Sound out! LP or SACD?

treitz3
treitz3 Posts: 19,033
edited June 2011 in 2 Channel Audio
OK, this is a poll for your preference of which you feel sounds better to you. I know it all comes down to the recording and to a degree, convenience. Not counting the convenience factor, which sounds better to you?
~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
Post edited by treitz3 on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • danz1906
    danz1906 Posts: 5,144
    edited March 2011
    SACD is my preference.........But LP can sound better.
    Linn AV5140 fronts
    Linn AV5120 Center
    Linn AV5140 Rears
    M&K MX-70 Sub for Music
    Odyssey Mono-Blocs
    SVS Ultra-13 Gloss Black:D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cubdog
    cubdog Posts: 835
    edited March 2011
    Even though I'm selling my TT I prefer vinyl over 5 channel SACD. In 2 channel I'll take the SACD over vinyl. What's the question?

    cubdog
    Shuguang Classic S8MK
    Emotiva XDA-2
    Bel Canto M300 mono blocks
    Bel Canto DAC 1.5
    Squeezebox Touch
    Sony SS-M7
    A/D/S L710
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Erik Tracy
    Erik Tracy Posts: 4,673
    edited March 2011
    Whichever sounds better due to mastering, pressing, etc.

    SACDs are more convenient, but a nicely mastered LP, freshly cleaned can sound might sweet

    H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Toolfan66
    Toolfan66 Posts: 17,243
    edited March 2011
    I love both!!! I can't pick one over the other..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • gfong
    gfong Posts: 1,079
    edited March 2011
    Both are great but when it comes down to it, even with the odd tick or pop, the lp record prevails for me. Love the warmth of a good recording on a record but I also love the snap and crispness of a SACD while maintaining the analog sound.

    But I have to ad, some Lp's of late are just a complete waste of money and should have stayed on cd.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BlueFox
    BlueFox Posts: 15,251
    edited March 2011
    I guess SACD since I gave up on turntables in the 80s, and will never go back. In the future, 24bit/192kHz high-res files, either downloaded,or on a Bluray disk, will be the main preference.
    Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
    Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
    Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes

    Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
    Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
    Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables

    Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
    Three 20 amp circuits.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • quadzilla
    quadzilla Posts: 1,543
    edited March 2011
    When we get to 192/24, I might take a digital direction. For now, I tend to prefer vinyl, but again, it comes down to the recording and mastering. I've a got plenty of both that sound good, and plenty of both that sound like ****. It's not and either/or choice for me.
    Turntable: Empire 208
    Arm: Rega 300
    Cart: Shelter 501 III
    Phono Pre: Aural Thrills
    Digital: Pioneer DV-79ai
    Pre: Conrad Johnson ET3 SE
    Amp: Conrad Johnson Evolution 2000
    Cables: Cardas Neutral Reference
    Speakers: SDA 2.3TL, heavily modified
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • inspiredsports
    inspiredsports Posts: 5,501
    edited March 2011
    Convenience, CD . . . Sound Quality, LP.
    VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
    Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
    TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
    Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
    Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
    MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
    Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
    PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
    Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
    NAD SS rigs w/mods
    GIK panels
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thsmith
    thsmith Posts: 6,082
    edited March 2011
    Vinyl then CD. Had SACD player but ended up liking the 2 channel version and found the 5.1 to not sound realistic IMO.
    Speakers: SDA-1C (most all the goodies)
    Preamp: Joule Electra LA-150 MKII SE
    Amp: Wright WPA 50-50 EAT KT88s
    Analog: Marantz TT-15S1 MBS Glider SL| Wright WPP100C Amperex BB 6er5 and 7316 & WPM-100 SUT
    Digital: Mac mini 2.3GHz dual-core i5 8g RAM 1.5 TB HDD Music Server Amarra (memory play) - USB - W4S DAC 2
    Cables: Mits S3 IC and Spk cables| PS Audio PCs
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • wayne3burk
    wayne3burk Posts: 939
    edited March 2011
    uhmmm... I don't think I've ever heard an SACD???

    what can i say

    --wayne--
    Yamaha RX-V2700, EMI 711As (front), RCA K-16 (rear), Magnavox Console (Center & TV Stand), Sony SMP-N200 media streamer, Dual 1249 TT =--- Sharp Aquas 60" LCD tellie
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Ricardo
    Ricardo Posts: 10,636
    edited March 2011
    Both suck.
    _________________________________________________
    ***\\\\\........................... My Audio Journey ............................./////***

    2008 & 2010 Football Pool WINNER
    SOPA
    Thank God for different opinions. Imagine the world if we all wanted the same woman
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PolkClyde
    PolkClyde Posts: 662
    edited March 2011
    Ricardo wrote: »
    Both suck.

