Classical on SACD

[Darryl]

I'm interested in your comments and experiences with SACD as they relate to classical recordings. I recently made the hardware change and have been enjoying the relatively new format very much. As with redbook CDs, the quality of the recordings varies, but many are very good, and a few outstanding. These are some of the ones that impressed me:

Gatti/Tchaik 6
Chailly/Mahler 3 & 9
Kleiber/Beethoven 5
Rostropovich/Schubert Arpeggione Sonata
several of the Reiner and Munch classics on RCA
several of the Szell classics on Sony
Szell/Sibelius & Mozart (Japan 1970)

[Barry]

I've got a unit that plays SACDs, but it's kind of a waste since I usually have to listen on headphones where I live if I want any kind of volume.

Anyway, if you're a Mahler fan and want to hear his 6th symphony in wonderful sound, try Eschenbach and Philadelphia's recording. It's an SACD hybrid.

[Reed]

For some of the best sound you'll ever hear, and a fine performance as well, try Mahler 2 cond. by Fischer on Channel classics.

Too bad Sony stopped making SACDs, but I agree, some of the Szell titles are wonderful, as is Schippers doing Pictures and Nevsky with the NYPO from the early '60s. Wonderful sound and playing.

Only problem is, it's hard to play regular CDs right after SACD. Kinda spoils you and makes you see what you're missing, know what I mean?

[Seán]

Reiner with the CSO performing Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra is on SACD, it's a terrific recording.

[Darryl]

For some of the best sound you'll ever hear, and a fine performance as well, try Mahler 2 cond. by Fischer on Channel classics.

Too bad Sony stopped making SACDs, but I agree, some of the Szell titles are wonderful, as is Schippers doing Pictures and Nevsky with the NYPO from the early '60s. Wonderful sound and playing.

Only problem is, it's hard to play regular CDs right after SACD. Kinda spoils you and makes you see what you're missing, know what I mean?

Yes, I can hardly bring myself to play anything but the very best sounding RBCDs now. I forgot to list several of the Bernstein/NYPO SACDs -- the Gershwin (just now OOP) is spectacular.

[Chalkperson]

I have around 500 Classical SACD's, I agree about the sound quality, luckily I have an excellent stereo system so regular CD's still sound good, what we lose most is the spatial ambience that comes from the rear speakers...if I get a chance this weekend i'll recommend 25 must have SACD's...

[Fugu]

I have a lot of SACDs and only hope machines will still be made that can read them in the future.

[Barry]

I have a lot of SACDs and only hope machines will still be made that can read them in the future.

Aren't most SACDs at this point hybrids that will also play on CD players?

[Darryl]

I have a lot of SACDs and only hope machines will still be made that can read them in the future.

Aren't most SACDs at this point hybrids that will also play on CD players?

Yes, most are hybrids, but I only pay attention to classical. The early single-layer SACDs appear to be on the way out. I got the only new copy I could find anywhere of the Bernstein/Gershwin from ElusiveDisc.com! The Japanese made some limited editions of the Szell/Sony too. I've had a little time to compare some of ours with theirs, and while I generally find the Japanese to have better sounding products, I prefered the US release of Szell's Mozart 39/40. The Japanese release was a little on the bright side. On the other hand, I preferred the Japanese Szell/Dvorak 7 disc, as it had noticably less hiss. I don't have a lot of time to do stuff like this though. That's kinda why I started the thread. Barry, I hope my illustration isn't too boring for you; I seem to remember you didn't care much for Szell.

[Barry]

I remember the first SACD I bought was the sony SACD-only release of Bruno Walter's Beethoven 6th. I took it home and immediately played it back to back with my CD-only copy of the same recording. The difference was immediately apparent.

[Darryl]

My first was the Gatti/Tchaik 6, on the Wadia 581se. It was so good, I can't even remember the name of that other first

[Chalkperson]

I have a lot of SACDs and only hope machines will still be made that can read them in the future.

