The slow take up of SACD is a real shame and waste of a great opportunity. I love physical media.

@oysteinsoreide4323

4 жыл бұрын

The reason that it never became popular was that people really wanted downloadable files aka mp3 or similar. The problem is that most people are more than content with the mp3 sound quality. They could not care less about a format that is better than CD. But one of the most important problems with SACD was the licensing of the format. Sony has been too greedy with this one. They made the format because they couldn't get money for their CD patent anymore. Had they made an open format, maybe it had been more popular.

I buy more cds from amazon now than I did 20 or 30 years ago. Cheap and lovely.

@StringerNews1

6 жыл бұрын

Same here. I even find rare, out of print ones there.

@brianmoore581

6 жыл бұрын

Yep. Me, too. Lot's of rare stuff you never see at even the best semi-local stores. You can get some rare stuff on Ebay, too, usually cheap. I kind of miss the hours I used to hang out in the record store trying to decide what to buy this time. Kind of. Well, maybe not. They were too expensive anyway.

@JohnMorris-ge6hq

6 жыл бұрын

thegrimyeaper Nothing wrong with 16/44.1 if done right. Check out any CD before the loudness war - Fantastic.

@brianmoore581

6 жыл бұрын

John Morris even a lot of the newer stuff is wonderfully recorded. Most of the stuff that I've found over the years with squashed dynamic range is popular radio music. Other genres, at least what I have purchased, seem to have been largely immune to such atrocities.

@brpadington

3 жыл бұрын

Same here.

I think MQA was created for the sole purpose of generating revenue, I have no problem with making money but the creation of MQA was not to overcome some problem that was preventing music from reaching people's ears. The addition of a corresponding light on audio gear to show that MQA is being received is a stroke of genius from a purely business point of view. A listener doesn't get anything that cannot be provided by existing formats but it is possible to check you are getting what you paid for with those formats. MQA has a little colored light that appears to make people think they're getting what they paid for when they may not be.

@aussie8114

3 жыл бұрын

Should start a business fitting little blue LEDs to amps that come on when you power up. $320 sounds good. The user can get a happy feeling knowing they’re listening to something special 🔵

@PatDoyle

3 жыл бұрын

I agree with your thoughts on MQA. To me, it is a solution in search of a problem. Who has issues with audio bandwidth exceeding their available internet bandwidth?

@ThinkingBetter

2 жыл бұрын

MQA is dead. It's a lossy PCM compression format and nowadays serious audiophile consumers in most places can easily get internet fast enough to not bother with lossy compressed formats such as MQA. DSD-64 is inferior to 192kHz 24 bits streamed lossless on Amazon HD Music and the convenience is hugely better on a modern lossless streaming service. DSD is dead because it doesn't allow any level of modern audio processing and reality is that modern DACs aren't even using pure sigma delta in the conversion making the argument of staying in sigma-delta conversion in both end of the signal chain a lie.

@user-od9iz9cv1w

2 жыл бұрын

IMHO, all it does is provide hi res music with a smaller foot print. Guess what. I have gigabit fibre to my home. File size is not a reason for me to invest in a niche recording format. Give me a well mastered PCM CD. I'm happy. The really significant improvement in sound is not from file format. It is what is in the file. Playing, mastering and publishing are far more important than the file format or compression algorithm.

@ThinkingBetter

2 жыл бұрын

@@user-od9iz9cv1w Yes, MQA makes zero sense already. It’s just yet another format that will enter the history book of formats that came and went away.

I love listening to SACDs through my Sony DVP-CX777ES 400-disc changer. Superb sound!

SACD is the best format ever in my opinion, I buy them as often as I can , they are increasingly hard to find and they ain’t cheap, but they sure do sound the best

@reinaldoalves9038

2 жыл бұрын

me too. I am trying to get some as I possibly can, not cheap at all !

The Carpenters Singles 1969-1981 on SACD sounds fantastic on the stereo and multi tracks.

@centralscrutinizer9591

Жыл бұрын

The Carpenters???? ok grandpa.

What's most important in my humble opinion is the recording/remastering process and not the format. I've heard Redbook CD's that sound fantastic or bad depending on the process involved around the recording or final mastering. Ditto for DSD or PCM Hi Res. I feel that as yet the full potential of red book CD hasn't been harvested and that may hold true for the higher res formats as well.

@motorradmike

5 жыл бұрын

I absolutely agree. Interestingly, I read that many studios may indeed record in DSD but the final mastering is done in the PCM realm.

@playbackvintagehifihunter9669

3 жыл бұрын

Agreed. In my collection of Cds I would estimate about 5% of them sounds stunning.

@brpadington

3 жыл бұрын

The CDs that sound the best to me are the early ones that were basically direct transfers from the master tape.

@johnholmes912

3 жыл бұрын

mastering and mixing in dsd is an absolute nightmare, which is why most studios won't go near it

@ThinkingBetter

2 жыл бұрын

DSD is dead and technically you can achieve superior resolution with a modern PCM streaming service e.g. 192kHz 24 bit streamed from Amazon HD music lossless are better than SACD (DSD-64).

I have a few sacd' s about 30 albums, and feel the mastering is better most of the time on sacd then cd, i Think personnally sacd is best overall.

A first-rate and often very expensive disc player will show SACD and CD to be far better sonically than I believed possible. Much much closer to high speed analog tape, which for these older recordings at least means a closer approach to what was put on the master tapes.

Your ~3 year old video is floating back up to my suggestions, because I've been hearing about MQA, and the how it is not what it claims to be.

@aussie8114

3 жыл бұрын

KZread knows you better than you think.

