|
Bronze Member Username: Culp4684Post Number: 40 Registered: Aug-04 | I think I've read some mention of this in some of the past threads I researched... For those of you that have DVD-Audio and SACD, does it spoil you when you go back to 2-channel stereo? I'm afraid that if I take the plunge, I'll go broke trying to replace my expansive CD collection with new issues of these formats!!! |
|
Silver Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 623 Registered: Aug-04 | Robert Yes, I am thoroughly enjoying DVD-A and SACD. Like any format some recordings are better than others, but generally the resolution is outstanding and the surround versions can be simply wonderful. I cannot recommend the hi-res formats enough. Does it spoil normal 2 channel stereo listening. Yes and no. On a side by side comparison - definitely. But ears adjust and when listening to redbook cd's, as we still do often, we still appreciate them - especially the good recordings. Of course, all this is relative upon having reasonably good sound gear. Take the plunge! |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 1469 Registered: Dec-03 | it spoils to certain degree to listen to regular cd's unless it's a really good cd. but i still listen to 2channel even in sacd/dvd-a |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Check out "Teaching an old dog new tricks" on this part of the forum. But you must read the first post to make sense of the rest. And some of it makes no sense, even to those of us on the thread, but it passes the time between questions about which cable to use on a subwoofer. |
|
SACDude Unregistered guest | Please note that, especially for classical music, many of the SACDs are recorded only in 2-channel. As for me, I often prefer to listen in the 2-channel mode, anyway. And also - some of the SACDs aren't super-fi - indeed, many of the new "regular" CDs sound better than the "bad" SACDs. They're trying, but haven't got it right, yet. And as I have one of the early SACD players, I'm told that the new ones - especially the new Denons and Sonys - have even better sound? |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Amazing, something new is promised to sound better than something old. As I said check out "old dogs" for more about this idea. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 369 Registered: Apr-04 | Several months ago, I setup a NAD T763 surround system with a Denon DVD-2200 universal player, Monitor Audio GR10 fronts and center speakers, existing B&W speakers as surround (ran out of money), REL Strata III sub for the sole purpose of getting into the hi-rez formats of SACD/DVD-A. I loved the sound of the new formats. Even on recordings that did not have a surround mix, the hi-rez formats had superior sound to redbook CD's, in my opinion. On recordings where I had both the redbook CD and the hi-rez format, I always listened to the hi-rez. Recently, I became curious about setting up a particular 2 channel system (I already had a NAD c350/iPod 2 channel setup in the bedroom) involving a 25 year old McIntosh integrated amp and Spendor speakers. The amp was badly damaged in shipping (see Old Dogs thread. But, to my surprise it worked when I plugged it in. And, the sound? Incredible. In fact, I haven't even listened to the surround system since the Mac was plugged in. If I was forced to keep only one system out of the components I currently have, it would be a 2 channel system with the Mac being the heart (and soul). As Jan said, check out old dogs. |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanMt. Pleasant, SC Post Number: 606 Registered: Dec-03 | I listen to cd's, DVD-A's, and SACD's. I am far more concerned with the quality of the music and the recording than the format. Sure, I love listening to a great SACD or DVD-A disc. But it hasn't spoiled me remotely from enjoying a great cd. And I have found that a number of cd's sound very good when played through Dolby Prologic II, which matrixes the sound into surround. Obviously it works better on some discs than others. But even when listening to straight stereo on a well-recorded cd I love the experience. The music and the quality of the recording are far more important to me than the format. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AsimoPost Number: 27 Registered: Apr-04 | Ghia It was very interesting for me to read your impression about your old-new McIntosh two channels stereo set. From the introducing stage of the DVD-A and SACD I suspected that it is not a real breakthrough in the audio world for the classical music and operas listeners. I still remember the Quattro records and more recently the HDCD which just failed because they did not have a real superior sound only a lot of complications. As for the McIntosh I know that some of the old stereo amplifiers/receivers were very good. I have a friend that has an excellent SUNSUI 9090DB stereo receiver from the70th http://www.audioreview.com/Receivers/Sansui/PRD_118777_1593crx.aspx I have NAD 7000 Monitor receiver from the 80th. In my opinion is better than my other new NAD