Don't bank on Sony for it though, Oppo make a very good and inexpensive DVD/CD/SACD/DVD-A player, models go for $200-$400...I have a Linn Unidisc and Linn still produce SACD's so i'm not too worried..if anybody likes Bruckner the Gunther Wand RCA Cycle is available on SACD, Amazon has them...

[Reed]

I know. I love the Wand Bruckners, and I want to save my pennies and get them on SACD.

Drool, drool . . .

I second that recommendation for the Julia Fisher/Russian Violin Concertos. A wonderful disc, in terms of the pieces, the performances, and the sound. I have heard her live and that lovely tone is not a result of studio sound--she really sounds that good in the concert hall.

[rwetmore]

Any find any really good new SACD releases lately?

[Reed]

Well, I like the Mozart last four syms. cond. by Mackerris on Lynn. Some have commented on the wiry tone, and not all have liked the performances. I have only listened to 38 and 39, and I like sound and performances just fine. My first Linn SACD, though definitely not my last.

I'm very interested in acquiring the newly-released Beet. 9/Furtwrangler on Tahra. The out of print CD goes for prices in the hundreds of dollars, and now they've re-released it on a hybrid SACD!

Pentatone continues to put out new stuff, plus reissues of Phillips 70's quad recordings. Want to get my hands on their new reissue of the Berlioz Requiem, cond. by Colin Davis.

For a complete listing of SACDs, reviews and a forum, you might want to check out sacd.net.

PS I should add that I only have a stereo setup, and an old Carver receiver and advent speakers, a $700 Denon universal player--hardly state of the art, but I can hear an instant improvement on almost any SACD versus its CD layer or equivalent.

[Chalkperson]

For a complete listing of SACDs, reviews and a forum, you might want to check out sacd.net.

The correct address is SA-CD.net

Otherwise you get a travel site...I will list a few great new SACD's when I get home tonight...

[Chalkperson]

These 20 CD's are from all musical areas, I find them all superb discs...

TCHAIKOVSKY - MEDTNER
First Piano Concertos
Yevgeny Sudbin - San Poalo Symphony - John Nesling
BIS

TCHAIKOVSKY - GLAZUNOV
Violin Concertos
Vadim Gluzman - Bergen Philharmonic - Andrew Liton
BIS

HAENDEL
Water Music - Music for the Royal Fireworks
Jordi Savaal - Le Concert Des Nations
AliaVox

BRUCKNER
Mass in E Minor
Marcus Creed - SWR Vokalensemble Stuttgart
Hanssler Classic

GRIEG
Lyric Pieces
Hideyo Hadaya
Audite

MUSSORGSKY - RAVEL - BALAKIREV
Pictures at an Exhibition
Gaspard De La Nuit
Islamey - Oriental Fantasy
Freddy Kempff
BIS

RUED LANGGAARD
Symphony No.1
Thaomas Dausgaard - Danish National Symphony
DACAPO

HERTEL
Trumpet Concertos
Wolfgang Bauer - Wurttemburgisches Kammerorchester Heilbronn
MDG

TCHAIKOVSKY
Symphony No.6 - Pathetique - Dumka (Piano)
Christoph Eschenbach - Philadelphia Orchestra
ONDINE

SIBELIUS
Kullervo
Soile Isokosi - Helsinki Philharmonic - Lief Segerstam
ONDINE

SIBELIUS
Orchestral Songs
Soile Isokoski - Helsinki Philharmonic - Lief Segerstram
ONDINE

SIBELIUS
Works for Orchestra
Pekka Kuusisto - Violin and Conductor - Tapiola Sinfonietta
ONDINE

SIBELIUS
Symphonies Nos. 5-7 - En Saga
Sir Colin Davis - Boston Symphony
Pentatone

BEETHOVEN
Piano Concertos Nos. 1+3
Ronald Brautigam - Norrköping Symphony Orchestra - Andrew Parrott
BIS