@pappo666

3 жыл бұрын

well i wouldnt call it a scam but Tidal working hard on keeping that secret is fishy since no one can properly test it its hard to know if it is scam or not just look at the "MQA Review" by Goldensound Then again spotify is no better they scamming the artists to on 3 million a year calculated guess best is still CD / SACD (Some of them) and vinyl

I have over 40 sacd...love them all...some of them are rare and worth $$$

Oh yeah, we're going there! I'm still digging hdcds! lol! Neil YOung, Joni, Beach Boys, Cars, Roxy, Ferry, Dead, and many more all sound great to me with my hdcd player and Pacific microsonics hdcd player processor chip. The Stone sacd drama is even crazier than that as they released jewel cases claiming sacd and the discs inside were just regular cds! The digipaks have the sacds.

@knockshinnoch1950

Жыл бұрын

I still have my LINN GENKI CD player with an HDCD chip. I have around 150 HDCD discs and they really do sound awesome. I also have a Marantz SA10 SACD Player and it is a beast. I love both formats. There are still lots of HDCD discs available to buy new at regular prices- no big price hikes like SACD. There are also loads available 2nd hand on Discogs, Amazon & MusicMagpie. With careful checking of catalogue numbers/deep searches you can turn up discs priced at only a few quid- some as low as £2!

I love CD quality sound. If I were putting music on a micro sd card, which format should I download to get cd quality or better sounding music?

@beezanteeum

2 жыл бұрын

You can use lossless format like FLAC or ALAC (a.k.a AAC Lossless), or you can go raw with WAV or AIFF

What is the source material/carrier? How the conversion/transmission has been executed and with what equipment. Nowadays we can record/mix PCM up to 24b/192kHz. We can record in DSD as well, but mixing/editing is not convenient with DSD.

You just explained why it's so difficult to try to find used SACD titles mixed in with regular CDs at record stores, thrift stores, flea markets, etc. -- they often don't even mention SACD or have the logo on the covers or spine, and often come in regular CD cases. And even just looking for the rounded Super Jewel Boxes that many SACD titles came in isn't foolproof, as some regular CDs came in a Super Jewel Box as well!

@knockshinnoch1950

Жыл бұрын

Not the case in the UK where SACDs are easily identified- I have over 600 discs and never have I come across a SACD that was not clearly identified

I AM the Musicophiliac, and I ❤️❤️❤️ me some DSD! Heard it for the first time only a couple of years ago, and was immediately blown away. Bought a player on the used market, but still don't really have a lot to play on it, yet. Thanks to that pro-tip, I'm guessing I'll have some Stones soon, though. I've got the Sympathy for the Devil remixes, and they're alright.

@markyexley9440

6 жыл бұрын

Despite what Steve says many artists have released catalogues on SACD - they have just been snapped up. You can pay a premium - but there are bargains out there like Dark Side Of The Moon. If you don’t mind paying a premium then CDJapan have some good classic rock releases and MoFi stuff is good. There is loads of classical stuff out there.

Why I remember buying one of them newfangled phonographs that went round at 33 1/3 revolutions. Pissed me off to no end to have to have two phonographs.

SACD = Schrõdinger's Audio CD? Neither dead or alive :-)

@normanbott

6 жыл бұрын

I Like it, same thought occurred to me as Steve was talking. If more people looked at it would it be more alive ? ;-)

@MegaF1guy

6 жыл бұрын

Super Audio CD

@Baerchenization

5 жыл бұрын

When aliens will visit Earth in 230000 years and find the remnants of civilisation they will report back home that Schrödingers cat being dead and alive was the greatest misunderstanding among the people on this pale blue dot...

I just bought an mct350 mcitosh..try to burn an sacd iso,what I did,but I cant play it on mymcintoash it sucks though

Depeche mode did the same and also did multi channel mixes witch sounds great.

I love the mult-channel catalogue from Vocallion

Let it bleed is a classic.

I guess the reason why DSD/SACD is only really happening in the classical world is that as soon you're using some kind of digital audio workstation like Pro Tools etc. during production, you basically have to use PCM for that. So apart from music that is essentially recorded straight from microphone to master or recorded mostly analog and only then transferred to digital, DSD just doesn't make much sense, because you'd have to convert from DSD to PCM and back anyway during production.

Could anyone tell me some of the best sites to buy used CDs , sacds? I use discog for vinyl. Thank you

@melchior-christophvonbrinc7764

5 жыл бұрын

rutracker.org

How good would those Stones master's from the 60s shape up? Would it be even worth putting them on a format like that???

SACD protocol locked digital output and forced user to use players analog output. So, I only bought one disc and that was it. Couldn't hear a difference anyhow.

@brpadington

3 жыл бұрын

CDs sound amazing when mastered correctly. I bet most people could not tell the difference.

@beezanteeum

2 жыл бұрын

But you can use HDMI to play SACD, at least HDMI 2.0 w/ HDCP 2.2, as long as your player and your AV Receiver support SACD and DSD decoding

It is really important to note that most SACDs are hybrid with a CD layer on the disc as well as the SACD one. This means that any Cd player can play them. As can any SACD player.

The future of sound right now is immersive audio. 3D sound using Auromatic up mixing of SACD (hi resolution) or hi resolution files that Apple and Amazon are now producing with Atmos encoding (yes-new offerings daily) is addictive. We have rediscovered not only our SACD’s but our CD collection playing them on a 7.2.6 (13.2) system using the Auro 3D codec (even if released in Atmos format). Thank you Wilfried!

Hi Steve, greetings from the UK. I must say how well I like your channel and your very easy on the ear presentation. I always feel like you are speaking to me personally. With regard to other artists who committed to SACD, I believe Neil Young was/is a supporter of the format. Keep the content coming!👍

With all that "Format Wars" , back then in the early 2000's, I've acquired and listened to all of them. I have a huge collection of sacd, dvd-a, dts-cd. I really love the Dts-audio (CD) formats over the Sacd... Like Steve Wilson's 5.1 mixes on those Classic Rock Faves, as well as His own recordings with Porcupine Tree and his Solos... I agree, you must have a really decent player for it. I really love my Sony-ES, Oppo, and Denon. Universal Dvd Players...Thanks for bringing this up Steve!

