|
|
|
Like I wrote a short while ago I've been working on a new FAQ because no really comprehensive one was available anywhere. It's not yet finished but it's in a state now where it ready to be reviewed.
You can find the DRAFT version here: /misc/faq022.pdf
IMPORTANT NOTE: the email address mentioned in the document is not active yet so please don't send any messages to it. Instead post your comments here or alternatively mail them to my address as shown in the member index.
Furthermore, please don't publish this link outside this forum. It's just a temporary one until we can publish a proper version, hopefully in a week or two. Probably it will be in HTML format rather than as a PDF document.
Have a look and share your suggestions so we can make a better document to help spread the word about SA-CD.
|
|
|
Post by pelley May 30, 2007 (2 of 24)
|
|
The FAQ looks good!
For some reason I had it in my head that the upcoming Sony BDP-S300 would play SACD. Maybe I had just assumed that. But you're right-- I don't see the logo on the face of the player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pelley said:
For some reason I had it in my head that the upcoming Sony BDP-S300 would play SACD.
Thanks. The BDP-S300's major improvement over the BDP-SE1 is that it plays CD!I'm still hoping the BDP-S500 will add SA-CD playback. You may be interested in this thread: /showthread/18500/19668/y#19668
|
|
|
Post by DSD May 31, 2007 (4 of 24)
|
|
I found a couple small errors
"The obvious benefit of a hybrid disc is that you don’t need to replace all your CD players by SA-CD players at once. In fact you could even start collecting SA-CDs before you own a CD player."
should be changed to read:
"The obvious benefit of a hybrid disc is that you don’t need to replace all your CD players with SA-CD players at once. In fact you could even start collecting SA-CDs before you own an SA-CD player."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you *could* start your collection even before you own a CD player but there would be very little sense in that. Obviously I meant SA-CD player. Thanks for your remark.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fantastic Effort..I think even those who have been in it since the begining will find something to learn.Well done..
Minor comments,,
The titles of each section should be hyperlinked to the sections in the body.to make it more user friendly.....Lot of work.
I suppose the major question I didnt find that I often hear.
Why do some people not find the sacd listening test a major system improvement.?.
I have a list from years of experience.
Probably the most honest answer is?. Cos they dont want to spend any more money..or.
They have just read a hifi review that tells them that " Brand X Cd player" is the Bees knees and cannot be beaten for the money...(even funnier)
Ive seen a demo once where they had just the front right and left surround channels plugged in for a stereo demonstration.Now that one really did sound different...
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intersting question. I'm not quite sure yet though how to integrate that semi-objectively into the FAQ.
As for linking the ToC to the entries: in my source document (MS Word) that actually works. The final FAQ will probably be like a normal HTML page. Apologies for the temporary inconvenience and thanks for the feedback.
|
|
|
Post by amatala June 1, 2007 (8 of 24)
|
|
Great effort indeed!!!
There is however one affirmation which I find quite radical and not universally correct:
"The sampling frequency of CD, 44,100 times per second is simply not good enough to reproduce a good ‘sound stage’ which is why you may find that the sound of a CD ‘sticks to the speakers’: you’ll hear it coming from the left speaker and from the right speaker but there’s nothing in between."
The symptoms described here are more specific to a badly optimized system than to the CD sampling frequency.
I have heard expensive systems based on CD which sounded so open and natural that I couldn't believe that what I was hearing could come from a CD!
So I strongly believe that it is possible to make CD sound good! Of course it is much more difficult and expensive to build a very good CD-based system than a very good SACD-based system and, no matter what, CD playback will never fully match SACD (vocals do sound so good on SACD!), but I have found that starting with a certain price range, the differences tend to become rather subtle (I am of course referring to stereo SACD here, multi-channel is a completely different experience).
|
|
|
Post by fafnir June 1, 2007 (9 of 24)
|
|
amatala said:
Great effort indeed!!!
There is however one affirmation which I find quite radical and not universally correct:
"The sampling frequency of CD, 44,100 times per second is simply not good enough to reproduce a good ‘sound stage’ which is why you may find that the sound of a CD ‘sticks to the speakers’: you’ll hear it coming from the left speaker and from the right speaker but there’s nothing in between."
The symptoms described here are more specific to a badly optimized system than to the CD sampling frequency.
I have heard expensive systems based on CD which sounded so open and natural that I couldn't believe that what I was hearing could come from a CD!
So I strongly believe that it is possible to make CD sound good! Of course it is much more difficult and expensive to build a very good CD-based system than a very good SACD-based system and, no matter what, CD playback will never fully match SACD (vocals do sound so good on SACD!), but I have found that starting with a certain price range, the differences tend to become rather subtle (I am of course referring to stereo SACD here, multi-channel is a completely different experience).
I agree with amatala; this is a fine effort, but the assertion that RBCDs all have the proverbial "hole in the middle" is simply ridiculous. There are many valid reasons for SACD superiority.
|
|
|
Post by ldj325 June 1, 2007 (10 of 24)
|
|
Your statement if probably correct for most people's systems. But maybe it would be more correct to add ..."except in very high end systems." A few weeks a go I was able to demo a SACD (Tommy)in a system that was conservatively 150-200K. I listened through a Ayre $6K universal player as well as a $45K player (the name escapes me right now)and the speakers were Wilson MAXX. After listening to the SACD, a standard CD of a male vocalist was put on which sounded even better than the SACD. I was amazed at how much information there is on a regular CD--given the right system.
But to put this into proper context WHAT A GREAT SACD FAQ! Thanks for the great work!!!
|
|
