Dvd Audio/ Sacd

[T2K]

Having hid in a cave for the last several years,I know absolutely nothing about these new formats.Can anyone give me some general info regarding above and pros and cons relating to either or both? Personal opinions appreciated.Thinking about upgrading from the old Sony CD player.BTW,I have 3801 receiver if it matters.

Thanks,

Keith

[EHamner]

Textc>Textf>

General info re DVD-Audio and SACD (Super Audio by Sony/Phillips)

DVD-A (everyone but Sony/Phillips)

1. requires dedicated dvd player

2. at the present date the players are made to be exclusive - cd or dvd-a but not sacd

3. the intention is to boost the sample rate per second from 44.1k/s to 96k/s (96,000 samples each second of time).

4. this yields a somewhat smoother sound, especially at the top end.

How much better is a subject of some debate. The sound is smoother yet when the sample rate is increased again to 2 * 96k/s.

SACD (Sony/Phillips)

1. requires dedicated player.

2. at the present date the players are made to be exclusive - cd or sacd (and perhaps dvd as in the SONY 9000ES) but not dvd-a.

3. the intention is to boost the sample rate per second from 44.1k/s (CD format) to 2.1 million/s (SACD format) using just one bit.

4. this yields a tremendously smooth sound with great dynamics and low distortion (my opinion, which is shared by others).

5. the decoding of sacd is done inside the player. This excludes external decoding (and thus copying of the digital stream).

try the DIGITAL and HI-REZ (SACD) forum here for more info -

http://www.AudioAsylum.com/index.html

take a look at the sony 9000es here -

http://homepage.mac.com/earlghamner/PhotoAlbum3.html

[Seb]

correct me if i'm wrong, but it looks like dvd-a is taking the conventional and rather logical approach of boosting both the sampling rate and the resolution, whereas sacd is using a considerably higher sampling rate, but reducing the resolution to only register the variations between one sample and the next.

i haven't heard either but i've read more often that the sacd had an overall more analog-like quality than dvd-a.

both are using a dvd or dvd-like storage layer, but sacd's also include a normal cd layer readable in any cd player, making the format more backwards compatilbe than dvd-audio. bass management seems to be more of an issue with dvd-audio too.

[DwK]

I realy wish these companies would work on making small storage Devices like Mini Disk better.

Hell, with alittle work everything could be put out on those little disk. Instead of using DVD's

Use Double Sided Mini Disk.

------------------

Living Room:

Yamaha Natural Sound A-500 Stereo Amplifier

2 Klipsch Heresys on A switch

2 Fisher STV-873 on B switch

My Room:

Klipsch Pro Medias

2 Fisher Surrounds

[Quenten]

Here's some good reading http://www.hometheatermag.com/showarchives.cgi?77

I've checked to see if I could access this hyperlink & don't seem to be able to??? If I type in the address it opens just fine. The article talks about how each format works and why SACD sounds more "analog like," helped me to understand a little better. I recommend reading it.

This message has been edited by Quenten on 07-08-2001 at 05:23 PM