For what it is worth, the SACD disc has two layers.........a "normal" layer
and the SACD layer. Not all but most do. If you have a do not have a SACD player, you will not hear the SACD layer and will not notice a difference.

That being said, if you have at least a "mid-fi" system, you will hear a big difference between SACD and a normal player.

Beggar's and Let It Bleed were always my favs when I had a "mid-fi" player.

I would demo the normal layer and SACD layer for people and you could hear the difference. Much better and more clear instrument seperation.
My favorites were Mcintosh and Esoteric. I use a normal tube player now.

By the way on my system I could not notice that much difference on a below $800 SACD player.

While SACD is not what it was, the new Sony CD/SACD player only is a good one.

I have used players from $300-$5000.

i have a good friend whose ear i trust and he is BLOWN AWAY by the japanese sacd exile. he's doing a careful a/b comparison this weekend and will report the results to me.

Has anyone heard the Black and Blue sacd?
I'm especially interested in Melody, which I think was treated rather badly in the UM-remasters.

FLOWERS Super Deluxe Edition !!!

SADC is 100% marketing. With all of the Stones recordings, the source material and possibly a little mixing is the limiting factor. I've heard audiophile regular CD's - for example Bowers & Wilkins Audiophile recordings series - that sound insanely good. The only limitation being the loudspeakers and the room accoustics. It just shows how much can be poured out of a regular CD.

If you want to throw away your money, rebuy recordings as SACDs.

Ok Alef - i´ll agree with you, that no stones recording will ever sound so perfect (soundwise), just like an really audiophile recording.
Even if the stones stuff is on cd, vinyl, sacd or hi-def download - and the good audiophile recording is only on cd.

My experiences with the latest (and wonderful) ABCKO Remasters (from 2002 i guess), which are available in different formats are:
the sacd-layer from bb and lib sounds better, just a little, than the cd-layer.
I can´t hear any difference on the older records.

Back in the days i´d a really good Swoboda (Sony based) SACD player.
About 95% of really good recordings are sounding much better on SACD than on CD.

So i´ve to disagree with your statement, that SACD is 100% marketing.

Today i´ve an Linn Digital Streamer (the Akurate DS). The DS displaced the SACD Player.
I´ll hope that the new japanes masters of all the 70s will be available as hidef download.
The available hidef download of sg deluxe doesn´t sound better than my ripped sg deluxe cd.
That´s depends on, in my opinion, the loveless remastered um-version.

For just a while the ABCKO remasters are available as hi def download (ok, that was just another thread).
I´ve the same experience - due to the limitation of the original recordings, i can´t hear no difference between my ripped ABCKO stuff (and i can only rip the cd-layer) and the hidef download (which are based on the same remaster).
Only the hidef versions of bb and lib are sounding a little better.

But all of them sounding better via the Akurate DS....

Phew ..... a lot of words...

My point is, if you have a really good hifi (i´ve really nice components, which go really well together, for about 25000 €) than it really makes sense to buy sacd or hidef downloads.
But if the original recording/master/remaster isn´t good - than you don´t need the sacd or hidef download version.
If your hifi is mediocre - it´s the same.
If your listening in your car, on your computer or iSomething....i hate to say that - mp3 might be good enough.

"from new 2011 DSD masters"

Does that mean they transferred the actual Masters in hi-def (24/192)?

Well bring these out as direct-DL files, dummy!

Quote
Alef
SADC is 100% marketing. With all of the Stones recordings, the source material and possibly a little mixing is the limiting factor. I've heard audiophile regular CD's - for example Bowers & Wilkins Audiophile recordings series - that sound insanely good. The only limitation being the loudspeakers and the room accoustics. It just shows how much can be poured out of a regular CD.

If you want to throw away your money, rebuy recordings as SACDs.

Can't agree with you.

Quote
GetYerAngie
Has anyone heard the Black and Blue sacd?
I'm especially interested in Melody, which I think was treated rather badly in the UM-remasters.

My general impression of Shm-SACDs & worth buying in order:
Black and Blue > Exile > Some Girls > SF > LIB > GHS > Dirty Work > IORR > Emotional Rescue > BB > Tatto You > Love You Live > Still Life > Undercover



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-14 03:24 by Toru A.

