m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 Remastered and all that. But, question about it. It's SACD and I don't know the fist thing about SACD. I know it's a Sony thing. My Harman Kardon DVD 50 does not have SACD. Ok. Don't laugh at me. By not having SACD, what does this mean to me? Again, like I said, i don't know anything about SACD... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 It just means you're listening to the regular stereo layer, as if you only bought the redbook version. Eventually you'll need an SACD player if you want to hear it in multi-channel or enhanced SACD stereo mode (kind of like hi-def). What made you buy it if you don't own a player? Are you planning on a future purchase? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholtl Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 And if you're planning to getting an SACD player, mOOn, make sure your HK receiver has multichannel analog inputs specifically made for that function. Otherwise...it's upgrade time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Author Share Posted May 31, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 6:33:01 PM garymd wrote: It just means you're listening to the regular stereo layer, as if you only bought the redbook version. Eventually you'll need an SACD player if you want to hear it in multi-channel or enhanced SACD stereo mode (kind of like hi-def). What made you buy it if you don't own a player? Are you planning on a future purchase? ---------------- K... that's what I thought. I purchased it because it was the only version of DSOTM they had in the store. I may someday have a CD player or what not that has SACD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Author Share Posted May 31, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 6:39:53 PM nicholtl wrote: And if you're planning to getting an SACD player, mOOn, make sure your HK receiver has multichannel analog inputs specifically made for that function. Otherwise...it's upgrade time! ---------------- What? Why? Are you saying that there are multiple outputs for SACD? I realize that SACD is multi channel but.... Good lord. nevermind. I guess I have some reading to go do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r.cherry Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 i want to join the know not about sacd club, i would ask this...is there no benefit to sacd in 2 channel? are there bennies for 2 channel? how does one get the most from sacd in 2 channel? according to the 12 yr old salesman at best buy the other day if you aren't running a multi-channel system you might as well buy a regular cd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Author Share Posted May 31, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 8:34:03 PM r.cherry wrote: i want to join the know not about sacd club, i would ask this...is there no benefit to sacd in 2 channel? are there bennies for 2 channel? how does one get the most from sacd in 2 channel? according to the 12 yr old salesman at best buy the other day if you aren't running a multi-channel system you might as well buy a regular cd. ---------------- Good question! If nothing else, it has at least been digitally remastered which would lead me to believe it at least sounds better than something recorded and put on CD 10~15 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev313 Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 Thats when I tell the Best Buy kids how much I paid for my 2 channel set-ups, explain the use of tubes and LPs, and watch the pee stain slowly spread across the front of their pants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 I have 2 SACD players and rarely use the multi-channel layer. 99.9% of the time I just use the SACD 2-channel stereo layer. It's significantly better than the non-SACD layer. Better clarity, detail, bass, etc. BTW - Not all SACDs are multi-channel. Some are 3.1, others 5.1, and some just 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Author Share Posted May 31, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 8:52:26 PM garymd wrote: I have 2 SACD players and rarely use the multi-channel layer. 99.9% of the time I just use the SACD 2-channel stereo layer. It's significantly better than the non-SACD layer. Better clarity, detail, bass, etc. BTW - Not all SACDs are multi-channel. Some are 3.1, others 5.1, and some just 2. ---------------- Ok, but... Even if you're gear (mine) does not have any SACD at all, will the overall sound quality be better than NON SACD? Also, you have any good URLs that explain SACD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 9:11:08 PM m00n wrote: ---------------- On 5/31/2005 8:52:26 PM garymd wrote: I have 2 SACD players and rarely use the multi-channel layer. 99.9% of the time I just use the SACD 2-channel stereo layer. It's significantly better than the non-SACD layer. Better clarity, detail, bass, etc. BTW - Not all SACDs are multi-channel. Some are 3.1, others 5.1, and some just 2. ---------------- Ok, but... Even if you're gear (mine) does not have any SACD at all, will the overall sound quality be better than NON SACD? Also, you have any good URLs that explain SACD? ---------------- I use SACD with my old tube gear and it IS quite an improvement. My Sony ES is SACD compatible but the sound pales in comparison to the Scott 299b in 2-channel SACD. In order to use the multi-channel feature, you need to run multiple RCAs to the Sony for each channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted May 31, 2005 Author Share Posted May 31, 2005 is sony gear the only thing that supports SACD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay L Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 no, many companies support SACD playback Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedball Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 When I play an SACD on my Denon universal player the one most noticable thing other than overall clarity is the quieter background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheelman Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 ---------------- On 5/31/2005 8:48:00 PM kev313 wrote: Thats when I tell the Best Buy kids how much I paid for my 2 channel set-ups, explain the use of tubes and LPs, and watch the pee stain slowly spread across the front of their pants. ---------------- Man that was some good comedy right there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 m00n,your HK is sacd/dvda ready(notice multi ch inputs in the rear of the 7200).You just need 3 pair of interconnects to go from your player to the 7200(L,R,C,SL,SR,SUB).You can buy a decent sacd/dvda/dvd player new for a few hundred bucks.I just bought a used Denon 2900 for my 2nd set up for $285 delivered(a great deal on a very good player).I also see the Pioneer 45a for a few hundred bucks pretty often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 m00n, If you google SACD and some combination of TECHNICAL and EXPLINATION and THEORY and DVD-A and REDBOOK and probably a bazzilion other combos you'll get quite a wide range of explinations from the most basic to stuff way over *my* head, at least... Also, if you check Stereophile's website and search their archive for SACD you'll find a lot of articles talking about the technology, measurements of SACD vs CD of the "same" recording, that sort of stuff. As a software guy, you'd probably find the Burwen Bobcat more up your alley... to quote the guy who built it, "...Burwen Bobcat is a plug-in for the Windows Media Player that processes audio by adding equalization and unique, patent-pending, high-frequency reverberation. Unlike any previous technology, Burwen Bobcat makes CDs, MP3s, and DVDs sound comparable or superior to analog or SACD..." Ray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sivadselim Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 even if you only use the redbook portion of the disc, you still benefit from the remaster. i bought it when it first came out, well before i delved into hirez, just because it was the 25th anniversary edition. i think there are many people out there who never intend to go hirez but own this disc since it is a hybrid hirez/redbook. someone that doesn't have a hirez player who was buying dsotm today, would most likely buy this version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC275 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 I also listen to most SACD's in 2-channel. The redbook layer of DSOTM SACD sounds pretty similar to the original. The multichannel SACD layer was remastered/re-engineered by Pink Floyd's producer (current one, not Alan Parsons) with input from the band members. It is truly awesome & well worth the price of an SACD player all by itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.