Sure I know what it is and it is laying on my bookshelf at the very moment, even if I don't own a SACD player (yet).

I thought that the SACDs were fairly expensive (more than $50 / disk). So, are these Rolling Stones SACDs the same price as a regular CD, since they are unmarked? I’ve been trying to find a copy of The Cleveland Symphony’s, Pictures at an Exhibition SACD, on Telarc, but the prices are $99 - $250 for one CD!

what happened to HDCD,I i went for that when i bought my Arcam Alpha 9 cd player,doh,wrong choice.....great vids.thx mk

Very informative video!

Personally, I don't want anything to do with MQA. Anything that requires my stereo to have an internet hookup to get maximum sound quality is a non-starter for me. No, thanks, even if it was the best sounding format ever. SACD, on the other hand, I absolutely love. Whether the format itself sounds better, or whether it is simply better remastering, I don't know for sure. On second thought, I have many hybrid discs and the SACD layer is inevitably better. Not only the Rolling Stones, but the Police and Peter Gabriel released their entire catalogs on SACD, and Bob Dylan the majority of his. Then there are audiophile labels like Mobile Fidelity, Audio Fidelity, etc. who regularly release SACD titles: Stevie Ray Vaughan, Norah Jones, and on and on. Dire Straits' remaining titles will be out soon from Mobile Fidelity. Then there are countless Japanese releases, from Rock to Jazz to Classical, all easily available to order online. Apparently, SACD is big in Japan. Most of what I've bought sounds exceptionally good. Then there is the Classical market. Many, many Classical titles are still released on SACD and sound absolutely stunning on that format. Rachel Podger's new "Four Seasons" is a great example. Yeah, there are a hundred "Four Seasons" already, but this one is really something special, in both performance and sound quality. And I could go on for hours. There is an ever increasing number of absolute treasures in the best available sound quality on SACD. Sure, it's an audiophile format for a niche market, but so is everything else not named "CD" or "mp3". I actually enjoy tracking down rare discs. I enjoy owning physical media. No streaming for me, no downloads. We all have brands of stereo equipment that the average person has never heard of. We all hopefully put in a little effort to acquire the best sounding releases we can find, if there's a choice, regardless of the format. I started in audio with vinyl records. I own several thousand CDs that I still enjoy immensely. I started buying SACDs back when they were first introduced in 1999, I think it was, and I own several hundred. SACDs just sound best to me. Here we are nearly twenty years later and SACDs are still being released all the time, hardly the mark of a dead format. Niche format may be an apt description, not dead. But we are audiophiles; some would say the entire industry that supplies this hobby is dead. Not to me. Not till the fat lady sings. When it's an option, I will choose SACD every time.

@CanuckFluter

6 жыл бұрын

I have to agree. SACD is my go to and I buy mostly classical and to hell with whether some think it is dead. Titles keep coming out and I keep buying em. Love SACD!

@juliaset751

6 жыл бұрын

Brian, me again...I recommend the Dire Straits Brothers In Arms SACD from MoFi. See if you agree that it sounds better with the phase reversed.

@brianmoore581

6 жыл бұрын

Julia Set I have the Brothers in Arms SACD. It does sound wonderful, much better than the original CD or lp record. I also have a good sounding XRCD of it, but the Mobile Fidelity SACD is the best. Never tried it with the phase reversed, though. I would have to reverse speaker wires because I don't have a phase reverse button on my preamp. My SACD player is an Ayre C-5xe mp. My preamp is a Pass XP-20. I'm planning to upgrade the player to an Esoteric k03xs when I save up the money in about six months or so, hopefully.

@juliaset751

6 жыл бұрын

The Brothers in Arms is one of my favorites, I have the original LP, the MoFi LP, the SACD, the CD, probably others. All of them sound better with phase reversal. I don’t know why phase reversal should even make a difference, given that the music has gone through about a hundred IC’s that probably are inverted. The drums especially sound different. BTW, my preamp is also the XP-20 and I love it.

@zarg05

6 жыл бұрын

MQA players and streamers are massively expensive at the moment. I don't think there will be enough take up.

London Symphony Orchestra still releases SACD`s

That's a hybrid sacd you have it has a traditional CD layer so it plays on a regular CD player, I guess DVD audio and Blu-ray audio is ancient history as well, Jazz artist still release a fair amount though. Hey, where can I get a shirt like the one you're wearing?

It played the regular 16bit 44khz stream in a CD player. SACD requires SACD specific hardware.

I have a shoebox full of SA-CDs that I realized, with horror, I haven't listened to in nearly a decade! This will soon change, though. I'm building a tiny house / man cave here in our little forest on the Big Island and I might as well make it into a listening room. The prospect of hearing the beginning of Time on "The" Dark Side of the Moon again brings a smile to my face! I'm just glad there are still players available. Aloha!

Steve, you’re just the best! Thank for all the helpful information over the years. I have a question about playing SACDs into powered stereo bookshelf speakers (currently Edifier S3000 Pro). I have a vintage Sony 400-disc DVD/CD changer with SACD playback. However, I just learned that Sony doesn’t provide the SACD information through its digital outputs (optical or digital coaxial). Since I’m wanting to connect the RCA line output directly into my powered speakers, will the high quality SACD signal be output through the two stereo RCA jacks? Thanks, and sorry I didn’t get this out in two sentences. All the best! ~ Danny

I like collecting physical format so I stay away from MQA. Streaming just doesn't cut it for me

@markd4292

3 жыл бұрын

Don't know if you are going to get this but...I hear you about streaming isn't for you. I "don't think" it's for me too, yet I may have to do it until I establish a CD/LP collection again. I hear you can download music or rip it onto a USB, and then listen to it from the USB? Wha? How does it sound? How can it sound good? I don't understand. Man, growing up in all analog era, I always liked what I heard, I never doubted what I heard was what I was hearing, but today, I question what I hear is Actually what is Meant to be Heard. Weird stuff.

