For stereo, that might be true. But as Spiff said, how do you distinguish between improvement from remastering vs improvement from the SACD format? Many people report SACDs sound a lot better, but so do some CDs that have been carefully remastered.
For multichannel SACD and DVD-As it's even more complex. They've been remixed as well, plus there's the multichannel factor.
I attribute much of the improvement to the remixing and multichannel format (and only when well done), not to the CD vs SACD format change.
For example I have several multichannel DVD-As I play on a regular DVD player (using the Digital Dolby or DTS 5.1 compatibility track). The good ones sound about equal to my good multichannel SACDs, despite SACD having a theoretical significant technical advantage in sample rate and dynamic range.
By contrast poorly-mastered/mixed multichannel SACDs and DVD-As both sound poor. Of course the technical audio quality of the original master tapes is also a factor.
Another example: my Elton John Goodbye - Yellow Brick Road multichannel SACD sounds superb -- it's up there with DSOTM in terms of audio and mix quality. Is it SACD that causes this? Well my stereo CD of the same album also sounds very good when played in Dolby PLII. Not as good as discrete multichannel SACD, but very good. By contrast the stereo CD Elton John - Don't Shoot Me is acoustically flat and lifeless by comparison, despite good material. Yet it was recorded in the same studio, by the same artist, using the same recording engineer as Yellow Brick Road, about 1 year apart! This well illustrates how there are very signifcant factors at play besides CD vs SACD technical details and alleged player quality.
