DVD-a vs. SACD vs. CD

[RichP714 3,151]

 

interesting comparison:

 

http://sound.westhost.com/cd-sacd-dvda.htm

[BillD 239]

Well, most of the issue with SACD is ultrasonic.  I tend to agree that DVD-A sounds better to me.  But I can't hear much over 15 kHz anymore.  What could be an issue with ultrasonic noise is heating up your tweeters, causing them to be inaccurate in the audible band.  Makes me think that having an ultrasonic filter might not be a bad idea (remember the made-up Rane spec sheet for some device that had an ultraviolet filter?)

[RichP714 3,151]

 

 

Well' date=' most of the issue with SACD is ultrasonic. .....[/quote'] Yes, the tweeter issue caught my eye as well; maybe people that are SACD proponents are hearing that and attributing it to 'air' and 'spaciousness' ???? 

[Harryfan 20]

Re everyone’s comments on the new Beatles CDs…

Tell me, for two-channel audio, do you think the newer hi-resolution formats like SACD and DVD-A really offer any advantage over redbook CDs? I’ve listened to the new Kraftwerk remasters, as well as the entire Harry catalogue that was released in Japan a few years ago. They all sound stunning. It makes me wonder if those claims about the CD format having perfect sound wasn’t true after all, the only problem was lousy mastering. I have maybe ten hybrid SACDs and, sure, they sound great, but so does the CD layer on every one of them.

[snow 207]

Re everyone’s comments on the new Beatles CDs…

Tell me' date=' for two-channel audio, do you think the newer hi-resolution formats like SACD and DVD-A really offer any advantage over redbook CDs? I’ve listened to the new Kraftwerk remasters, as well as the entire Harry catalogue that was released in Japan a few years ago. They all sound stunning. It makes me wonder if those claims about the CD format having perfect sound wasn’t true after all, the only problem was lousy mastering. I have maybe ten hybrid SACDs and, sure, they sound great, but so does the CD layer on every one of them.

[/quote'] A very good recording on CD can sound better than a poor recording on SACD but it has been my experience that a very good recording on SACD sounds better than the identical recording on CD. I have a couple of albums that I have in both formats.

 

 

 

REGARDS SNOW

[TNRabbit 370]

Re everyone’s comments on the new Beatles CDs…

Tell me' date=' for two-channel audio, do you think the newer hi-resolution formats like SACD and DVD-A really offer any advantage over redbook CDs? I’ve listened to the new Kraftwerk remasters, as well as the entire Harry catalogue that was released in Japan a few years ago. They all sound stunning. It makes me wonder if those claims about the CD format having perfect sound wasn’t true after all, the only problem was lousy mastering. I have maybe ten hybrid SACDs and, sure, they sound great, but so does the CD layer on every one of them.

[/quote'] A very good recording on CD can sound better than a poor recording on SACD but it has been my experience that a very good recording on SACD sounds better than the identical recording on CD. I have a couple of albums that I have in both formats.

 

 

 

REGARDS SNOW

 

 

x2~

[Harryfan 20]

Well, I have some albums in both formats too, but that may not be a fair comparison.  I just wonder, if the new Beatles remasters had been issued as SACDs, how many people would be touting the amazing improvement in sound quality due to this new hi-rez format.