maxg Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Last week whilst at the airport waiting for a delayed plane I found myself browsing in a CD/DVD emporium and came across Ca Ira - the new Opera from Roger Waters. I had only discovered it existed a few days before and so I snapped it up. On getting home I noticed that it was actually a hybrid SACD with both CD layer and SACD layer(s). As my daughter was watching a DVD (piped into the bedroom) I just slung it on the old trusty Marantz CD6000 to take a listen and very good it was too. Later on that night I switched it over to the Pioneer 575 to take a listen to the SACD 2 channel mix. Wouldn't you know it - it sounded worse. I then opened my SACD drawer and selected several dual layer disks for a quick comparison of Marantz playing the CD layer Vs Pioneer playing the SACD layer. At best the differences were too marginal to spot but in most cases the CD layer played better in the Marrantz than the SACD layer did on the Pioneer. This was not the case when comparing CD layer on the Pioneer to SACD on the same unit - although even here the differences were very marginal with only the slightest of nods towards SACD. So - to the point of this diatribe: When SACD first came out I really had hoped that playing a higher definition medium would allow a cheaper unit to play at least as well, if not better, than a more expensive CD only unit. This is not the case. At the high end it might well be that a top SACD player will outplay a top CD player - although I remain to be convinced having heard some really VERY good CD players recently. If I compare this story to vinyl I have found - at least to my ears - that in the normal run of things a vinyl record outplays a CD on similar costing rigs. Indeed I would argue that I generally gain a better musical experience on a vinyl rig than on a CD player that costs about twice as much. Why does this not happen with SACD? Could it be that the real improvement the medium brings is, at best, very marginal? The sort of improvement one might expect to gain changing interconnects (patch cables)? I do think that more time and care has been taken in the recording process with SACD's. In other words the CD layer on an SACD is usually good in comparison to straight CD's - but this is not a function of the SACD itself - merely of its production. Ultimately the Marantz is a better sounding unit than the Pioneer - I had just hoped that SACD would swing that balance, and it doesn't. And therein lies the dissapointment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai2000 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Max, perhaps this 'lack' of clear aural superiority is one reason why SACD never really took off (though I have no experience with those up-market players either). But what about the music......is it similar to Roger's usual albums? Wolfram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 Max, perhaps this 'lack' of clear aural superiority is one reason why SACD never really took off (though I have no experience with those up-market players either). But what about the music......is it similar to Roger's usual albums? Wolfram Not similar AT ALL. It is an Opera - well of sorts - more like a musical if you ask me. The subject matter is the French Revolution and it much reminded me of the Les Miserables tenth aniversary production on CD and DVD. That is not meant as a criticsm - far from it - I happen to adore that Les Mis production and it does enjoy a full orchestra, choir etc. Structurally is is fairly along the lines of an Opera with 3 acts and multiple scenes - I suppose you would have to see it to judge properly. Worth having if you are both an Opera fan and a RW fan - which I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 When the recording companies use the same master and mix for both the Redbook and SACD 2 channel versions, why bother? Buy the LP. LP sales are equal to the "more convienient" SACDs. I'm sure there is a reason for that. Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbsl Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I have some SACDs that sound better played as a SACD in my Denon 2900 than in my NAD C542 cd player. Then I also have other SACD that sound better on my NAD C542. Some SACDs can sound so good and other so bad. I guess it depends on who did the SACD engineering and what equipment you play it on. Again I think it is how well the engineer knows what they are doing. Do you have any regular cds that you also have on SACD(one you cannot play on a cd player) and compare the two? I am not sure the Hybird SACD is the same quality as just a SACD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 "Do you have any regular cds that you also have on SACD(one you cannot play on a cd player) and compare the two? I am not sure the Hybird SACD is the same quality as just a SACD. " Interesting variation. I do have Roger Waters live and in the flesh on both CD and on SACD non hybrid (but with multi-channel mix as well as stereo). I will try it out. I suppose the question therefore changes from "is the CD layer on an SACD disk generally better than a normal CD" to "is the SACD layer on a hybrid disk worse than the SACD layer on a non-hybrid" or both? or neither? And just to ask a question to a question: Playback of a normal CD on your Denon - how does it compare to playback on your NAD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whell Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 You know, this shouldn't be such a damn mystery. If a new format is marketed as higher resolution, it should provide an audible benefit, based on a set of objective standards. If Max's observations are correct, and I have no reason to think they're not, then Sony's SACD format must have ZERO standards spelled out in its licensing agreements with software producers (and don't they own some of these producers??). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 max, Thanks for the post. Interesting observations. I have listened to just a little two channel SACD and found it unremarkable. Didn't go to enough work to compare as you did, though. Also, did not have a pricey SACD player, either, so don't know if better gear would have made a noticeable improvement or not. These days one can get impressive sound out of a sub $100 DVD player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strabo Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 "I then opened my SACD drawer and selected several dual layer disks for a quick comparison of Marantz playing the CD layer Vs Pioneer playing the SACD layer. At best the differences were too marginal to spot but in most cases the CD layer played better in the Marrantz than the SACD layer did on the Pioneer. This was not the case when comparing CD layer on the Pioneer to SACD on the same unit - although even here the differences were very marginal with only the slightest of nods towards SACD." I don't know anything about the two players but maybe the point is the Marantz plays CDs better than the Pioneer plays CDs or SACDs. Might need more testing. [] I've heard this before at a Hi-Fi shop where their Bel Canto DAC played CD much better than my SACD player (a cheap Sony at the time) playing the SACD layer of the same disc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbsl Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 "Playback of a normal CD on your Denon - how does it compare to playback on your NAD?" The NAD is used to play the cds that are good to great recordings and it sounds very good. I will be buying a