What about MQA cd's which are available in japan maybe they might take off

@matthewv789

3 жыл бұрын

How on earth do people think MQA is putting ultrasonic sounds into the cd audio format without replacing audible sounds? There isn’t exactly any extra space to store additional data. Answer: it’s not. They’re introducing a very large amount of noise between 15-20KHz, much of which remains after unfolding (and the unfolding just reconstructs some sounds that nobody can hear). Coincidentally the noise is added in a range where most of the people most concerned with high-res audio can’t even hear anything. To the extent the noise is detectable, it probably sounds like an increase in “airiness”, which they might think is an improvement.

How about explaining what all these formats are for the people who are new to it or don't know... just a thought.

@bareknuckles2u

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly! This video goes nowhere.

I’m pretty sure those Rolling Stones hybrid SACDs had stickers on the outside of the shrink wrap about the SACD format. It was certainly a selling point for me back then, and I looked for that sticker to make sure I was getting the right version. What about BluRay audio? On the classical front there’s some cool stuff happening....big boxed sets coming out in new 24bit remastered versions. Considering that DG, for instance almost never had remastered anything once an initial 16 bit redbook cd came out, this is good news (and these things are space saving too). William Steinberg’s Holst Planets and Strauss Also sprach Zarathustra are spectacular on the new BluRay disc! Whether it’s because it’s hi-Rez isn’t SO important as the fact that they really did the work with the original tapes the right way. 4 channel mix is fun as a bonus (DG has sat on 800 Quad masters for all of these years....Pentatone has been doing SACDs from these recently). Always amazes me to see the comments saying you “can’t” hear quality differences between mp3 and whatever. Just because YOU can’t hear it doesn’t mean it’s not there. And Steve Guttenberg has reviewed MANY pieces of equipment to get a great budget system going for under $1000. So, don’t be lazy, use your ears!

@StringerNews1

6 жыл бұрын

'Always amazes me to see the comments saying you “can’t” hear quality differences between mp3 and whatever. Just because YOU can’t hear it doesn’t mean it’s not there.' Every time someone does, ask them for their sources. I think it's nothing more than a rumor. The burden of proof is always on the claimant, but I have looked and found no evidence of any substantive tests (ie. ones that provide useful evidence) of any kind that compare 320 kbps MP3 and _any_ form of LPCM, and yet I read a very specific claim being made on KZread at least once a week. Russian bots?

I am very new to Hifi. I am about to complete my first system since the late 70s and 80s. Its been too long. When I started shopping around for gear (speakers to front end) I was approached by sales people walking around with tablets and punching up songs. Wow, I thought, what the hell is this? It gets me a bit confused how many people into streaming and DACs and all things digital try to get that digital sound as analog as possible. Weird. Or is it just me? Am I missing something? Yet, I am in a rough situation because I have a modest CD collection and even less of a LP collection. So do I give in and get a streamer like a BlueSound? or a DSD player like the Sony Hap1Zes (which I heard was/is pretty good)? Or do I just get a regular Tuner (remember them?) with a CD player and a Phono and start LP collections again? I tell this: the speakers that speak to me the most are probably the most throw back "analog" associated kind: the Klipsch Forte III or IV, even JBL...something about paper cone and horn that is so darn nostalgic. I am temped to get an entry level streamer, just to have until I establish a nice CD/LP collection or should I even bother? It's so darn confusing.

I just received a SACD Beethoven and played it on my Sony 4k blu-ray player on some generic Samsung audio bar. Then I played the same album on the same speakers from a KZread video...couldn't really see much difference. So..where is the problem? My ears? The speakers? The Sony 4k player, or the SACD?

I bought the Let it Bleed SACD in 2002 and I'm still spinning it.

I love SACD, from a former Vinyl exclusive listener.

@johnholmes912

3 жыл бұрын

possibly because like vinyl there is a high level of distortion

@Gavynnnnn

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnholmes912 Not in any audible range. Noise shaping techniques, unlike vinyl lol

I had two of those rolling stones SACDs, they really are hard to tell unless you look at them.

Does DSD sound better than vinyl?

My Emotiva player had Sacd and yes it sounded awesome versus normal cd.

I purchased my outstanding Denon DCD610 compact disc player (used) from Ebay two years ago, for the seemingly reasonable price of $25 free shipping. It says 1991 on the rear panel. It plays music in stunning fashion, and the CD tray only occasionally needs a friendly nudge to close, but it always opens. I don't use it much now because I have a dac and youtube.

@mikeday62

6 жыл бұрын

Paul Homchick I need to read up on "ABX test with 44.1/16 lossless" and see what that is about. Thanks for the comment.

@phomchick

6 жыл бұрын

Sorry, Mike. I meant to add a comment to the video and not reply directly to you.

@mikeday62

6 жыл бұрын

Paul No worries. I might learn something this way.

The only SACD I've heard came with my Sony DVD/SACD Player -Bob Dylan- and with the receiver set up correctly, it sounded excellent.

I've bought 2 sacds this month.

Watching this, I am listening to your voice, wondering how you would sound if you sang some opera. You are an audiophile, I am sure you must have a few opera favorites, you should sing one in your next video...

Just picked up a used SACD player on Ebay. Denon 1510 - wasn't much time left in the auction so tossed in a half-hearted bid and won. Now am weirdly excited even though I don't yet own a single SACD disc and can clearly the see the rabbit hole opening up in front of me. :D Just hope it actually works. It'll be funny (not) if the SACD function has actually failed and all I'm hearing is regular Redbook and convincing myself in my head that it sounds amazing!

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW .IN YOUR OPINION DOSE ( SACD ) SOUND BETTER THAN A ( CD ). IF SO TO WHAT %. HOODAT

Excuse my ignorance, but do you need to buy an SACD payer to play the discs or will they play on a regular payer? With reference to the higher rate bit file formats, I am confused because there are very few titles out there with even MQA and what is out there, is very expensive.