C350. Sure there are good new stereo amplifiers but most of them cost fortune and many suffer from bright sound. What really matters for me in the older amplifiers is a remote control at least for volume. I assume that John A, Gregory, Kegger, My Rantz and others will not agree and enthusiastly defend the multi channel format but that is what I think. Thank for the Pottery Barn site, there are many good item and ideas to look for my music room too |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 1505 Registered: Dec-03 | asimo i'm actually surprized you say it's not a breakthrough for classical. as so many people have said it's amazing for classical whether you listen in 2channel or multi. and if you've followed the old dogs thread at all lately you will see what i've been upto "mainly tubes" and from that you can gather i like 2 channel and older equipment. but I also enjoy multi very much. I think their are 2 problems people need to get over to enjoy the high rez and surround. 1st: it isn't either or: you don't have 2 channel or multi: they can live in harmony: 2nd: the problem that some people face is the added expense of quality multi channel. It's much cheaper to put together quality 2channel. so when most put together multi they have to skimp in some areas. so it downgrades the multichannel setup. then people try and compare 2channel setup done right versus multi setup done wrong! |
|
Silver Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 653 Registered: Aug-04 | Kegger I couldn't have said it better. In fact, I'm sure that many hi-res (surround or stereo) knockers have either not heard it through a properly set up sytem or, they have not heard it at all. But, there is also the possiblity that they may have only heard a mediocre or poor recording - the same as we often hear on redbook CD's. And it's not a war. Everyone has personal tastes but that should lead to tunnel vision. There is room for new and old whether its hardware or software and all audio enthusiasts should be supportive of all formats for the sake of music lovers everywhere. |
|
Silver Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 654 Registered: Aug-04 | Correction! Should be: 'but that should not lead to tunnel vision.' |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 1506 Registered: Dec-03 | I was wondering if that was what you meant, as the other didn't make sense! lol I see were on the same page again. |
|
Silver Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 655 Registered: Aug-04 | Yeah sorry - should be using those specs again! Today I ordered the "Doors - LA Woman" and "The Fabulous Thunderbirds Live" in DVD-A. The latter is recorded especially for DVD-A surround so it will be an interesting listen. I'll give a review. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 382 Registered: Apr-04 | Asimo, Good to hear from you again! I haven't abandoned the multichannel/hi-rez format (although it has now been over a week since I've listened to the multichannel system) and don't intend to. But, if I were forced to choose, the old 2 channel Mac would be the choice without question. Whether it is "better" is debatable but I enjoy what I'm hearing so much that it is a clear choice for me. But, like Kegger said, it doesn't have to be "either or" - unless financial considerations play a role. In that scenario, a good quality 2ch system would be preferable to a so-so multichannel system. I don't know. My first impression of hi-rez discs was they are an improvement over redbook cd's. It would be great if I could hook the Denon to the Mac and get an idea of how 2 channel hi-rez would sound through the Mac. But, I don't know how to do this. I tried it but because of the additional inputs needed, I'm not get the full recording. It sounds like a mono recording instead of stereo. |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 1509 Registered: Dec-03 | ghia it's actually fairly simple i do it all the time! AND YOU NEED TOO! IT'S AWSOME! with no disk in the player go to options and set sacd to 2channel not multi. save and exit whaallaa 2channel high rez. with dvd-a play the 2channel track from the dvd menu on the disk! all done. hi rez now for 2channel. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 383 Registered: Apr-04 | Kegger, Ok, thanks! I'll try this in a few....but, will have to move the amp to living room where TV is.... BTW, I just came across the first disk that the Mac did not enhance for me. Heart's "Alive in Seattle" SACD. I played the redbook track and came away preferring the multichannel mix. The mix of the SACD puts you in the audience and I much prefer the audience sounds in that manner as opposed to coming out of the 2 channel. |
|
Bronze Member Username: KingfishPost Number: 21 Registered: Sep-04 | It did spoil me somewhat, but mostly what it did was left me wanting more! But now, I've accommodated for that by playing my cd collection in Dolby Pro-Logic II, or Neo 6, which simulates surround very well into 5 channels. I now have a new collection! It really does do wonders for 2 channel sound. |