|
|
|
hookedondsd said:
I listen to mostly multichannel but I love my stereo sacds also. I don't understand the battle of the threads going on here between stereo/multichannel. We have a wonderful format that contains the best of both worlds.
I agree. The problem is that old-fashioned fuddy-duddys who delude themselves that somehow 2 channels are the source of all sonic magic, and anything more or less is sheer lunacy.
You see, there are some that accept and embrace technological advancements knowing that they ultimately bring benefits at far lower costs than what went before.
It's always been the same. People professing that vinyl is better than CD. CD-based systems are better than SACD. 2-channel is better than multi-channel. Without realising that people have had a different experience to them.
|
|
|
Post by Paul April 14, 2008 (22 of 93)
|
|
FunkyMonkey said:
I agree. The problem is that old-fashioned fuddy-duddys who delude themselves......Without realising that people have had a different experience to them.
Strange, you seem unable to realize that people who prefer stereo might simply have had a different experience than you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul said:
Strange, you seem unable to realize that people who prefer stereo might simply have had a different experience than you.
On the contrary, I prefer stereo music that was mastered in stereo. I dislike very much multi-channel that is just a gimmick. I think some of my tapes sound better than some of my CD's. But most of all I love SACD multi-channel when done well. In other words, I am not prejudiced about number of speakers or format, merely how the equipment is installed and the software used.
|
|
|
Post by twolugs April 14, 2008 (24 of 93)
|
|
Some interesting comments, most celebrating the fact that we have SACD whether it be MC or stereo.
I fall firmly into the stereo only camp as it's all I need/want, but I know that MC can also offer great things with great recordings.
I'm rather surprised that some seem to dismiss the SACD stereo layer as being not very worthwhile, to me the difference in quality/clarity between SACD DSD stereo and RBCD can be astonishing.
But then we all have different equipment/ears/opinions.
To get back to Esa's original point, I can't see how MC can ever be harmful to the format as some would appear to claim, but MC is certainly not the sole reason for SACD's existence, it's more of a further option (in my humble fuddy-duddy opinion)..
|
|
|
Post by zeus April 14, 2008 (25 of 93)
|
|
I don't understand this stereo vs multichannel divisiveness. SA-CD has succeeded (in a contracting market) precisely because it's able to offer something for everyone ... including a CD compatible layer for the bulk of purchasers who neither know nor care what an SA-CD is.
|
|
|
Post by Paul April 14, 2008 (26 of 93)
|
|
zeus said:
I don't understand this stereo vs multichannel divisiveness.
Is there even a large divide in the general market? I always figured the contention here, such as it is, boils down to the fact that a very small group of regular posters here like to debate their favorite cause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
eesau said:
Hi,
there has always been a lot of discussion about the support of
multichannel audio with SACD. Some of us in the discussion forum
are strictly and constantly claiming that the multichannel audio is
a gimmick and possibly even harmful to SACD.
So what do you think?
I personally don't buy stereo only SACDs at all because I don't
think I would gain anything when doing that. To me, the only point in
playing SACDs is multichannel audio.
best regards,
Esa
Interesting thought, but that's not the way I see it. Each to their own though. I really don't think that MCH is a gimmick, and thinks it's very good if mixed well. I don't mind stereo (or even mono) though, and don't see that SACD - or DVD-A - have anything to do with single, two, or multi-channel music. I feel it's about aiming quality-wise, as high as you can. There could be some older music recording out there, where a MCH mix would be hard to achieve (I'm not an expert though), so it would make sense to leave it as stereo or mono. That can also please the purists out there - and why not!!?? Slightly to one side, I have a DVD-A that offers the originally released mono mix, a stereo mix (as originally recorded), and a 5.1 mix. Surely this is good, as it should please all. One DVD-A I have, apart from offering stereo and MCH, also offers the album in MP3!!
Interestingly enough though, I took delivery of my very first "stereo-only" SACD last week. It was Kitaro's Kojiki album, and it's incredible (apart from the clarity and depth), how it comes across as almost MCH instead of stereo.
|
|
|
Post by hanser April 15, 2008 (28 of 93)
|
|
I have a very good DAC for CDs (Aqvox), so Stereo SACD sounds better, but not drastically better than their CD counterpart on my equipment (if the same master is used). And I have a modified Denon 2910 (ms-technik.de), so I have very good SACD capability, too. Therefore, multichannel is a deciding factor for me. Especially since I have a weak spot for the Tacet Real Surround approach.
|
|
|
Post by bholz April 16, 2008 (29 of 93)
|
|
Well, I got into SACD/DVD-A for the multi-channel as I had rebuilt my home theater to include surround (the emphasis was more on quality music reproduction). I really enjoy the MCH releases I have and was initially of a mindset that I would only buy MCH. In fact, if there is a MCH mix on the disk, I will likely never listen to the Stereo SACD tracks.
However, that has not stopped me from purchasing and enjoying some fantastic Stereo and even Mono SACD titles (e.g. Ryan Adams - Heartbreaker, John Coltrane - Soultrane, Miles Davis - Steamin',....).
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
bholz said:
Well, I got into SACD/DVD-A for the multi-channel as I had rebuilt my home theater to include surround (the emphasis was more on quality music reproduction). I really enjoy the MCH releases I have and was initially of a mindset that I would only buy MCH. In fact, if there is a MCH mix on the disk, I will likely never listen to the Stereo SACD tracks.
However, that has not stopped me from purchasing and enjoying some fantastic Stereo and even Mono SACD titles (e.g. Ryan Adams - Heartbreaker, John Coltrane - Soultrane, Miles Davis - Steamin',....).
Bill
I also thought I would buy only MCH releases at first, and nearly always tend to listen to the MCH mix if it's available. My SACD collection has grown steadily over the last year (since I have a universal disc player), and interestingly enough two of my SACD albums do not offer a MCH mix. One is mono only, and the latest one is stereo only. The mono disc is the "Here's Little Richard" album, and definately sounds mono. That's not a criticism though. The stero only disc is Kitaro's "Kojiki" album, recorded in (I believe) 1990, and the quality is staggering. It's so weel "placed" and three-dimensional sounding. Admitedly, I do tend to listen to mono and stereo sources through all speakers, rather than just a stereo set-up (which therefore involves an element of signal processing/degradation), but the album does sounds almost MCH. I have one DVD-A where my wife seems to prefer the stereo mix, whereas I'm perfectly happy with all of the audio options.
|
|