@annescott2296

6 жыл бұрын

they will play on a cd player HOODAT

@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac

6 жыл бұрын

SACDs play on regular CD players.

@StringerNews1

6 жыл бұрын

No, SACD will not play on a regular CD player. Despite the name, a SACD is a DVD. Some SACD discs come with a Red Book CD layer, but there's no guarantee that every SACD is compatible with every CD player. MQA, forget about that. It's like MP3, except worse. All snake oil.

@audiogurulyndon

6 жыл бұрын

only if it'says "Hybrid Sacd" some are Stereo, and some are multi channel.

@charlesludwig9173

6 жыл бұрын

SACDs do not play on regular CD players. Hybrid SACDs, which have a CD layer will play the CD layer on regular CD players. The Rolling Stones albums you alluded to are hybrid SACDs. I own several of those; and, I've got to tell ya, I cannot here any divergence between CD and SACD layers.

My HiBy R3 Pro tells me it’s MQA when I play through Tidal

ABKCO Records' decision to market their Rolling Stones SACD's at the price of a regular CD (not at a premium "audiophile" price) offended SACD's inventor Sony, so Sony cut off ABKCO's access to Sony's SACD pressing plant, hence ABKCO had to reissue their new Rolling Stones masterings as regular CD's.

These were CD/SACD hybrid discs, at least in the UK they were. I got the lot bar a couple of the US versions of the albums

It is so said. There are so many scam today. A lot of "Hi Res" streaming made from oversampled MP-3 or other low quality source. 99% or LP reissues (even "audiophile") are made from digital sources or using digital technology. So, in result, you got digital and vinyl technologies drawbacks both.

@matthewv789

3 жыл бұрын

Also, lots of sources are 44 or 48, so delivering them in 96 let alone 192 isn’t adding anything. Not that they sound any worse than 192 sources either, which is why so many audio engineers don’t bother working in high-res in the first place.

Bought a couple of sacd's a while back when they were reasonably priced, and loved the sound. Checked recently and they are now way to expensive for me. But!!! Now with dolby atmos for home theatre on my pc which i recently got working, playing cd's easily rivals the sacd discs i have. I was blown away actually. It will put out 2 channel stereo only, even though it says its in multichannel mode ( or whatever the source material is). But wow, what a difference! I will never purchase another sacd as long as i can use dolby atmos for home theatre via my pc. Using VLC media player which gave me the best playback sound. Now i see some cd's released in dolby atmos which would be true multichannel but havent heard one yet. I beleive REM released a few.

I’ve been watching several videos about this and have been wondering: which of these formats sound exactly like what the microphones picked up in the studio? I bet it’s not DSD mastered from Analog Master Tape because the Super Audio Compact Discs made by MFSL have distortion on them, which, from what I’ve read, is claimed by MQA to be sourced from electrical issues with the analog gear used in mastering and is also claimed to be corrected in the MQA process. However, from testing out MQA files, I’ve heard that their minimum-phase filters still butcher the audio. Treble frequencies are muffled and sometimes bits of the sound wave are broken, making the audio choppy in places. That leaves digital formats such as CD, WAV, FLAC, and DSD, and analog formats such as Vinyl, Cassette Tape, 8-track tape, and Reel-to-Reel tape.

Sacd was fantastic!

I believe the outer packaging on those SACDs did indicate what they were.

SACD... not alive, not death... zombie?

@andreasleonlandgren3092

5 жыл бұрын

Dragan Antonijević my favourite format zombie or not.

I considered SACD dead when the official SACD webpage went dark, and that was a loooong time ago. The real question is DVD-A still alive under the guise of DTS-HS Master Audio?

I own several dozen or more SACD's. For the most part amazing good sound. Respectfully the many computer whatever formats are not going to be something I ever adopt to. I have my silver disc spinner and my turn table. I take my record player seriously. The silver spinner is for my SACD's some older red-books that are listenable and blue ray movies my family and I enjoy. For all I know the computer formats maybe amazing. Honestly I don't care and don't have time to figure out the many odd stuff to learn it.

Blu-ray audio also sounds great

i just booguht an McIntosh mct 450 but i don't have any sacd

Am into vinyl..always have been. But recently have been getting into high res downloads...out of curiosity other than anything else. But I can also listen to them via headphones ( no headphone amp on my main system) in my study whilst SWMBO is watching the telly. I have to say I am enjoying the experience. But so many digital formats at the moment and, I presume they will continue to evolve over time; some will fade away only to be replaced by others. So one thing i have started to notice is the plethora of the various playback ‘kit’ (software/ hardware) etc required to playback the different formats. As the formats evolve over time, i guess the kit will evolve too. With vinyl though, the format hasnt changed for decades; a spinning platter, a vinyl disk and a pickup. I cant see this concept changing much into the future either. My 1982 Linn will still be playing vinyl records for many more years but will today’s digital playback systems be able to cope with future digital formats? So for me, whilst i am seriously enjoying my current dalliance with digital, i dont see it as a long term option. Just an observation 😎

DSD and SACD continue to grow by the day. They are growing very slowly, but they are growing. Why? Because people are ALWAY going to be looking for higher quality versions of their favorite recordings. That alone is enough to drive both DSD and SACD forward over time.

@knockshinnoch1950

Жыл бұрын

I continue to pick up SACDs and purchase new discs when they become available- I hold out hope that with a "revival" of physical media SACD will be relaunched as a cool must have format similar to the UHQ vinyl niche. It is good to see more SACDs being released as part of the remastered reissues by Analogue and other labels.

@vitorfernandes651

Жыл бұрын

Wrong. It’s growing on classic and jazz. Where’s Michael Jackson, madonna, led zeppelin and a lot more?

