|
|
|
raffells said:
My own comment therefore is,
If you try your own Ray Kimber type plaitted lead (It is not Russ design) and it doesnt work then it shows either limitations in your system or, somebody has made tremendous improvements to filtering in a stock machine.Either way you cannot lose.
Raffells,
I can lose as I place a value on my own and others time and of course, few people (save un-reconstructed [insert hobby]-philes) wish to waste money. If it hasn't been published in a peer-reviewed publication, it isn't science so ipso facto it isn't measurable ipso facto it is a waste of anybody's and everybody's* time.
As our own ASA acknowledges (and it only examines Russ because Kimber products were not marketed in such a scandalous manner), there is NO SCIENTIFIC JUSTIFICATION for such claims. Link: http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_44177.htm
As the good scientist that I try to be, like BG on badscience.net, I am perfectly willing to change my mind if you can provide peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary...
PN
*: except those fraudulent individuals those who peddle such claptrap
|
|
|
|
|
|
FunkyMonkey said:
Are there any SACD players that one can deem to be reference SACD players? I.e. that take the DSD stream and convert straight to analogue, that has a neutral sound, and that is built to high-end audiophile standards?
There's no need pay thousands of dollars for a SACD player. While not exactly cheap, for about $1,000 the Sony DVP-NS9100ES DVD/CD/SACD multichannel player is superb. When you play audio only, all video circuitry is bypassed. It's not blu-ray, but on standard DVDs the video is first class too. Excellent build quality as well, which is why it has a five year warranty.
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr July 16, 2008 (13 of 26)
|
|
Cherubino said:
There's no need pay thousands of dollars for a SACD player. While not exactly cheap, for about $1,000 the Sony DVP-NS9100ES DVD/CD/SACD multichannel player is superb. When you play audio only, all video circuitry is bypassed. It's not blu-ray, but on standard DVDs the video is first class too. Excellent build quality as well, which is why it has a five year warranty.
Why not just buy an Oppo player and be done with it. Many think this is a reference too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stvnharr said:
Why not just buy an Oppo player and be done with it. Many think this is a reference too.
Nonsense. The Oppo is nowhere near the same class player as the Sony. As to build quality, the Oppo 1 year warranty speaks volumes as to their confidence in products longevity.
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr July 16, 2008 (15 of 26)
|
|
Cherubino said:
Nonsense. The Oppo is nowhere near the same class player as the Sony. As to build quality, the Oppo 1 year warranty speaks volumes as to their confidence in products longevity.
I wasn't trying to suggest that the Oppo is as good as it gets. But it is cheap and plays music for at least a year. And they do have several models to choose from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FunkyMonkey said:
Are there any SACD players that one can deem to be reference SACD players? I.e. that take the DSD stream and convert straight to analogue, that has a neutral sound, and that is built to high-end audiophile standards?
I had the same question. I plan to replace my Marantz DV6400 with another one.
I compared the NAD Master Series (DVD+SACD) with a TEAC Esoteric SA-60 (SACD only, multi-ch). The SA-60 should be around 5000 US$, double from the NAD, and it is surely better. TEAC has also other more expensive HW and they sound better if you have the gear for it.
Look also for KRELL or PRIMARE (not the same league as KRELL but many says it is the best universal player so far), each have terific reviews.
A vendor told me that all high end universal players have their sales going down because of BlueRay. People are waiting for the next universal players... Hard to justify few 1000's $ on obsolete tech...
This is the main reason I think I will go for the TEAC, it is SACD only.
If you don't care about multich, there is many others. AYRE, high-end Marantz...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks to all for your views on this subject. I better explain the reason for starting the thread. Which is that I love the PS3 for my SACD playback, but I know that I can get better and will have to do so (later rather than sooner) because the PS3 will not last forever, and newer PS3 models are not goign to have SACD playback.
I will have to go one of two routes - get a player that gives (MC) DSD output, and rely on my Onkyo receiver to convert to analogue. Or invest in a (MC) reference level player (because I feel I need that level to top the PS3 , and also to last me for several years at least) that does on-board decoding and conversion, leaving the receiver to do the amplification.
|
|
|
Post by Fugue July 17, 2008 (18 of 26)
|
|
rickyd1969 said:
A vendor told me that all high end universal players have their sales going down because of BlueRay. People are waiting for the next universal players... Hard to justify few 1000's $ on obsolete tech...
Will the next generation Blue-Ray players play SACD? I just bought a Sony BDP S350, and it won't play SACD.
|
|
|
Post by toddao July 17, 2008 (19 of 26)
|
|
Fugue said:
Will the next generation Blue-Ray players play SACD? I just bought a Sony BDP S350, and it won't play SACD.
If you wanted sa cd playback you should have gone with PS3(not the 40GD though)
and you would also have got yourself the best BD player around.Why not see if you can change it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Windsurfer said:
To summarize, recording engineer Erdo Groot (posting as GROOT GELUID) said in another thread (I paraphrase here) that he can make a good stereo recording but that he can make a great multi-channel (surround) recording. We are not talking about putting instruments all around you but rather in trying to recreate the sound of the concert hall in your listening room.
Getting off the topic a little - but: if we are using SACD to recreate the space of the concert hall in one's listening room, does this mean the most acoustically neutral room is to be preferred for a listening room - so as to avoid the listening room's acoustic qualities interfering with the recorded experience?
I would love to be able to compare an SACD recording in my listening room (which I am sure imposes its own colourations, etc ...) and a genuinely acoustic-neutral listening room. I am sure that the latter room would allow for the production of a more genuine illusion of being present in the recording venue.
|
|
