![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearThere's reasons SACD never caught on.
1 - the SACD player I just got at Best Buy looked great, but nothing in the "publicity" actually mentioned that the digital cable was only good for the 2-channel output, and useless for the 5.1 layer which only goes out on the 6 analog rca lines.
one reason for that is that the sacd player does its own internal balancing in the digital->analog conversion and its adjustable there, rather than relying on the receiver that may not have the capability. On the other hand, wouldn't it have been easier (granted, requiring a patent license) to convert the SACD signal into Dolby 5.1 Surround and know that you're at least still on a digital standard?
Fortunately, I wasn't using them for my dvd player as I'd gotten that running through a coax rca cable (my cheap-ass dvd does digital out the rca, but doesn't have digital-optical - but hey, it's multi-region and pal->ntsc).
2 - not every SACD bothers to actually be a 5.1 mix! yeah, maybe it "sounds great" but its still only 2-channel and to a degree, defeats the damn point. 3 sacd's i just got (Peter Gabriel, Bernstein's Mahler 1, and Guaraldi's Charlie Brown) i'm taking back as I already have all 3 on normal cds and they're good enough for my system in that form.
So pay attention if you get into that market and look specifically for "SACD Surround" unless your ears are better than mine or you don't mind the 2-channel.
But on the bright side, this recording is just incredible. Best sounding 9th I've heard yet (out of 5 that I have - Stokowski, Bernstein/Vienna, Von Dohnányi, some generic version, and Von Karajan's SACD). Performance-wise I'm still leaning to the Von Dohnányi, but the mix here really works.
1 - the SACD player I just got at Best Buy looked great, but nothing in the "publicity" actually mentioned that the digital cable was only good for the 2-channel output, and useless for the 5.1 layer which only goes out on the 6 analog rca lines.
one reason for that is that the sacd player does its own internal balancing in the digital->analog conversion and its adjustable there, rather than relying on the receiver that may not have the capability. On the other hand, wouldn't it have been easier (granted, requiring a patent license) to convert the SACD signal into Dolby 5.1 Surround and know that you're at least still on a digital standard?
Fortunately, I wasn't using them for my dvd player as I'd gotten that running through a coax rca cable (my cheap-ass dvd does digital out the rca, but doesn't have digital-optical - but hey, it's multi-region and pal->ntsc).
2 - not every SACD bothers to actually be a 5.1 mix! yeah, maybe it "sounds great" but its still only 2-channel and to a degree, defeats the damn point. 3 sacd's i just got (Peter Gabriel, Bernstein's Mahler 1, and Guaraldi's Charlie Brown) i'm taking back as I already have all 3 on normal cds and they're good enough for my system in that form.
So pay attention if you get into that market and look specifically for "SACD Surround" unless your ears are better than mine or you don't mind the 2-channel.
But on the bright side, this recording is just incredible. Best sounding 9th I've heard yet (out of 5 that I have - Stokowski, Bernstein/Vienna, Von Dohnányi, some generic version, and Von Karajan's SACD). Performance-wise I'm still leaning to the Von Dohnányi, but the mix here really works.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-07-29 03:45 am (UTC)