@beezanteeum

Жыл бұрын

​@@vitorfernandes651 Due to her former label's restriction, Madonna maybe release her album in competing DVD based format: DVD Audio (since SACD is basically a DVD based format, too)

@ianstewart2563

Жыл бұрын

Incorrect. For surround sound you need sacd. Cd is two channel only. But it exceeds human hearing capabilities. In short cd frequency response is 22.5khz. Nobody can hear above that. And anyone over 30 is unlikely to hear above 15khz. Sure sacd can give frequency response to 96khz. So what?? You won’t hear above 15khz, just like you won’t be able to hear a dog whistle. Sure cd is 16 bit v 24 bit for sacd. So what? 16 bit has dynamic range of 96db. Listen at that level for one minute and you’ll be deaf. Sacd has dynamic range of 144db. So what?? Masking effects mean the real dynamic range we can hear is way below 90db. Stereophile review of 1812 overture on Telarc found it’s dynamic range was 44db!! There’s zero music with dynamic range of 96db for good reason. Any difference between cd and higher resolution is due to different mastering. Sometimes manufacturers down resolve cd layer of sacds to make it sound inferior to sacd. The other difference is due to bad cd players with delta sigma dacs. I have Aqua La diva cd transport and La Scala r2r dac. I have oppo205 to Geerfab dbob to La Scala dac. On properly mastered sacd there’s no audible difference between layers. Check out esoteric sacds for proper mastering. Otherwise, unless you want surround sound, invest in a top cd transport and r2r dac, and buy CDs . Look at double blind study reported by AES 2007 that found humans can’t tell any difference between cd and higher resolution formats. Then look at the science of hearing. Then save your money rather than fall for the hype of high resolution (which double blind studies show can’t sound better than cd to humans).

Anybody remember DVD audio...

@richardmann5049

5 жыл бұрын

Don't know why it didn't catch on. Everyone has a DVD player or Blu ray. No need for another machine.

@DrinkWater713

4 жыл бұрын

@@richardmann5049 CD was good enough for 99.99999% of people, so DVD audio was overkill (and so was SACD).

@markd4292

3 жыл бұрын

DVD was cool. Hell man, I use to go to BlockBusters to rent video tape/movies. I have a lot of live concerts on DVD that I will not mind watching again, if I find a nice device that plays all medium or multi player.

@brpadington

3 жыл бұрын

I have a DVD-AUDIO setup. I love listening to Megadeth Peace Sells and Metallicas black album in 5.1

@laurentzduba1298

3 жыл бұрын

Before the streaming era - i.e. 1999 to 2010 - if you want your music to come in a resolution "better" than redbook CD, DVD audio was the most readily available option. Unfortunately, most of the 1980s era rock / pop albums reissued in 24 bit 96 KHz DVD audio format are actually mastered in 16 bit 48 KHz DAT and my system and my ears can easily tell.

sometimes I sit down and I wonder, how stupid this can get....

@konadbenz3383

6 жыл бұрын

RazorStrap I hope, i find forgiveness for this philosophical remark, In honour of gregory Isaacs fabulous record : soon forward, Which meant so mich for me. Around 1980. But smart kids like you weren't born yet. at the high times of music. so be happy with your IQ of 211

@stevevlahos5469

6 жыл бұрын

Stupidity has no bounds ;)

Nearly all music is recorded at 96/24 in professional studios and then down to 44.1/16 red book for consumer, a properly recorded red book track takes a lot of beating if it comes from a good nas streamer in wave or alac format. People then can do anything they want with the files, even make a vinyl record! Nearly all 2” tape machines have gone now so how do you propose recording music now?

@finscreenname

4 жыл бұрын

2" tape is making a huge comeback. So much so they started ramping up production to meet the demand.

I really wanted DVD Audio to take over from CD because the cost of a decent CD player has gone up. My only multi-channel sacd is Dark Side of the Moon, but I wish it was on DVD so that there's no chance that I'm unable to play the disc on newer gear.

Sacd is so good I still buy it and I love it. There are Also tons of files of it online.

I think some SACD were back compatible with regular CD players; still they should be information on the package, IMHO

@bepli6751

6 жыл бұрын

all were except some very rare once, they had two layers (one DSD and one PCM) so basically SACD is a normal CD with another layer added, still sacd is pretty much dead only very few releases

@brianmoore581

6 жыл бұрын

If it says "Hybrid SACD" it has a CD layer that will play on standard CD players, in addition to the SACD layer that only plays on SACD players. If you see the CD logo on the package, that also means it has a CD layer. Many SACDs are single layer, so those will not play on a standard CD player. Also, if you know where to look, there are thousands of SACD titles available, and more are released almost every day. Acoustic Sounds, Music Direct, CD Japan, Amazon, there's no shortage of places to get your SACDs. What bothers me is that we audiophiles finally got an audiophile format and the majority of audiophiles ignored it. This should be our standard by now. It is that good. Try it. You'll like it. Grab a used player off of EBay if you don't want to spend much.

Wasn't Bob Dylan's catalogue released in SACD?

@alandunn4459

5 жыл бұрын

Yes Sony / Columbia released them.. They have more recently been done by mfsl as well in sacd format and generally are an improvement over the original Sony releases

@dannytse8767

2 жыл бұрын

@@alandunn4459 MoFi also announced the first 6 studio albums by the Eagles and the David Lee Roth era Van Halen titles will be released on SACD. The first 2 Eagles studio albums have already been released on SACD.

I'll give SACD a try funny how CD all of a sudden just wasn't enough to my ears anymore. I might as well getting used to see and buy a lot of Jazz and classical albums from now since that's the SACD's bread and butter genres. I just need some good universal player to get me started.

Nice preamble for buying the new McIntosh CD/SACD player, but the fact is CD players are going the way of the Dodo bird, cassettes or 8 tracks. I believe best to save your money for buying online content online, sometimes actually free to listen to, or buying improvements for your audio system if you have an itch for spending money. Personally a good used turntable and decent cartridge is a worthwhile addition to any system if not done so. It not superior to digital but can be very relaxing.