@ StonesTod

What about Exile? Any reports yet?

How good a SACD player do you need? Are they all comparable?

Quote
donvis
How good a SACD player do you need? Are they all comparable?

I recommend an OPPO.

Quote
dubclub
My experiences with the latest (and wonderful) ABCKO Remasters (from 2002 i guess), which are available in different formats are:
the sacd-layer from bb and lib sounds better, just a little, than the cd-layer.
I can´t hear any difference on the older records.

Back in the days i´d a really good Swoboda (Sony based) SACD player.
About 95% of really good recordings are sounding much better on SACD than on CD.

So i´ve to disagree with your statement, that SACD is 100% marketing.

Unfortunately you are wrong:
[theaudiocritic.com]

I can imagine though that SACD might sound better in some cases, because more effort was put in the mixing and pollishing of the sound. But that has nothing to do with the SACD format.

It is just amazing to see people longing for SACDs of for example Exile on Main Street. I mean, that recording just doesn't sound very good, because the source material is not good enough. That's it. But who cares, the music is great. When you want just audiophile recordings, you should become a Diana Krall fan.

Quote
Toru A

Quote
GetYerAngie
Has anyone heard the Black and Blue sacd?
I'm especially interested in Melody, which I think was treated rather badly in the UM-remasters.

My general impression of Shm-SACDs & worth buying in order:
Black and Blue > Exile > Some Girls > SF > LIB > GHS > Dirty Work > IORR > Emotional Rescue > BB > Tatto You > Love You Live > Still Life > Undercover

Thanks a lot, Toru A!

Hey Alef,

the Diana Krall gag ain´t that bad - but you should have known better.....

I trust my own ears - and so i wrote, that in many cases there i can´t hear any difference between the cd- and sacd-layer.

On the other hand sometimes i was blown away by the sacd version.

You can trust in such an article.
But it´s an article using the phrase "they prove beyond a shadow of doubt".....

Quote
Phil Good
I couldn't care less. To me, they finished with Exile.
Just my 2 cts. But each his own. Peace.

I know what you are saying, but you could say they ended with Now!, you could say they ended with Let It Bleed, you could say they ended with Some Girls, you could say they ended with Voodoo Lounge. Perhaps with each end there was a re-birth of sorts?

Quote
Alef

Quote
dubclub
My experiences with the latest (and wonderful) ABCKO Remasters (from 2002 i guess), which are available in different formats are:
the sacd-layer from bb and lib sounds better, just a little, than the cd-layer.
I can´t hear any difference on the older records.

Back in the days i´d a really good Swoboda (Sony based) SACD player.
About 95% of really good recordings are sounding much better on SACD than on CD.

So i´ve to disagree with your statement, that SACD is 100% marketing.

Unfortunately you are wrong:
[theaudiocritic.com]

I can imagine though that SACD might sound better in some cases, because more effort was put in the mixing and pollishing of the sound. But that has nothing to do with the SACD format.

It is just amazing to see people longing for SACDs of for example Exile on Main Street. I mean, that recording just doesn't sound very good, because the source material is not good enough. That's it. But who cares, the music is great. When you want just audiophile recordings, you should become a Diana Krall fan.

I'll trust my own ears, which have heard the SACD disks and find them to be the best digital versions of the respective albums, over "two music journalists who are not professional audio engineers" that wrote some article about their opinion in some magazine. Thanks.

Quote
tkl7
I'll trust my own ears, which have heard the SACD disks and find them to be the best digital versions of the respective albums, over "two music journalists who are not professional audio engineers" that wrote some article about their opinion in some magazine. Thanks.

You didn't even read it I guess. They did not 'write some article', they did research. But you don't need research do you, you have your own opinions. And research would only get in the way of that.

Quote
Alef

Quote
tkl7
I'll trust my own ears, which have heard the SACD disks and find them to be the best digital versions of the respective albums, over "two music journalists who are not professional audio engineers" that wrote some article about their opinion in some magazine. Thanks.

You didn't even read it I guess. They did not 'write some article', they did research. But you don't need research do you, you have your own opinions. And research would only get in the way of that.

