|
Anonymous | Just want to know what people think if the better of the 2 as far as sound goes. Does one sound better than the other? Is there any reasonably prices player that can play both? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Drew_and_not_uWilmington, NC United States Post Number: 38 Registered: Nov-04 | They both sound great to me, an incredible step up from stereo CD. DVD-A technically should sound better simply because there is more space on the disc but it's mostly how each individual album is recorded and mixed. I have the Pioneer DV-578A. It plays both DVD-As and SACDs exceptionally well. It also puts out great picture and sound from DVDs. You can read a review here: http://reviews.cnet.com/Pioneer_DV_578A_S/4505-6473_7-30917074-2.html?tag=tab You can find it at some vanns.com for about $130. hope this helps ---drew--- |
|
Silver Member Username: Arnold_layneMadridSpain Post Number: 344 Registered: Jun-04 | Yippee, Format war again!!! IMHO, SACD sounds really analogue whilst DVD-A shows finer details in the music. DVD-A 192/24 is more breathtaking for me, so far. But this is merely swift experiences and subjective opinions of mine. Like most audiophans, I haven't yet played one album recorded in both formats through two dedicated state-of-the-art equipments. Hence I dare not (and should not anyway) impose my point of view on anyone. Anyway, here's a link to a SACD/DVD-A dynamic comparision by somebody much wiser than me: http://users.bigpond.net.au/christie/articles.html Something strikes me: DV578A always downsamples SACD to 88.2/24 PCM, yet people say it sounds pretty good, some even distinguish certain "SACD qualities". Maybe it doesn't matter so much having 2 competing formats, maybe the key issue is that there is life beyond CD. Cheers AL |
|
Bronze Member Username: Drew_and_not_uWilmington, NC United States Post Number: 40 Registered: Nov-04 | I guess the most important thing is that it's still 24 bit, perhaps the sampling rate doesn't have as great of an impact on sound quality as the sheer amount of information available. As for the formats, I agree with you. Though my experience only covers the 9-10 DVD-As and SACDs I have, I've come to prefer DVD-A. It just seems to sound more rich. This is not to say, however, that SACDs don't sound spectecular as well. The nice thing about SACDs is that you can still play many of them in your car. But I imagine that as in-car 5.1 systems become more and more common (which they already are) DVD-A and SACD support won't be far behind. Won't that be great!? Now I've gotten myself all worked up =\ |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1458 Registered: Aug-04 | I now have around 40 hi-res titles and as far as what I believe to be the best sounding format I think DVD-A and SACD are just about equal, though I tend to put SACD slightly in front when comparing the best of each in my collection. How to describe the difference is difficult - maybe it's the analogous type of sound, but it is something that becomes apparant to the senses after listening to a recording for a reasonable time. Of course this could change with the next DVD-A purchase. It's a close call. |
|
Silver Member Username: Arnold_layneMadridSpain Post Number: 347 Registered: Jun-04 | The 24 bits gives dynamic range, losely speaking the difference between silence and full volume. Sample frequency on the other hand is often associated to audio frequency, and debates about if the limit is set by our ears or if we actually sense inaudible vibrations somehow. But IMO we should also remember phase, i.e. the timing when different tones and resonances reach our ears. SACD is originally not 24 bits. It is a one-bit technology, whith a very high (> 2.8 MHz) sampling frequency. Cheers AL |
|
Anonymous | my rantz, wow u have allot of disks.. can u make a list, of what you have? |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1470 Registered: Aug-04 | Anon, You can find many of them listed on the "Rate your hi-res discs here" thread: https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/68570.html |
|
New member Username: JbecvarPost Number: 3 Registered: Mar-05 | I can't really tell the diff IMO they're both great, cause they sound better then cd's, and you have to love the 5.1 on a lot of the discs, in fact, I won't buy one if it's not 5.1 |
|
Bronze Member Username: Drew_and_not_uWilmington, NC United States Post Number: 41 Registered: Nov-04 | I think the stereo SACDs are great too. Death Cab For Cutie's "Transatlanticism" is a stereo only SACD but it still sounds amazing. |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanMt. Pleasant, SC Post Number: 639 Registered: Dec-03 | Both formats can yield great sound. I have great and not so great discs in both formats. As with any disc format the sound beyond the performance is mostly dependant on the recording engineer and the mastering quality. Probably why great recording masterers get paid so much. |
|
Silver Member Username: ShokheadLakewood, CA USA Post Number: 116 Registered: Jan-05 | Cant tell any difference but SACD Hybrid is better if you use cd's in your car. |