I have Tidal MQA and it don't sound any better to me. Actually head to head, my turntable beats all formats.

Ok this question goes out to someone that really knows what they are talking about becuase i unfortunately do not. DISCLAIMER: So i am not willing to buy an oppo sacd/bluray player nor a ps3 to copy them digitally. I have a denon avr3400h and a sony bluray player that can pass sacd/dsd through hdmi with a set of klipsh rp260ms. So i absolutely love listening to my bob dylan sacds and i feel i am hearing it at its full potential. Now this is were i am going to get scolded by you guys. I want to capture the sacd stereo layer through analog rca cables onto my computer using audacity(let me know if there is a better or easier program you recommend). And capture it to flac files, i have lots of space so not afraid of big files. So my question is how much am i going to loose going this route? Will i be getting the pure dsd audio through the analog? I have the bluray player setup so that it is actually playing the sacd layer and it is setup for analog out not the hdmi out....so there should be no pcm conversion or any conversion for that matter right? Now i do want to retain the high res audio but the other reason i am doing this is because the mix is different on the sacd layer and it is also the original master tapes from the Columbia vult. I want to be able to play the sacd layer mix on the go on things such as plex where i can listen to the full umcompressed flac files. So am i crazy? Lol Thank you in advance, Shane

@donaldspaulding6973

4 жыл бұрын

Good question. The short answer is yes, it will degrade the sound. Why? Because you are adding another DtoA and AtoD stage. Which the quality of either of those will most likely add noise and degrade the signal. Not so much using your existing audiophile analog out (will sound the same that is coming through your speakers), but the Analog to digital conversion in most computers is not great. You have to spend a grand to get professional quality conversion. But, I would get a decent CD recorder and then rip into itunes and convert. The only difference in this scenario would be the AtoD in the CD recorder.

Amazons streaming music set on high quality sounds as good as high res files i have down loaded from HDtracks. Haven't tried Tidal or spotify.

@wesw9586

6 жыл бұрын

Spotify is ok but definitely limited. Tidal HiFi is definitely better than the best of Spotify and better that 320 mp3. Honestly, I think Tidal HiFi sounds better than most of my FLAC files and the Masters stuff is just beyond amazing. Probably depends a lot on you speakers/amps and signal chain tho. I bet a lot of the people who "don't hear a difference" are listening to gear that doesn't give them everything they could be getting.

@hchavez

4 жыл бұрын

I beg to differ. I downloaded a Flac file an compared Amazon ultra HD. My download sounds better, Amazon's copy sounds compressed. My DSD files are better than Flac by a long shot.

As a classical music lover, I was an early adopter of SACD. An orchestral recording on multi-channel SACD can sound absolutely spectacular and I'm glad that companies like Pentatone remain committed to the format. Unfortunately, the industry's obsessive fear of unauthorized copying precluded any form of multi-channel digital output from early SACD players. My Sony SCD-XA777ES has five analog RCA outputs to support multi-channel recordings which, of course, means you'd need a receiver or pre-amp with corresponding inputs. The expense and clutter associated with the many interconnect runs was, I'm sure, a huge deterrent to acceptance of the format. Nowadays, encrypted multi-channel sound can be output over HDMI (Sony UBP-X800) making the format much more end-user friendly. Alas, too late.

@johnwatrous3058

Жыл бұрын

The Sony UBP-X800 will play SACD and DVD-A (audio). Unfortunately, I bought the Sony UBP-X700 not knowing it only decodes SACD. For $50 more, I could have got the X800 (X700 was $200 at Best Buy). BTW, SACD is 2 channel audio and DVD-A is 5.1 surround.

@beezanteeum

Жыл бұрын

The first attempt for SACD over HDMI is on PS3 (2006), so it's not too late per se

Most people that claim there is no difference between Normal cd (44.1) and High Rez formats, They also can't hear a difference between 320 mp3 and lossless. So I have no more to say.

@chriss881000

5 жыл бұрын

True. I will say it al comes down to blind tests. I have taken so many blind tests between 320mp3 and lossless. And i am wrong 50% of the time or more. In my opinion if u are Just 50% wrong in bling tests, then u are rly just guessing and hope to pick the right one. I have paid for some months for tidal and im not very impressed. So many songs that sounds so much better on spotify than tidal. Many tidal songs sound very dark and unclear(when i compare them). So i just stick to spotify for now.

@1697djh

3 жыл бұрын

The difference can be heard on more expensive systems, I can hear the difference between DSD and PCM, my MQA DAC went back to the shop for a refund, interesting how no British manufacturer supports MQA

SACD is a niche within a niche within the audiophile community. I love them as I love physical media. I’m not an MQA guy. I tried it and wasn’t convinced but then again I also bought DVD Audio! 😬

Pink Floyd has released their stuff on SACD. Animals in 5.1 is coming out on SACD this year.

Hey Steve, the guys over at PS Audio have a recording studio called Octave Records, and they have very hi end recording gear..DSD and SACD are the end product..the band I play with in Boulder will be recording in August,,,I’ll let you know how it goes..

@dannytse8767

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for the heads up.....I will look for the SACD when it's released.

SACD 4.1 is very much alive , Original 1970 Quadraphonic Tapes now being transferred and mastered at the Austria factory for the UK Label and USA Label

I think the thing that killed the SACD was the DRM that forced you to play them through the analog out of a player. It would be nearly impossible to find an SACD player that would compare to a good stand-alone DAC in sound quality. The best I have heard is the Oppo 103 with a Vanity HD board, which converts the DSD to 176.4/24 PCM, then via SPDIF to a DAC.

@brianmoore581

6 жыл бұрын

Julia Set the thing is, if you are converting DSD to PCM, then there's no point in it ever being DSD to start with. Esoteric and dcs, to name a few, offer DACs that convert DSD natively, no PCM conversion necessary. It sounds better that way. I would also add that many SACD players sound phenomenal on their own. Many also offer digital inputs that let the player function as a DAC for your other digital sources.

