wil 0 Report post Posted July 13, 2004 Hi all, its really good to be able to post here again. I know the question of SACDs Vs Redbook has been asked on Headfi itself, but i just want to hear the opinions of fellow singaporeans. Being new to SACD, is it true that most SACDs are made to be multi channel? If that is so, does that defeat the purpose of using SACDs for headphone listening? Pardon my ignorance, but can the differences btw normal SACDs and well made CDs be heard? Will SACD provide music with better, more detailed music? Or will high-resolution listening be just as good on a well-pressed CD? Is the increase in price justified ( With both SACD player and slightly more costly SACDs ) in comparision to a normal CDP and CDs? Point in case, Will getting a Philips 963A SACD /DVD ( note : not DVD-a ) player be worth it over getting a CDP for around the same price? ( say 800 ++ ?) Apologies for the multitude of questions ( haha i remember someone asking me to post questions no matter how dumb ) Thanks in advance! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arj 0 Report post Posted July 13, 2004 i agreed to your last comment. no matter how dumb it is, it seem you must post. there are talk about deleting your membership if not posting post!!!!!!! Back to your question it is alien to me. at the end what sound better count is it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rameish 0 Report post Posted July 13, 2004 "Difficult to see the future is" (quoting Obi Wan Kenobi) LOL, Well if you wish to get into SACD players now the question is how many albums do you currently have that are hybrids? And how many SACDs albums are there out there that are your kinda music. Not much point in spending S$800 on a player if you have less than that in SACD titles (in terms of $). I am coming round to the conclusion that SACDs will be in our future - which means you should have S$600 (in todays currency) SACD players that will better that Philips in 1 - 2 years time. BTW that Philips multi-format player isnt great at playing back regular CDs. It's okay - meaning it should sound similar to say a Marantz CD-4000 (which is damn good for it's price of approx S$200) but not a great or even good CDP at S$800 plus. If I were you I would be thinking of getting my last good cdp for that money now. And in 2-3 years time pick up an SACD player. So you'll have the best of both worlds so to speak. Unless SACD albums prices come down even more (for the good stuff not the stuff they cant unload) then I believe average consumer will still stick with the CD format for say another 5 years as least. Buying hybrid SACDs maybe a wise thing to do for now but buying an average SACD player isnt IMO. If you really want to get a top-drawer SACD Player (maybe a 2nd hand one). It may be slower but they were made to last (as a transport). My very speculative and very subjective 2¢ on this matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fuwen 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 (edited) I am a SACD supporter and has been collecting SACDs since 2002. I am using SA-14 for SACD playback at home and Philips 963SA for SACD playback at office. Most SACDs that are made from new recordings are in multi-channel format. However there are lots of SACD that are remastered from old recordings and they are likely to be in 2-channel format but some are remastered into multi-channel format also. IMHO it does not defeat the purpose for using SACD for headphone listening as I felt that it is still a superior format even playing back in 2-channel mode. My personal experience is the difference between the SAME recording in SACD mode and red book mode can easily be heard (but I must agree that it took almost a year for me to be able to do so, as I am not a critical listener as far as A/B equipment is concerned). The biggest difference, based on my experience, is that the frequency extension at both ends, and especially for percussion instrument and piano, they sound much more realistic than red book. Also for vocal in the mid range SACDs sound more relax and natural. However, I think it is fair only if we are comparing XRCDs with SACDs. I still think SACD is superior but I know there are people out there think otherwise. Anyway SACD nowadays are cheaper than XRCDs. About the price increase justifiable, at this point of time I still think SACDs are more for audiophile rather than for a normal listener. I do not think that in the near future it will replace the much cheaper redbook CDs unless it can be sold at that kind of price. Also although the SACD titles have really increased tremendously but redbook is still much more. Also I believe SACDP will not play back red book as good as conventional CDP at the same price. As for 963SA, IMHO it is a very good player for that price. Can already hear the difference in SACD mode (but slightly lacking in dynamics and transcient) but certainly just an average performer when play back red book CD, even with the audio direct function and 192kHz up sampling. It is a good SACDP and DVDP but if you are fussy about sound u may need another CDP for redbook CD playback. It has been mentioned in other thread in this forum, that in the end it is still the recording source that will affect the CD performance. So u can get rubbish recordings even for SACD and personally I have one of such SACD. Edited July 14, 2004 by fuwen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mackie 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 Once upon a time, many were sidelined in wait of the clear winner in the SACD vs DVD-A war. As yet, no clear winner is seen but it's a fact that the outcome will be (if not already) decided by availability of software as opposed to earlier envisaged technology superiority. What about SACD vs redbook? Sound for sound, no contest especially if one digs LPs (analogue sound) for the newer format is definitely closer to an analogue sound and without the usual digital glare that undermines cd format. Even if U have lots of dough and aims to buy all your favourite music on SACD format, it might not be possible as current production is very much targeted at pre 80-90s repertoire when the digital medium was still young and thus failed to maximize sound quality. Of course, some current titles are available but I reckon your collection will encompass mostly conventional cds and SACDs only for albums closer to your heart. As such, U'll need to consider sound quality of redbook playback between a SACD and CD player of the same price bracket. For example, U might pit Marantz CD17MkIII (KEC quoted S$880 recently) against Marantz SA-8260 (possibly lower than S$1260). In my experience, redbook playback by these 2 models are either on par or even tilted in favour of SA-8260. Hence, U will have to consider if the premium price of $400 is worth paying for its SACD capability. I think another person who has 80-90% of his collection in cds may opt either for CD17MKIII or increase his budget by S$200 and commit on a Regar 2000 cdp. In summary, your decision will tend to hinge on your present/future cd/SACD collection. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
