2 channel vs. multi-channel

[O'Shag]

Westcott, I see you have a pair of Altec Valencias. I love those speakers. What are you driving them with??

[O'Shag]

Feanor,

I do agree with what your saying with regard to SACD being a niche product, and it is certainly higher fidelity than CD. For example, I listen to 'Oscar Petersen and Friends' on regular CD running through my Musical Fidelity trivista DAC 21 (an excellent DAC), and it sounds very good. I then listen to the same Oscar Petersen and Friends via SACD. The SACD is better. Even though it is only a two-channel SACD, its immediately evident that there's more 'there'. The music has much more sparkle and sizzle - not in a bright tizzy way, but more the way of the real thing. Symbals have a more real brassy ring and attack. Drums have more wieght and texture. The midrange is more present, and in this particular recording the space and air is more evident. This particular preformance from the late 60's using rather crude recording gear - one can even hear the microphone amp distorting here and there. The MC SACDs I have do, in general, sound fantastic.

I don't feel however that SACD is better than vinyl. At its best Vinyl has an open natural quality that gets closer to the real thing. Air and space are not 'created' so much as existing naturally by virtue of the direct analoge format. When listening to a well-recorded LP, its easier to place instruments, and easier to differentiate from one instrument/voice to the next because vinyl doesn't sound at all compressed. Also, vinyl is better when it comes to instrument textures. Finally the soundstage of vinyl is generally superior despite it being a two-channel format. Of course all this depends on the phono stage, which determines the amount and accuracy of information being presented to the amplifier....

[Feanor]

Feanor,

I do agree with what your saying with regard to SACD being a niche product, and it is certainly higher fidelity than CD. For example, I listen to 'Oscar Petersen and Friends' on regular CD running through my Musical Fidelity trivista DAC 21 (an excellent DAC), and it sounds very good. I then listen to the same Oscar Petersen and Friends via SACD. The SACD is better. Even though it is only a two-channel SACD, its immediately evident that there's more 'there'. The music has much more sparkle and sizzle - not in a bright tizzy way, but more the way of the real thing. Symbals have a more real brassy ring and attack. Drums have more wieght and texture. The midrange is more present, and in this particular recording the space and air is more evident. This particular preformance from the late 60's using rather crude recording gear - one can even hear the microphone amp distorting here and there. The MC SACDs I have do, in general, sound fantastic.

I don't feel however that SACD is better than vinyl. At its best Vinyl has an open natural quality that gets closer to the real thing. Air and space are not 'created' so much as existing naturally by virtue of the direct analoge format. When listening to a well-recorded LP, its easier to place instruments, and easier to differentiate from one instrument/voice to the next because vinyl doesn't sound at all compressed. Also, vinyl is better when it comes to instrument textures. Finally the soundstage of vinyl is generally superior despite it being a two-channel format. Of course all this depends on the phono stage, which determines the amount and accuracy of information being presented to the amplifier....

Perhaps it's because of the limitations of my hearing -- I go deaf somewher between 10kHz and 12kHz and I suffer from tinnitus -- but I don't hear hear the alleged superiority of vinyl, nor do I hear the superiority of SACD over CD in stereo. Where the superiority of SACD is clear is in multi-channel that, when done properly, can convey a sense of realism that stereo cannot equal.

Of course there are lots of very, very poorly produced CDs that provide the ammo for the attacks on this medium, but a medium must be judged to the best examples, not the worst. The best CDs give away nothing to vinyl, nor to (stereo) SACD, that my modest ears hear.

[O'Shag]

Granted CD at its best is very good. I can't lay claim to having the best CD source but I have heard top players in friends' systems. My own CD source presently is the Denon DVD 3910 as transport feeding the Trivista DAC 21 via Purist Audio digital cable. The trivista DAC feeds the signal to the preamp via Transparent MusicLink Ultra cables. I have just bought and have yet to receive the California Audio Labs Alpha transport, and I'm interested to see if it improves on the denon as transport. I didn't get the Delta DAC as I know the Trivista DAC 21 is superior - I do own a California Audio Labs Tempest II CD player (six tubes), which despite its attributes is trounced by my denon/Trivista DAC 21 combo.

With software availability considerations aside, I hear quite plainly that; SACD, DVD/A, DTS 96/24, and HDCD all in two-channel played on the Denon 3910 or Sony DVP-NS9000ES are clearly superior formats sonically. I would agree with you that the MC does add a dimension to the music. MC when mixed properly is superior to two-channel.