@juliaset751

6 жыл бұрын

Brian, I agree with you 100%, there is no point in converting to PCM. Maybe I was not choosing my words well enough, but that was the point I was trying to make. Most people would have to pay big bucks for a dedicated disc player just to play SACD’s at a decent quality. And they would not even have the choice if they wanted to play their SACD music as files from a server or portable player. My $1500.00 Marantz SACD player on the analog out clearly cannot compete with SACD’s converted to PCM and played from my server. I confess that I only have about 50 SACD’s, maybe if I had a thousand I might feel differently.

@venturarodriguezvallejo1567

6 жыл бұрын

Julia Set: Another point is most labels claiming "Pure DSD" (Blue Coast Music is a perfect example) do not record/mix/master in DSD...,,just because, to date, editing capabilities of the format are extraordinary limited, if existing. The usual procedure is to record, edit and mix in DXD (a very high sampling frequency PCM variant) and then convert the master to DSD. A non very fair method of dealing with things, from my point of view.

@kacperuminski1547

6 жыл бұрын

ventura rodríguez vallejo I have personally heard of people mixing in analog during recording before the ADC so that it stays as "pure DSD."

@venturarodriguezvallejo1567

6 жыл бұрын

@@kacperuminski1547 That's true. But there is a well known international code for this: the characters "a" and "d" ("a" for "analog", "d" for "digital") grouped in a set of three to ibentify every step of the whole recording. If a label, for example, records in digital, mixes in analog and then masters the record in digital (too many conversions, I think), it must be marked d/a/d. In this case, the company cannot claim the final product is "pure digital" (no matter if PCM or DSD) becase it is not.

I have read more than one article about Tidal being in fiscal trouble. Also I have yet to see MQA in a physical format.

@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac

6 жыл бұрын

Chesky Recordings has released a few MQA high-resolution CDs, Casey Abrams, Meiko, Mark Whitfield, and a few more.

@snowpuppy77

6 жыл бұрын

Good to know. Thank you Steve. More of that and I would become more interested.

@AndyP126

6 жыл бұрын

MQA requires dedicated hardware. You can't just buy an MQA disc and pop it any player. Tidal is doing the decoding in software. But to get the "MQA experience," you need a DAC with built in MQA decoding.

@snowpuppy77

6 жыл бұрын

I understood that you can play an MQA disc on any player but you have to have an MQA DAC to unlock it into high res MQA. Will look into that.

@60zeller

6 жыл бұрын

Andy Pastuszak actually you need a mqa enabled dac to get the full unfolding of the file. Now can you tell the different in the partial and full unfolding?

I bought most of the Stones hybrid discs titles at Tower Records when they came out. They had been recently demoed at the AES Convention. I don't recall, but perhaps the wrapped said that they were hybrid discs. They all said 2002 on the back. The previous releases came in plastic cases. Robert Ludwig skillfully mastered them so even the CD layer was a vast improvement. I love them; they sound great.

SACD is hardly dead. It's a niche format these days. I blame Sony, its creator, for not properly supporting the format. ABKCO was an independent record company, and I give them kudos for releasing the Stones' albums in hybrid SACD format.

I purchased a couple of MQA-CDs from Japan. They sound great, better than the same MQA tracks on Tidal.

I'm considering a Sony 4K video player with SACD capability thrown in right now. I've never heard it. It's actually a plus for the player imo vs possibly better video quality of a more expensive player I've got a few DVD-A discs from the early 2000s and it can play those too. My gripe with Tidal MQA with my trial of the highest tier Tidal is that it would require a Bluesound Node 2 for like $500 to really play them while I can play Amazon HD Ultra natively on my receiver. I personally do think some of the Ultra HD material on Amazon is the real deal. Some of it might be real high resolution, but the source material just isn't all that terrific anyway to really make the most of it. I hate for Amazon to dominate everything so I wish Tidal were more easily accessible, but $500 is too much fir me just to play Tidal MQA and pay an extra $8 or so a month for it vs Amazon Ultra HD.

All killed by DRM

@hxhdfjifzirstc894

3 жыл бұрын

Yep, pure poison.

I glommed on to SACD back in the day as it was the only digital format that I could stand to listen to more that one album before my ears started objecting. I have compared directly, vinyl, redbook, hi-res, MQA (software only) and DSD. What I have learned is that the most important thing in digital is the DAC. And probably the most important part of the DAC is the analog output stage. I have had a copy of "Jazz at the Pawnshop" on vinyl for many years. I bought a copy in DSD directly converted from analog. Playing the record followed by the DSD, it is like a curtain had been blocking the players and was lifted for the DSD. The improvement is so great that I suspect the recording was remastered. I never thought I would say this, but digital is now equal to analog, and can be superior in some cases, and as it turns out, always has been. It just took this long for people to start treating the digital to analog conversion seriously. So here is my hierarchy from worst to best: MP3, higher bit rate MP3, cassette (had to throw that in, and yes I have a Nak), CD and MQA (again software decryption only) are equal, 192/24 high res files, vinyl although a remastered high res can sound better, and DSD that is not converted from PCM. Although 44.1/16 PCM can sound very good, high res is better despite theories that say it is not, probably because the brick wall filters are set at a higher frequency and have less effect on the audible frequencies. MQA should have this same advantage.

The Rolling Stones Albums and Bob Dylan Albums were the very first SACD albums to be Pushed By Sony back in 2002-2003 I was lucky enough to buy most of The Rolling Stones SACDs and a small handful of Dylan Albums at Sony Galleria Store which was Sony Flagship Store down Tottenham Court Road back during the good years before they all closed down here in the UK. I'm. Big big fan of this format I also have aload of DVD-A Albums as well but SACD is the winner by a mile for me.