AH!SuperTjoeb with upsampler tube cd player in a month or two and will post my findings between the 3 players. The cds I play on my Denon are usually ones that are bright or bad recordings. The Denon seems to tame them or make them bearable otherwise I would not play them at even moderate volume levels. There are some cds that are good recordings and still sound better on the Denon. One of my favorite recording studios is Putumayo World Music. Their cds always sound fantastic probably the best sounding cds I have heard on my system. I play them on the NAD cause on the Denon they sound duller, I guess that is why bad recording sound better on the Denon. Maybe some of the really expensive players play everything and makes the cds sound great but in my system it does have advantages to have two players. I am waiting on th US Post Office to find the Phillips 963A dvd player that was sent to me and it will be interesting to see what it can do with different cds and SACDs compared to the other players I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.4knee Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I dunno I have a small holding of SACD's, both 2 and multi channel, and to me they all sound better than your basic redbooks especially Brubeck's Time Out. What I have found the most disappointing are a lot of DVDA disc's. To me it seems all the or at least a large sector of the recording engineers think "wow I have all these extra channels lemme see what I can do" and go way overboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croc Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 i have Sony DVP-N9000es DVD/SACD player. this is ~1200$ stereo only SACD machine. as a CD player it doesn't do a very good job - i would say a fair performance comparing to 500$-800$ CD player. on the SACD layer it easily beats my Meridian G08 CD player (~4500$ machine). for me it's easy to hear. untill now 100% of my audiophile pals that i demonstarted it to them have heard the difference (none of them have sacd and absolute most of them was very sceptical about it). IMO it's pretty amazing 1200$ player beating 4500$ one - this is a perfect example how technology is serving consumers. regarding CD layer sounding better on SACD hibryd disks - this may be because on a lot such a disks PCM layer is derived from DSD using SBM (super bit maping) tecnique, which is supposed to provide better results (at least theoreticaly). regarding your specific case - pioneer 757 never was than strong machine. especialy on SACD it got a lot of complains. people say that its DVDA is much better and sacd section got somehow compromized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 Croc, What you are observing is EXACTLY what I was expecting/hoping to hear myself - it just didn't happen. I should add that I observed the same poor performance some years ago with a Sony NS900 player - maybe that was simply bad at SACD too? I am the first to say that the Pioneer 575 is not a good machine - at least sonically. For DVD videos, DIVX etc. it is excellent as it the fact that it plays MP3 from DVD disks. That makes it a juke box for background music as I can fit 65-70 albums on a single DVD dual layer disk @ 256 Kb/s. I should add that you are the first person I have heard to get this result (SACD on lesser machine beating CD on higher cost machne) not that I am denigrating your findings. I think I will do a little further research on this - slightly higher up the ladder in terms of equipment. My local dealer has a slew of digital sources at varying prices and I will go round there for a play at some time. Actually he has invited me round on Saturday morning to listen to a different kind of digital player altogether - a laser turntable would you believe!!!????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croc Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 oh, it's 575................... i thought it's 757, so you're talking about even more basic player which IIRC converts internaly DSD to PCM - so this is not a good test. what i hear?better bass definition, smoother LP like sound, more "air", more transparent midrange. after listening to SACD and going back to the same song on CD creates big disapointment. Few days ago i heard some Miles Davis compilation CD - it sounded good until i got to a song from a "kind of blue" which i use to hear on sacd - i just couldn't listen and after 2 minutes i skiped it............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 oh, it's 575................... i thought it's 757, so you're talking about even more basic player which IIRC converts internaly DSD to PCM - so this is not a good test. what i hear? better bass definition, smoother LP like sound, more "air", more transparent midrange. after listening to SACD and going back to the same song on CD creates big disapointment. Few days ago i heard some Miles Davis compilation CD - it sounded good until i got to a song from a "kind of blue" which i use to hear on sacd - i just couldn't listen and after 2 minutes i skiped it............ Are you sure about the down-conversion thing? I cant find anything anywhere to indicate that and the literature all refers to a 192/24 bit DAC on board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai2000 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Max, thanks for the input on RW's opera. To be honest, I am not a huge fan of musicals. It might sound snobbish, but often it's so obvious how a melody develops that until now this genre hasn't really caught my attention....but then perhaps I wasn't looking for the right thing. When it comes to SACD I must say that the Living Stereo SACDs I own certainly sound less digital than in their former Red Book format: smoother/less harsh I'd call it. Now I have not done a lot of A/B comparison but the Heifetz recording of the Beethoven concerto certainly portrays more of the master's tone on the SACD. I guess if I wasn't so much into vinyl at the moment, I'd certainly pick up more SACDs......at least Living Stereos []. Wolfram BTW: You might be one of the few people able to actually hear this famous laser TT......so please let us know how it performs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croc Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Are you sure about the down-conversion thing? I cant find anything anywhere to indicate that and the literature all refers to a 192/24 bit DAC on board. i wasn;t sure but now i am: http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:LgFkYgf2nD8J:www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/archive/index.php/t-60141.html+pioneer+575+converts+pcm&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 Interesting - thanks for the link. It seems it does convert - but to LPCM @ 24/88.1 which is a rather higher resolution that CD and according to the cited experts indistinuishable from DSD. No idea - I think it sounds like crap - pity I missed out on the 563.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smilin Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 [*]Max, Sorry to read about your SACD issues, I have many hybrid CD's and have yet to like a redbook over SACD. I really believe your players are just not up to snuff[H]Really, with s high end player DSD rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 The disappointing thing about SACD 2 channel.... is they don't make enough titles! They can sound very good IMHO. Not all do but many are very good. But you have to use a reasonably good SACD player. Craig 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.