MAHLER
Symphony No.1
Mariss Janssons - Concertgebouw Orchestra
RCO Live

BEETHOVEN
Symphony No.3 - The Creatures of Prometheus
Helsingborg Symphony Orchestra - Andrew Manze
Harmonia Mundi

BRUCKNER
Symphony No.4
Karl Bohm - Vienna Philharmonic
DECCA Japanese Import

BACH
Motets
Peter Dijkstra - Nederlands Kamerkoor
Channel Classics

WEINBERG
Concertos - Flute - Clarinet - Cello
Tord Svendlund - Gothenburg Symphony
Chandos

SHOSTAKOVICH
Symphonies Nos, 5+8+15 (Three Discs)
Kurt Sanderling - Berlin Symphony Orchestra
Berlin Classics (Japanese Import)

[slofstra]

It strikes me that a recording will sound no better on SACD than CD unless it's originally recorded using high end analog or high bandwidth digital processes. Do you think that is correct?

I'm very skeptical about SACD. When I purchased my current stereo (lower end good quality Arcam with Totem Arro speakers) I A-B'd a multi-format SACD player against a higher end Arcam single play CD player. My stereo dealer told me that the single play CD player would sound better, and it did. I wasn't about to spring for the top of the line Sony SACD player so at that point my dream of starting with SACD went out the window.

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

[slofstra]

PS I should add that I only have a stereo setup, and an old Carver receiver and advent speakers, a $700 Denon universal player--hardly state of the art, but I can hear an instant improvement on almost any SACD versus its CD layer or equivalent.

Reed, unless I am making an incorrect assumption you are playing both CD and SACD on the same Denon multi-format player? If you compared the SACD on the Denon versus the CD as played on a top flight 'CD only' player, the results might be quite different.

[Reed]

Yes, I am playing them both on the same system. However, the Denon is rated quite highly, even by The Absolute Sound, as a good all-round player.

Also, before I got it, I had a good Rotel CD player and a cheap Phillips SACD system. Again, the SACDs sounded much better played through the cheapie SACD than the CDs did through the good CD player.

Just my opinion.

There are a few exceptions, or a few cases where the sound quality was close. For the most part, the SACD sound was appreciably better. I have also done blind listening tests for my wife, who is a musician with a good ear who can hear things I can't. In every case, she preferred the SACD sound.

[slofstra]

Yes, I am playing them both on the same system. However, the Denon is rated quite highly, even by The Absolute Sound, as a good all-round player.

Also, before I got it, I had a good Rotel CD player and a cheap Phillips SACD system. Again, the SACDs sounded much better played through the cheapie SACD than the CDs did through the good CD player.

Just my opinion.

There are a few exceptions, or a few cases where the sound quality was close. For the most part, the SACD sound was appreciably better. I have also done blind listening tests for my wife, who is a musician with a good ear who can hear things I can't. In every case, she preferred the SACD sound.

Well, that sounds promising. Don't get me wrong - I really wanted the SACD to sound better. There are some situations where I'm unhappy with CD sound - particularly choirs, at times, and piano recordings, at times. It is very difficult to do a good A-B test, for example, getting the volume exactly the same level. So the original test I performed in the dealer's shop is by no means definitive.

Incidentally, what kind of speaker configuration did you use in your tests?

[Reed]

I just listen in stereo, as I don't have surround-sound capability, and I can still hear a quite large difference in MOST SACDs I've auditioned, where I either have a hybrid and compare the layers, or where I have had the same disc before in standard CD.

[Chalkperson]

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

And, there was me about to welcome you back into the fold and you arrive with both guns blazing...

[rwetmore]

It strikes me that a recording will sound no better on SACD than CD unless it's originally recorded using high end analog or high bandwidth digital processes. Do you think that is correct?