No, I did my own research. Which SHM-SACDs have you listened to, btw?

PS: That article is full of false information, I doubt the author even knows what he is talking about. He states that he noticed no difference when flipping his dual layer SACD Hybrid disk over from the SACD side to the redbook side, but I assure you that is false, since the dual layer hybrid disk plays both layers from the same side. Furthermore, most modern players do not just play SACD through analog jacks, but also through HDMI as DSD. Your "researchers" only used analog RCA jacks. Finally, he concedes that SACD also allows for multichannel, which also pretty much wipes out your statement that it is 100% marketing as apposed to CDs, since no CD that I am aware of, plays in multichannel.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-14 22:40 by tkl7.

Quote
dubclub
Ok Alef - i´ll agree with you, that no stones recording will ever sound so perfect (soundwise), just like an really audiophile recording.
Even if the stones stuff is on cd, vinyl, sacd or hi-def download - and the good audiophile recording is only on cd.

My experiences with the latest (and wonderful) ABCKO Remasters (from 2002 i guess), which are available in different formats are:
the sacd-layer from bb and lib sounds better, just a little, than the cd-layer.
I can´t hear any difference on the older records.

Back in the days i´d a really good Swoboda (Sony based) SACD player.
About 95% of really good recordings are sounding much better on SACD than on CD.

So i´ve to disagree with your statement, that SACD is 100% marketing.

Today i´ve an Linn Digital Streamer (the Akurate DS). The DS displaced the SACD Player.
I´ll hope that the new japanes masters of all the 70s will be available as hidef download.
The available hidef download of sg deluxe doesn´t sound better than my ripped sg deluxe cd.
That´s depends on, in my opinion, the loveless remastered um-version.

For just a while the ABCKO remasters are available as hi def download (ok, that was just another thread).
I´ve the same experience - due to the limitation of the original recordings, i can´t hear no difference between my ripped ABCKO stuff (and i can only rip the cd-layer) and the hidef download (which are based on the same remaster).
Only the hidef versions of bb and lib are sounding a little better.

But all of them sounding better via the Akurate DS....

Phew ..... a lot of words...

My point is, if you have a really good hifi (i´ve really nice components, which go really well together, for about 25000 €) than it really makes sense to buy sacd or hidef downloads.
But if the original recording/master/remaster isn´t good - than you don´t need the sacd or hidef download version.
If your hifi is mediocre - it´s the same.
If your listening in your car, on your computer or iSomething....i hate to say that - mp3 might be good enough.

I am on Akurate too and I 100% agree

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Quote
tkl7

Quote
Alef

Quote
tkl7
I'll trust my own ears, which have heard the SACD disks and find them to be the best digital versions of the respective albums, over "two music journalists who are not professional audio engineers" that wrote some article about their opinion in some magazine. Thanks.

You didn't even read it I guess. They did not 'write some article', they did research. But you don't need research do you, you have your own opinions. And research would only get in the way of that.

No, I did my own research. Which SHM-SACDs have you listened to, btw?

PS: That article is full of false information, I doubt the author even knows what he is talking about. He states that he noticed no difference when flipping his dual layer SACD Hybrid disk over from the SACD side to the redbook side, but I assure you that is false, since the dual layer hybrid disk plays both layers from the same side. Furthermore, most modern players do not just play SACD through analog jacks, but also through HDMI as DSD. Your "researchers" only used analog RCA jacks. Finally, he concedes that SACD also allows for multichannel, which also pretty much wipes out your statement that it is 100% marketing as apposed to CDs, since no CD that I am aware of, plays in multichannel.

My assupmtion was right, you didn't read it. They did not flip sides,where the hell did you read that? They downsampled SACD tot CD bitrate and compared that in double blind tests with the not downsampled SACD output. Which means no audible information is lost going from SACD to CD.

Anyway, you are not interested in facts, you are only trying to stick to your own opinions. No research would be good enough to convince you.

Furthermore, no Stones record has ever been been recorded in multi channel.

>Furthermore, no Stones record has ever been been recorded in multi channel.