    Where can I buy SACD,Besides E-bay..there's a website,I just forgot what it is.
    PolkAudioClyde
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,566
    edited March 2011
    www.sa-cd.net lists many of the retail sellers.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."

    President of Club Polk

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Toolfan66
    Toolfan66 Posts: 17,243
    edited March 2011
    thsmith wrote: »
    Vinyl then CD. Had SACD player but ended up liking the 2 channel version and found the 5.1 to not sound realistic IMO.[/QUOT

    Not all SACD's are 5.1 and even the 5.1 SACD's can be played in 2 channel..I don't think they even make 5.1 SACD's anymore, and it's fine by me..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • danger boy
    danger boy Posts: 15,722
    edited March 2011
    DVD-Audio sounds better than both..
    PolkFest 2012, who's going>?
    Vancouver, Canada Sept 30th, 2012 - Madonna concert :cheesygrin:
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHStuart
    HHStuart Posts: 263
    edited March 2011
    I have heard a comparison of LP versus CD and I would judge the LP the winner.
    I have not heard a side by side by comparison with a SACD.
    I can't stand the snap, crackle, pop of LP's and would never go back.
    From what I've read the needle grinds off the highs anyway. Now maybe if they had a turn table that uses a laser like the one at the Smithsonian? And a filter that would remove the snap, crackle and pop?
    And there is the storage factor.

    SACD's for me.
    Front - Polk LSiM 705, Center - Polk LSiM 704c, Rear - Polk LSi 7
    Subwoofer - Epik Legend
    Receiver (as Preamp) - Sony STR-DA3400 ES
    Amplifier - Outlaw 7125
    Television - 58" Samsung Plasma PN58B860
    Blu Ray - OPPO BDP 83
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • vc69
    vc69 Posts: 2,500
    edited March 2011
    Don't have a daggum TT rig so SACD it is for me.
    -Kevin
    HT: Philips 52PFL7432D 52" LCD 1080p / Onkyo TX-SR 606 / Oppo BDP-83 SE / Comcast cable. (all HDMI)B&W 801 - Front, Polk CS350 LS - Center, Polk LS90 - Rear
    2 Channel:
    Oppo BDP-83 SE
    Squeezebox Touch
    Muscial Fidelity M1 DAC
    VTL 2.5
    McIntosh 2205 (refurbed)
    B&W 801's
    Transparent IC's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jmwest1970
    jmwest1970 Posts: 846
    edited March 2011
    vc69 wrote: »
    Don't have a daggum TT rig so SACD it is for me.

    Ditto.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • zingo
    zingo Posts: 11,258
    edited March 2011
    HHStuart wrote: »
    I have heard a comparison of LP versus CD and I would judge the LP the winner.
    I have not heard a side by side by comparison with a SACD.
    I can't stand the snap, crackle, pop of LP's and would never go back.
    From what I've read the needle grinds off the highs anyway. Now maybe if they had a turn table that uses a laser like the one at the Smithsonian? And a filter that would remove the snap, crackle and pop?
    And there is the storage factor.

    SACD's for me.

    I totally agree. Vinyl can sound very good, but so can good SACDs and 24/192 files as well. A really good digital system can sound as good as vinyl IMO, and without all the hassle, storage, cleaning, etc.
    Jake
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • madmax
    madmax Posts: 12,434
    edited March 2011
    Keiko wrote: »
    Why not enjoy the best of both? That's what Keiko does. :smile:

    Thats a really tough one. After playing LP's for awhile digital gives you a lot of WOW factor. That pretty quickly wears off and you start hearing all the flaws. Then if you go back to LP's they are disappointing for a short while until you stop expecting the WOW factor and start hearing all the beauty and fine quality. Back and forth gets annoying. I try to stick to the better source and give up on the 30 minute WOW sessions, they really are not worth it.
    Vinyl, the final frontier...