Yes - that would be correct. Many SACDs are sourced from high resolution PCM (96khz/24bit). While these should sound better than their regular CD versions, ideally you want recordings that are natively recorded in DSD or transferred from analog tape directly to DSD.

I'm very skeptical about SACD. When I purchased my current stereo (lower end good quality Arcam with Totem Arro speakers) I A-B'd a multi-format SACD player against a higher end Arcam single play CD player. My stereo dealer told me that the single play CD player would sound better, and it did. I wasn't about to spring for the top of the line Sony SACD player so at that point my dream of starting with SACD went out the window.

Yes, not all SACD players are created equal, especially the less expensive multi-format players that often convert DSD to PCM before sending it through the audio out ports. Some of the more expensive ones have hybrid D/A converts than can natively handle DSD and PCM. Owning one of the top of the line Sony players myself, I can confidently say good SACDs sound better than CDs.

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

With SACD/DSD you mainly get a higher frequency response and sound that is little smoother, richer and more natural. You also get an increase in dynamic range, but almost no recordings actually take advantage of it. The difference you'll hear depends on how good your hearing is and how good the material is mastered or transferred to SACD. As with CD recordings, the quality varies.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

If you have the patience for that, that might be worth it too.

[slofstra]

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

And, there was me about to welcome you back into the fold and you arrive with both guns blazing...

Just some tentative posturing to tease out what I hope will be useful information.

[slofstra]

It strikes me that a recording will sound no better on SACD than CD unless it's originally recorded using high end analog or high bandwidth digital processes. Do you think that is correct?

Yes - that would be correct. Many SACDs are sourced from high resolution PCM (96khz/24bit). While these should sound better than their regular CD versions, ideally you want recordings that are natively recorded in DSD or transferred from analog tape directly to DSD.

I'm very skeptical about SACD. When I purchased my current stereo (lower end good quality Arcam with Totem Arro speakers) I A-B'd a multi-format SACD player against a higher end Arcam single play CD player. My stereo dealer told me that the single play CD player would sound better, and it did. I wasn't about to spring for the top of the line Sony SACD player so at that point my dream of starting with SACD went out the window.

Yes, not all SACD players are created equal, especially the less expensive multi-format players that often convert DSD to PCM before sending it through the audio out ports. Some of the more expensive ones have hybrid D/A converts than can natively handle DSD and PCM. Owning one of the top of the line Sony players myself, I can confidently say good SACDs sound better than CDs.

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

With SACD/DSD you mainly get a higher frequency response and sound that is little smoother, richer and more natural. You also get an increase in dynamic range, but almost no recordings actually take advantage of it. The difference you'll hear depends on how good your hearing is and how good the material is mastered or transferred to SACD. As with CD recordings, the quality varies.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

If you have the patience for that, that might be worth it too.

And sure enough, it arrives. Thanks for a very informative and useful post.

Some time later I will digest that technical information against the SACD player I tried, and also the demo SACD disks I used.
A small point, but I doubt that one's hearing needs to be all that good to tell the difference if there truly is one. After all, nothing on earth sounds as good as a $150,000 Steinway piano properly tuned in a good acoustic setting, and that's to the ordinary ear. I'm intrigued by your comment, "smoother, richer and more natural" since that expresses subjectively what I sometimes find missing in choral recordings.

[slofstra]

Chalkie and others,

The problem is that there are other factors mentioned above, and I believe that a CD in ideal circumstances, can sound very, very good, and also, sometimes, not so good.
Last night I played vol. 20 in the Karl Ancerl 'gold CD' series. This consisted of an idiosyncratic recording of Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1, a sparkling Cappricio Italienne, and an 1812 Overture without cannons. No doubt, in part because of not listening to a quality stereo for over a month, this recording just bowled me over. So this is a superlative recording on a superlative pressing on a superlative CD player. Everything just right. If I heard the same as an SACD would I notice the difference?

