2. misc-audio
  3. 1165361396

SACD and an audiophile question


I recently bought a DVD player that is also an SACD
player. Denon 1930CI. It has some nice features, including one called Direct digital. It basically turns off everything not needed, display etc.
I ordered a 2 channel single layer SACD. Boston's first album. I compared it to the normal CD you would buy at any walmart. I can hear a difference, but its very little difference.
First thing that came to mind is my system isn't really an "audiophile" system: The Denon mentioned above, Anthem TLP-1 Pre-amp, and Rotel RB960BX Dual mono 60w/ch amp, currently using Paradigm Studio 60's V3(stereophile class B rated)(Have a Linn Genki CD player, being repaired, and Magnepan 2.7's as well, not currently hooked up.)
While some would snub their nose at this system, it's still leaps and bounds better than anything you buy at BB or CC type stores. If I had $50k to spend on an audio system I would, but I'm married with children..enough said there...
I read sterophile and other mags about audio, and I noticed that they test equipment with really old CD/LP that I've never heard of. I always have wondered, Why do audiophiles test equipment with recordings from 1945 and 1964 etc. Recording techniques couldn't possibly be as good as what is possible today. Why would you not want the Best recording possible when doing a critical listening test. Seems to me you would be able to tell a piece of equipments limit if you had a recording that would expose those limits. Since the Boston CD was originally recorded in 1976, is it the recording a factor in only hearing minute differences or is my system so crappy that I "should" have a hard time telling the difference between a normal CD and a SACD?
audio_ala
tvad
9,467 posts
 
12-05-06: Audio_ala
My player does specify it plays DVD-A. Are DVD-A's all 5.1 surround CD's? My system is strictly 2 channel, would I lose sound info playing it that way?
I really don't know anything about DVD-A, SACD, HDCD etc. I have always just used normal redbook CD's.
Any clarification would be appreciated.
Mike

DVD-A discs can be played in stereo or multi-channel. I listen exclusively in stereo on my Denon 3910. You do not lose any sound info playing in two channel unless the original recording was done for multi channel. Frankly, I'm not aware of any DVD-A recordings done originally for multi-channel although I am certain a few exist. Even in the rare situation of an original multi-channel recording re-mixed for two channel, I expect all the information will be on the two channel tracks, but the recording won't be presented in it's best playback format. Don't worry about it . DVD-A rocks. Just know that it's a dead format and shop accordingly.
rwwear
2,692 posts
 
There are some DVDAs that lose information when played in stereo. Porcupine Tree's Stupid Dream is one.
tvad
9,467 posts
 

12-05-06: Rwwear
There are some DVDAs that lose information when played in stereo. Porcupine Tree's Stupid Dream is one.
The stereo DVD-A loses info compared to what...DVD-A multichannel, CD...?

Your comment is based on listening or published specs/info?

Just curious. I own "Stupid Dream" on CD. Wasn't it recorded originally as two channel?
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
you raise a lot of points.

from my own experience, i don't necessarily believe that newer recordings are better than older recordings.

a very good, or excellent recording is in my opinion, not a good test of a stereo system. i prefer an "average" recording, to reveal the flaws in a stereo system.

a great recording will be evident when played on any stereo system.

i also believe your stereo system has sufficient resolution to reveal differences in recordings.
warrenh's avatar
warrenh
2,286 posts
 
As you can read, not all SACDs (audiophools) are created equal. A good one/great one, is worth the expense for me. I only have a few DVD-As. Not a loser in the pack. Wonderful sound.
More to discover