onefly9 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 (edited) Hi wil, I found quite a number of comments in Audio Asylum than the 8260 sounds better that a Rega Planet in redbook, and they happily swap it for the 8260!! (to my surprise initially). I have not audition the Planet before so cannot comment personally. But now that I am a happy owner of the Marant 8260, I can say it is really a good redbook player to start with, and slightly better in SACD. In comparison to my earlier player ie. a CD17 mk3, I found that the CD17 is more detailed and restraint, but found the 8260 more musical and enjoyable with sweeter tonal balance, better bass punch, dynamic and soundstage depth etc, at least in my system. However, this is a matter of taste and I can imagine people who prefer the more detailed delivery of the 17 too. Now, the good news is the multi-channel 8260 has a successor, SA8400, which is a stereo only player with improved transport, and cost less !!! Retail price of $1,000 found in SLS, before bargain!! That should be a good buy in IMHO. As to the matter of redbook or SACD, I am still pretty much a neutral party and sticking mainly with CD except when there is good offer in SACD (getting more often now) or good albums that I think worth investing in. I think if you can find a SACD player with good redbook performance (pay a little more of course) than treat SACD as a bonus. Just my 2 cents and hope it helps... Edited July 14, 2004 by onefly9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kenshinz 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 "Difficult to see the future is" (quoting Obi Wan Kenobi) LOL, Shifu, thats Yoda la, the greendaddy of all gremlims and elves Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rameish 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 hehe, you're absolutely rite. I guess I should add "difficult to remember the past is" (Yoda's Grandfather). Well some good comments by all - btw notice how Marantz's website is almost always behind time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Charismatic 0 Report post Posted July 14, 2004 ..........It has been mentioned in other thread in this forum, that in the end it is still the recording source that will affect the CD performance. So u can get rubbish recordings even for SACD and personally I have one of such SACD. Hi Fuwen, which SACD that makes u upset with the recordings, can let us know? Thks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fuwen 0 Report post Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) Hi Fuwen, which SACD that makes u upset with the recordings, can let us know? Thks. Butterfly lovers by Philips The recording was horrible! For once something that is unacceptable by me. So u should only get this one if u like the performers or the performance. Edited August 2, 2004 by fuwen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mackie 0 Report post Posted July 15, 2004 It's the same case with XRCD version of Cai Qin "Ming Ge" which sounded a tad brash over conventional cd format, despite the premium price of the former. YMMV. Henceforth, superior format does not guarantee superior music always. It reminds me of the birth of cd as manufacturers then proclaimed it "Perfect sound forever!". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wil 0 Report post Posted July 15, 2004 Hmmmm, food for thought. Ive read that last year, 1.3 Million SACDs were sold in the states. Compare that with 756 Million CDs. In terms of life-span, its a safe guess to say that the humble CD still will be around for awhile to come.... It seems that all in all, a good, reliable redbook CDP is still a very good and solid bet. So there, my 2 cents worth. (Ps- The Marantz CD5400 seems sooooooooooo very tempting, and at the price it retails for, it seems like a no-brainer [ im on a shoestring budget you see]) cheers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mackie 0 Report post Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) In which case, CD5400 at S$299 offers fantastic value. Do note that sound quality out of Marantz cdps' headphone sockets are pretty decent and it might mean something to U if U don't already have a head amp. Edited July 15, 2004 by Mackie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rameish 0 Report post Posted July 20, 2004 Marantz CD5400 seems to have different specs: If you visit Marantz Europe website the transpost used is a Sony (KSS) however the Asian website states (VAM1201 - ir philips). This is indeed strange as I have never known Marantz to use a Sony transport yet it cant be a typo? Anybody has any info on this? or any other differences? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rameish 0 Report post Posted July 20, 2004 (edited) Marantz CD5400 seems to be 2 different breeds: Not just the transport mech is different: From Marantz Europe Website: SPECIFICATIONS Mechanism KSS-213CCM Decoder TC9462F D/A Conversion Multi-bit, delta-sigma DAC IC CS4392 Low Pass Filter Stage NJM2068 Digital Filter CS4392 Noise Shaper CS4392 Output Buffer Frequency Range 20-20000Hz Dynamic Range 100dB S/N 110dB Total Harmonic Distortion(THD) 0.0025% Channel Separation 100dB From Marantz Asia Website: SPECIFICATIONS * Frequency range : 20 - 20 kHz * Dynamic range : 105 dB * Signal-to-noise : 108 dB * Channel separation : 98 dB * Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) : 0.0063% * Mechanism : VAM1201 + DSD * Decoder : SAA7378 * D/A conversion : Bitstream + CC filter * Digital filter : SAA7378 * DAC : TDA1549 * LPF stage : NJM4560 Edited July 20, 2004 by Rameish Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