(Perhaps a tangent, but how would you assess the complete series of 45 or so Ancerl Supraphon recordings against say, Karajan's 45 best recordings?).

[Chalkperson]

I state this example to spark some intelligent discussion about the prerequisites required for an SACD disk to sound better than a top quality CD. As I said, I am skeptical about the SACD format.

Which leaves me to contemplate the possibility of audiophile phonograph record pressings.

And, there was me about to welcome you back into the fold and you arrive with both guns blazing...

Just some tentative posturing to tease out what I hope will be useful information.

You were much missed here, especially your tentative posturing...i'll chip in on this subject but I can't do it straight away due to workload...cd

[Chalkperson]

Chalkie and others,

The problem is that there are other factors mentioned above, and I believe that a CD in ideal circumstances, can sound very, very good, and also, sometimes, not so good.
Last night I played vol. 20 in the Karl Ancerl 'gold CD' series. This consisted of an idiosyncratic recording of Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1, a sparkling Cappricio Italienne, and an 1812 Overture without cannons. No doubt, in part because of not listening to a quality stereo for over a month, this recording just bowled me over. So this is a superlative recording on a superlative pressing on a superlative CD player. Everything just right. If I heard the same as an SACD would I notice the difference?

(Perhaps a tangent, but how would you assess the complete series of 45 or so Ancerl Supraphon recordings against say, Karajan's 45 best recordings?).

You are listening to a Gold CD, not aluminum, the dymanic range is greater and it should be easier on the ear with better bass and should sound more musical...as for Ancerl vs Karajan I would pick Ancerl over HVK for Orchestral Recordings but HVK is a superb Opera Conductor, it's not really fair to compare them also because the 46 discs in the Ancerl set are all the music he recorded, Karajan's Orchestral output for EMI alone is 70 discs, and, Ancerl includes a lot of East European 20th Century Composers in his Set too...

Now, all you need is a Sub Woofer...

[slofstra]

Chalkie and others,

The problem is that there are other factors mentioned above, and I believe that a CD in ideal circumstances, can sound very, very good, and also, sometimes, not so good.
Last night I played vol. 20 in the Karl Ancerl 'gold CD' series. This consisted of an idiosyncratic recording of Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1, a sparkling Cappricio Italienne, and an 1812 Overture without cannons. No doubt, in part because of not listening to a quality stereo for over a month, this recording just bowled me over. So this is a superlative recording on a superlative pressing on a superlative CD player. Everything just right. If I heard the same as an SACD would I notice the difference?

(Perhaps a tangent, but how would you assess the complete series of 45 or so Ancerl Supraphon recordings against say, Karajan's 45 best recordings?).

You are listening to a Gold CD, not aluminum, the dymanic range is greater and it should be easier on the ear with better bass and should sound more musical...as for Ancerl vs Karajan I would pick Ancerl over HVK for Orchestral Recordings but HVK is a superb Opera Conductor, it's not really fair to compare them also because the 46 discs in the Ancerl set are all the music he recorded, Karajan's Orchestral output for EMI alone is 70 discs, and, Ancerl includes a lot of East European 20th Century Composers in his Set too...

Now, all you need is a Sub Woofer...

I scotched the sub woofer plan for now. I discussed the purchase of a Totem subwoofer with my dealer but he pooh-pooh'ed the benefits. What I really need, according to him, is to scrap the stereo I purchased from him only 2 years ago and buy one for $10,000 or so. I really should have bought that one in the first place had I listened to him then. I really did not spend quite enough and exaggerated sibilants are my comeuppance for being so cheap in the first place. (I realize that all this is totally irrelevant to whether a subwoofer would be a good idea or not, but certainly dissuaded me from purchasing the subwoofer from him. I walked into the store that day prepared to lay out good cash for a new subwoofer, and walked out actually feeling pretty content without one. This because I auditioned his $10,000 stereo and decide my cheaper one was actually better.)
Plus there's that new lens to get under my belt.