    Avantgarde horns, 300b tubes, thats the kinda crap I want... :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • zingo
    zingo Posts: 11,258
    edited March 2011
    I had an interesting conversation with David Chesky last year where he thought the future of HIFI was memory based digital files. The inherent issue with either vinyl or CD is it has to be read, and thus it can be read differently every time; some times with flaws. The files on a memory based source are played back exactly the same every time, which he believed was a system worth perfecting. I have to agree... :smile:
    Jake
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,447
    edited March 2011
    well i also had my last TT back in 1979. Once CD's came along i gave up on the TT(wish i still had all my albums though) so for me it's SACD and DVD-Audio both sound MUCH better than my TT ever did
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Dawgfish
    Dawgfish Posts: 2,554
    edited March 2011
    I like both, but prefer vinyl.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • vc69
    vc69 Posts: 2,500
    edited March 2011
    zingo wrote: »
    I had an interesting conversation with David Chesky last year where he thought the future of HIFI was memory based digital files. The inherent issue with either vinyl or CD is it has to be read, and thus it can be read differently every time; some times with flaws. The files on a memory based source are played back exactly the same every time, which he believed was a system worth perfecting. I have to agree... :smile:

    I too believe that HiRes files are the future, but I am sure going to miss the physical media from a collectors standpoint. I haven't heard a good TT rig in so long I have nothing to base a true comparison on, but a TT rig is in my future I hope. I have stockpiled a ton of vinyl for just such an occasion. In my case, it's kind of a toss up which direction I will go. High performance DAC and computer or Phono Pre and a nice TT. Finances will most likely dictate, but I really would like a nice analog rig.
    -Kevin
    HT: Philips 52PFL7432D 52" LCD 1080p / Onkyo TX-SR 606 / Oppo BDP-83 SE / Comcast cable. (all HDMI)B&W 801 - Front, Polk CS350 LS - Center, Polk LS90 - Rear
    2 Channel:
    Oppo BDP-83 SE
    Squeezebox Touch
    Muscial Fidelity M1 DAC
    VTL 2.5
    McIntosh 2205 (refurbed)
    B&W 801's
    Transparent IC's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TNRabbit
    TNRabbit Posts: 2,168
    edited March 2011
    I've heard CD copies of LPs that retain all the positives of the original LP, so I know it's POSSIBLE to have a great digital recording. The problem lies with recording engineers who don't know how to transfer to digital. I have some SACDs that are second to none.
    TNRabbit
    NO Polk Audio Equipment :eek:
    Sunfire TG-IV
    Ashly 1001 Active Crossover
    Rane PEQ-15 Parametric Equalizers x 2
    Sunfire Cinema Grand Signature Seven
    Carver AL-III Speakers
    Klipsch RT-12d Subwoofer
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 19,033
    edited June 2011
    The poll is still open, so if you haven't voted? Get on it.
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Face
    Face Posts: 14,340
    edited June 2011
    zingo wrote: »
    i had an interesting conversation with david chesky last year where he thought the future of hifi was memory based digital files. The inherent issue with either vinyl or cd is it has to be read, and thus it can be read differently every time; some times with flaws. The files on a memory based source are played back exactly the same every time, which he believed was a system worth perfecting. i have to agree... :smile:
    +1...
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,447
    edited June 2011
    zingo wrote: »
    I had an interesting conversation with David Chesky last year where he thought the future of HIFI was memory based digital files. The inherent issue with either vinyl or CD is it has to be read, and thus it can be read differently every time; some times with flaws. The files on a memory based source are played back exactly the same every time QUOTE]

    Somehow i find this statement hard to believe.... Something has to read the memory files they just don't jump into your eardrum.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dkg999
    dkg999 Posts: 5,647
    edited June 2011
    I wish there was a higher level of acceptance and investment in the SACD format, because I think it has real promise and I like what I have heard in my limited exposure and experimentation. I do think that the analog sound from an LP is more engaging and just more fluid sounding. Even the occasional noise is either engaging or enraging, depending on how bad it is :tongue:
    DKG999
    HT System: LSi9, LSiCx2, LSiFX, LSi7, SVS 20-39 PC+, B&K 507.s2 AVR, B&K Ref 125.2, Tripplite LCR-2400, Cambridge 650BD, Signal Cable PC/SC, BJC IC, Samsung 55" LED

    Music System: Magnepan 1.6QR, SVS SB12+, ARC pre, Parasound HCA1500 vertically bi-amped, Jolida CDP, Pro-Ject RM5.1SE TT, Pro-Ject TubeBox SE phono pre, SBT, PS Audio DLIII DAC
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • decal
    decal Posts: 3,205
    edited June 2011
    Depends on the recording. If you discount this fact, how can you make a logical decision?
    If you can't hear a difference, don't waste your money.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter