SACD

I've found that the Pentatone releases sound excellent even on a conventional CD player--noticeably improved from regular remasterings. In particular, Davis's BBC 5th symphony has tremendous fire and impetus in its latest iteration. I don't recall the LP sounding quite that good; it's never been on CD before, except in Japan (I think). The Beethoven 1st symphony he recorded with the BBC (or the LSO, I have to check) was never even released on LP, according to two discographies I have of Davis's.

I'm wary of getting an SACD player as I'm not sure I'd divine the difference, and I think it's an area for true audiophiles. (I'm not among them.) I do resent, however, the price of "hybrid" CDs being jacked up when I get no real benefit from them. In the earliest days of digital recording, the major labels were charging nearly 20% more for digitally-recorded LP new releases. That didn't last long.

As for "lossless" downloads, I've been mourning the loss of the elegant booklets included with some LPs. In particular, I recall the beautiful work included with the RCA Munch/BSO Berlioz Requiem, and the Solti Rosenkavalier libretto and accompanying package was just gorgeous. With CD, those accoutrements went the way of all flesh. Now most labels won't even give a listener a .pdf of a libretto with notes on a downloaded opera. Truly an unfortunate devolution.

Cheers,

Bill

> I'm wary of getting an SACD player as I'm not sure I'd divine the difference

I recently got an SACD player which I use for stereo. And when played with SACDs that have been recorded in high-resolution, the difference is obvious and sometimes stunning. The sound is incredibly natural and analogue, without the scratches and pops ... the most exciting change to my audio experience in 20 years. And, of course, it still a standard CD player too ... so it's forward and backward compatible with everything. 

You have to be careful though, as there are many SACD discs out there that have been recorded at basically CD resolution and thus are no better than CDs (they might have been marketed as SACDs for the multi-channel market). So, always make sure to check the recording resolution on the back of the box:  the minimum should be 96kHz / 24 bit and even better is pure DSD recording. And if the recording resolution is not stated on the box, just avoid it. For example, almost all BIS discs are recorded at standard redbook 44.1kHz, but are marketed as SACDs for the multi-channel market. So you have to be quite careful which brands you buy. Pentatone, Channel Classics, Caris, Mariinsky, etc are all brilliant. 

SACD is definitely superior to CD, provided you have the appropriate equipment and the recording company has done its job properly...Unfortunately, I have noticed, to my dismay, certain recordings that claimed to be SACD and cannot be convincing even with my KRELL equipment! Generally speaking, EXTON recordings are spectacular along with some Pentatone, Capriccio (The Shostakovich's Symphonies are at demonstration quality) and some older DG.

Parla

The good folks in marketing botched the SACD format right from the start by emphasizing the multiple-speakers rather than the boost in general sound fidelity; the warmer, rounder resolution.  It made the format sound gimmicky or even like a return to QUAD.

(Yet, some of those old QUAD recordings, like the Davis-Berlioz, sound great as SACDs!)

What's so puzzling is that BLU-RAY hasn't had this communication problem.  Even people who are sticking with DVD have a good opinion of its higher resolution picture and better sound quality.

But SACD retains its 'geeky' rep and no one seems able to undue the original damage.

I think the SACD format is great!  I don't think it is like VHS or Betamax clash at all as the joy of the hybrid SACD is that it gives you choice. So it does not mean those who do not have an SACD player cannot use it, but it does mean for those with SACD facilities it opens up the ability to enjoy the performance in stereo with a noticeably enhanced sound quality, SACDs are much warmer than CDs. For me though the real benefit of SACD is not just the enhanced quality but the fact that multichannel or surround sound playback is possible. You get the warmth of the recording venue or enjoy the recording in a very different way e.g. Kings Consort recording of the Coronation Anthems processing and McCreesh Missa Salisburgensis enveloping you with choirs and instruments in each corner, as it would have been in the church itself.  In SACD mulitchannel you hear so much more of the music.  

It is a great format which has been poorly marketed in my view and not managed properly by the majors, especially Sony Music which should have done far more to support the format given that Sony developed it.  I support labels like Alia Vox and Bis, Harmonia Munid USA etc that producing amazing discs and listening experiences at no extra cost than you would pay for an EMI, UMG or Sony CD.  There appears to be a resurrgence of the SACD in Japan which is interesting and all of these labels are releasing in this format, but at silly prices and often in stereo only, which makes no sense to me.  Why they cannot review their policies and release globally in surround at affordable prices I can't quite understand.  

There is a good demand out there but those who dictate the policies don't want to hear that.  Instead they don't want to give us, the customer choice, they want to keep giving us the old technology of the CD or push us down the download route, which is fine, but don't take away choice or options as some of us still prefer the tangible product but want it in a format that has moved forward as SACD has in my view.

I wanted to draw your attention to a relevant topic in the general forum: 

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/forum/general-discussion/japan-emi-umg-sa-cd

Here is a link to list of the EMI/Rattle SACDs scheduled for release in Japan later this month:

http://www.sa-cd.net/showthread/72597/72609/y

I agree that SACD is a superior sounding format (in the music hierarchy it goes: LIVE > BLU-RAY > SACD/DVD > CD/LOSSLESS DOWNLOAD > LOSSY DOWNLOAD). I can only echo the sentiments that I hope these companies will start to release their SACDs worldwide rather than just in Japan (it is impractically expensive to order them from there).

I absolutely agree. My only option for playing SACDs at present is on my Sony Blu Ray player!! And while the sound is superior, the 'breaks' between audio tracks are immensely annoying.

Sony won the SACD over DVD Audio argument (as they did with Blu Ray over HD DVD), although DVD Audio gave arguably better results i.e. a rerun of the BetaMax/VHS saga. While Sony have been releasing SACDs for years, it seems that only now the other 'major' labels are adopting the format. I use the term major loosely, considering that EMI looks likely to be sold again in the near future, and the rate of classical releases from these companies has dwindled dramatically. The independent labels are now leading the charge, but therein lies the difficulty - the niche markets won't convince the masses to adopt a new - even if superior - format. If EMI or Universal start releasing SACDs en masse worldwide then it may have a chance.