 1.4Mhz.
jadem6's avatar
jadem6 OP
1,071 posts
 
YAWN! All I know as a peon guy who loves music is SACD sounds great, better than anything to date to my non scientificly trained ears. Thanks for the info Dustin.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
SACD has hit first, and that means it has hit twice. Never mind that the blow is pretty weak, as we all know industry trends are usually commercially driven and not quality driven. Almost all of the SACD material out there does not significantly improve on what's achievable with standard redbook CDs. The best sound in the market today comes from 24/96 recorded DVD-A. Unfortunately, if the very proponents of that format, such as Chesky, abandon it for the lure of bigger bucks with Sony's support, the result is, at best, compromise. Arguably, many redbook CDs sound better than most of the SACDs out there. Sony, or someone, is going to have to do better than this. For starters they need to build a decent SACD player in a reasonable price range. Then they need to dramatically improve the recording and mastering process.
no_money
565 posts
 
Joe, Have you taken any of the current players home? The s9000es is only 1500 retail and is built like a tank.
More to discover