Thread: SACD Stereo: it doesn't make sense

Posts: 109
Page: prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 next

Post by rammiepie July 16, 2015 (71 of 109)
Euell Neverno said:

Many would disagree with that and there are quite a few stereo-only SACD's out there. And, even those who reject the thought that DSD provides a better listening experience than RBCD in stereo, have to acknowledge that extended time stereo-only SACD's are quite useful.

While I would definitely agree that SACD sounds more robust than RBCD, regarding the extended playing times on single layered stereo SACDs.....like BD~A, very few SACD releasing companies utilized this option...most especially the Japanese with their one album per disc mentality.

IMHO, this extended play option could've been brilliantly utilized in containing whole box sets, but, sadly that never materialized and even BD~A with its enormous capacity (Solti's The Ring, i.e.) never again graced us with mega multiple albums on one disc.

Post by Lute July 16, 2015 (72 of 109)
When they can get $25 a pop for an old Van Halen album... WHY would they?

Post by rammiepie July 16, 2015 (73 of 109)
Lute said:

When they can get $25 a pop for an old Van Halen album... WHY would they?

So when's your book entitled "GREED in the Record Industry" coming out, Brett?

Post by Lute July 16, 2015 (74 of 109)
Call it "greed" if you want.

But...I call it "Supply and demand" ... Or perhaps "Follow the herd" is more appropriate.

I mean...what gets me, Ralph... is that so many people are buying these OLD albums over and over again... at these "GREEDY" prices. If there is a "new" version of an old favorite...and it is expensive....and other people are buying and talking about it, THEN... "Man, I just gotta get me some of that" mentality takes over and the credit cards come out.


In the meanwhile, legitimate companies like BIS, Harmonia Mundi... get ignored.

Go figure!

Post by rammiepie July 16, 2015 (75 of 109)
Lute said:

Call it "greed" if you want.

But...I call it "Supply and demand" ... Or perhaps "Follow the herd" is more appropriate.

I mean...what gets me, Ralph... is that so many people are buying these OLD albums over and over again... at these "GREEDY" prices. If there is a "new" version of an old favorite...and it is expensive....and other people are buying and talking about it, THEN... "Man, I just gotta get me some of that" mentality takes over and the credit cards come out.


In the meanwhile, legitimate companies like BIS, Harmonia Mundi... get ignored.

Go figure!

Lute, the rock/pop market exists in its own universe. Remasters with bonus cuts in fancy packaging literally lure those rocker's $$$ magically from their pockets with No regard for DR scores, etc.

Meanwhile, the classical market has a more sophisticated clientele and a much smaller following who are not as likely to double dip unless the album (whether SACD/RBCD) in question merits their $$$$$$$$.

And like yourself, I purchase all genres of music whereas if you read the various posts on this site only a scant few are likely to do so.

Akin to that segment of the world population who will NEVER watch a movie with subtitles......IMHO, their LOSS!

Post by windhoek July 17, 2015 (76 of 109)
Ah, now there's a topic worthy of an off-topic talk...favourite foreign language films! The most bizarre film I've ever seen hails from Japan and is called Visitor Q, Yeah, there are so many great films out there that shouldn't be overlooked simply because they're in a foreign language.

Post by DSD July 17, 2015 (77 of 109)
rammiepie said:

...Akin to that segment of the world population who will NEVER watch a movie with subtitles......IMHO, their LOSS!

Ralph the reason I never liked movies with subtitles is I am a slow reader and I can't see what is happening on screen when trying to read the captions, even more troubling a new set of captions appear before I am finished reading the first set. Thus I never go to a foreign film at a theatre. Perhaps I am not the only slow reader out there?

At home with a foreign film on DVD or Blu-ray I have to hit pause to read the on-screen translation then hit play and look at what is going on and then hit pause again when the next on-screen translation pops up. All in all it takes 6 hours to watch a 2 hour movie, I hate it immensely, I prefer even poor lip syncing, at least I can see what is happening on the screen.

Back to the topic, SACD Stereo makes a lot of sense to me since I don't care for multichannel in any form, not even rear-only ambiance and not even for movies. But it doesn't matter as SACDs have room for 2-channel stereo hi-res, multi-channel stereo hi-res and even a CD layer. Thus they can make everyone happy.

Post by rammiepie July 17, 2015 (78 of 109)
Teresa {DSD}, you brought up an interesting point regarding subtitled films vs. listening in multichannel.

Both are exercises in paying rapt attention to what is going on.....both on the screen and in the listening room.

I do agree, some modern subtitled films have rapid fire dialogue which translates into subtitles overloading the screen and it can detract from the visuals. Multichannel (and NOT the ambience type) requires one to absorb front and rear info and the art of the mixing engineer comes into play when there is an absolute immersive, seamless effect achieved on all levels.

At the very least, Criterion's yellow subtitles especially on their BD~Vs does make life a bit easier and modern mixing engineers who fully 'get' the art of mch mixing afford the listener the same luxury as opposed to the ole days of blurry subtitles on DVDs and poor/distracting multichannel mixing choices which did detract from the proceedings. I will close by saying that hearing older rock/pop classics mixed to perfection in Quad or 5.1 make one realize that it is far more rewarding than listening in plain ole stereo and that watching subtitled films over the years has enriched my "movie experience."

Perhaps in our next lives we'll all be multilingual and have ears in the back of our heads.........LOL!

Post by Marpow July 17, 2015 (79 of 109)
DSD said:

Back to the topic, SACD Stereo makes a lot of sense to me since I don't care for multichannel in any form, not even rear-only ambiance and not even for movies. But it doesn't matter as SACDs have room for 2-channel stereo hi-res, multi-channel stereo hi-res and even a CD layer. Thus they can make everyone happy.

I find your view point very interesting Teresa, and also to the point of this topic.

I am one that loves mch for the big sound and movement, etc.

For my knowledge, can you further explain as to why you don't like mch in any form. I don't want to disagree with you, just interested, that's all.

Post by Euell Neverno July 17, 2015 (80 of 109)
Luukas said:

Super Audio CD (SACD) has changed my way to listen classical music. The surround sound (5.0 or 5.1 channels) brings incredible dimensions to the performances. The little reverb at the surround channels creates a feeling that you are sitting in the middle of the concert hall.
Now there are hundreds of albums which are produced on SACD Stereo. It means that there isn't multi-channel layer. It doesn't make sense.
I heard music only from the main speakers. The listening experience was dull.

There are many excellent "SACD Stereo" albums, for example Eliahu Inbal's Mahler cycle with the Tokyo Metropolitan Symphony Orchestra (Exton).

Any comments?

Yes, Luukas, there are many excellent SACD stereo albums, so why do you find it necessary to troll on this subject? There may be several possible reasons for stereo-only SACD recordings as, e.g., (1) the producer, such as Exton currently, records only in stereo due its perceived market, (2) the master is not susceptible to multi-channel treatment for technical reasons, or (3) the SACD is extra-length and there is no room for a multi-channel track. There are probably additional reasons, but you should enjoy stereo-only SACD's (and RBCD's for that matter) for their musical content and make room for them in your collection, regardless of your preference for multi-channel. Would you prefer to listen to a mediocre performance on a multichannel recording or a great performance on a stereo recording?

Page: prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 next

Closed