Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater SaCds!! I will never buy another regular cd again…

I just bought my first SaCd, Pink Floyd "The Dark Side Of The Moon"

The Musical quality of the cd is much superior to regular cd's and blows mp3’s away, I might even start paying for music again… hrm… what a novel though..

The receiver I have is a Marantz SR6300 and a Marantz MM9000 amplifier. I have an epic 60 system, with a vp150 center, and I am currently using only 1 surround, due to the constraints of my room. But even with 1 Qs8 the sound is killer, the surround sound.

I was wondering if any of you have any SaCd's and if so which ones do you have, and where did you find them? I went to circuit city and they only had like 7 SaCd’s, then I went to Best Buy and they had more, but still not much of the music I listen to….



Anyhow, for those of you who do not own any SaCd’s and have a player that will play them, Go out and buy one! You will not regret it…

Don't be fooled into thinking that all SACD's sound the same. Just like on regular CD's, the quality of mixing and mastering still applies. I also have the Pink Floyd album (which is awesome) and I have Aerosmith Greatest Hits and Michael Jackson's Thriller. The Aerosmith SACD is also impressive (albeit in 2 channel), but the Thriller SACD is actually a downgrade (in my opinion) to the redbook version. DSOTM sets the benchmark, but not all SACD's are of the same quality. But I do think that for the most part, the mixing engineers take the SACD version a bit more seriously.

I have the same SACD as well. I agree it sounds great! I have an Epic 80 system (minus the sub, went with HSU), powered by a Denon 3805.

Sounds amazing..

FYI: One of the best places to buy SACDs = amazon.com

I agree w/ player8. Not all SACDs are created equal. You just happen to listen to one of the best mastered SACDs. Unfortunatley, you'll find that a lot of titles may say SACD or DVD-A, but the mix is AWFUL. Buyer beware...

That being said, welcome to multichannel audio. As you can see, w/ the right set up and right disc, it sounds AWESOME.

Enjoy.

Dak, it's good that you're enjoying that particular SACD, but as I've previously commented, what counts is the technical expertise used in the the recording, mixing and mastering of a performance; whether it winds up on a CD, DVD-A or SACD makes little or no real difference(except for the multi-channel aspect, if present).

And as I've said before... the medium is not the message. If the next D.O.A. or Anti-Flag album is only available on 8-track, I'm dusting off a player... same if I'm given a choice between Mel Brooks' History of the World in mono DVD or Jay and Silent Bob Eat Steakums in 9 discrete channels.

Bren R.

Well, the multi-channel aspect IS what makes them better (ASSUMING the mastering and recording was done correctly..)

The added resolution of DVD-A and SACD is also imprtant for older analog recordings because there is more of the recording on the disc. So when you hear a guitar note, you not only hear the strings, but also the fingers sliding on the strings. But again, I would recommend reading reviews of SACD's and DVD-Audios before buying them because they can be poorly mastered or mixed.

One site I enjoy is www.highfidelityreview.com

i will check that site out, thanks..

bigjohn

I'd like to see numerical proof of that. I can hear fingers sliding on strings from CDs just fine, given good cans, good recording, and/or good speakers. I just don't buy that analog naturally has higher resolution, or that that higher resolution would result in audible change.

{edit} No, I'm not trying to start another 10 page long flamewar.