The only exception is here.[www.amazon.co.jp]
Let's indulge in the DSD sound of multi channel percussion!

Quote
Toru A
>Furthermore, no Stones record has ever been been recorded in multi channel.

The only exception is here.[www.amazon.co.jp]
Let's indulge in the DSD sound of multi channel percussion!

I don't think it was recorder in multi channel. They must have done some post recording multi channel decoding.

Anyway, this CD alone is not a very solid business case for a multi channel setup ;-)

Actually I'm waiting for the arrival of Bob Dylan The Basement Tapes on Numbered Limited Edition Hybrid SACD from Mobile Fidelity at this moment!



Audiophile Sound at Last: Sonic Subtleties, Loose Interplay, Organic Spirit, Warm Textures Presented Like Never Before on Definitive Mobile Fidelity Reissue!

The Basement Tapes’ capacity to remain so gloriously honest and timeless—performances that genuinely could’ve been made today, ten years from now,
or back in the 1930s—helps account for their emotional resonance and unsurpassed reputation as a snapshot of how unencumbered American music,
and art with deep historical roots and connective cultural tissues, is supposed to sound.

Mobile Fidelity’s reissue squares away the late-night bleariness, jovial atmosphere, low-ceiling dimensions, and ensemble-based perspective of the sessions,
allowing the listener to become Hamlet, the dog who slept nearby Dylan, Robertson, and Co. as it all went down. This is not to be missed.

I thought it was a joke at first. But it is real

SACD audiophile recordings to release all the subtleties that have been recorded with a tinker toy Casio cassette deck I presume....

Quote
Alef

Quote
Toru A
>Furthermore, no Stones record has ever been been recorded in multi channel.

The only exception is here.[www.amazon.co.jp]
Let's indulge in the DSD sound of multi channel percussion!

I don't think it was recorder in multi channel. They must have done some post recording multi channel decoding.

Anyway, this CD alone is not a very solid business case for a multi channel setup ;-)

Sympathy for the Devil was recorded to multi-track before it was mixed down to stereo and mono for release. For the multi channel SACD, it was remixed to 5.1. I don't know what you mean "post recording multi channel decoding" - It is a new mix from the original multis.

@Toru The Basement Tapes SACD looks really great. If I'm not mistaken it's the first time it will be available as such.
By the way can you confirm it'll be available as double layer SACD?

Anyway I found the answer : [www.elusivedisc.com]

Also mastered by MFSL and soon to be available on hybrid SACD :
Another Side Of Bob Dylan
Blonde On Blonde
Blood On The Tracks
Bringing It All Back Home
The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-16 04:34 by kowalski.

Quote
kowalski
@Toru The Basement Tapes SACD looks really great. If I'm not mistaken it's the first time it will be available as such.
By the way can you confirm it'll be available as double layer SACD?

Anyway I found the answer : [www.elusivedisc.com]

Also mastered by MFSL and soon to be available on hybrid SACD :
Another Side Of Bob Dylan
Blonde On Blonde
Blood On The Tracks
Bringing It All Back Home
The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan

kowalski san,

Yes, it's hybrid edition.
I believe Sony Music made The Basement Tapes SACD some years ago.
If my memory is correct, Sony has also released Blu-spec CD.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-16 05:08 by Toru A.

Quote
Toru A

kowalski san,

Yes, it's hybrid edition.
I believe Sony Music made The Basement Tapes SACD some years ago.
If my memory is correct, Sony has also released Blu-spec CD.

A remastered version of the Basement Tapes was released a couple of years ago but only on CD.

Quote
kowalski

Quote
Toru A

kowalski san,

Yes, it's hybrid edition.
I believe Sony Music made The Basement Tapes SACD some years ago.
If my memory is correct, Sony has also released Blu-spec CD.

A remastered version of the Basement Tapes was released a couple of years ago but only on CD.

kowalski san,

Thank you for your input.
I've confirmed that the Basement Tapes SACD is released for the first time.
Blu-spec version was released in 2009. Now it's premium price.

In addition The Who - Live At Leeds [SHM-SACD] will be realesed on April 25.
It's double CDs but not on hybrid.
[www.cdjapan.co.jp]