In Reply to: Re: Yet another straw man soundly whacked into a pile of hay posted by bublitchki on October 8, 2004 at 07:00:47:
"It is still, however, regarded as a very competitive SACD player"Without having heard this player (or its sibling) I take issue with this oft-repeated claim. It's widely acknowledged that the SCD-1 benefits greatly from a better clock (so despite its heft it's not without jitter issues) and its output stage has been roundly criticized. I suggest that if you listen to current players at significantly less than the SCD-1's original cost, you might be amazed how much better you can do. In the right hands, the SCD-1 would appear to make a great base for mods, but that's about it ... or at least this is the conclusion I've come to based on reading hundreds of relevant posts here.
That said, I think the Mercury Living Presence series (I'm still working my way through these) would be a much better base for any such format comparison than the Living Stereo set (which I thought were just OK). But inevitably you're still comparing player/format combinations. I tend to simply judge discs on their own merits ... was the outlay worth the music/performance/sonics.
Stephen
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- SCD-1 - Stephen 23:16:18 10/10/04 (9)
- Gear bashing - racerguy 03:51:18 10/12/04 (1)
- Fair comment (nt) - Stephen 03:54:23 10/12/04 (0)
- Re: SCD-1 - bublitchki 02:35:30 10/11/04 (6)
- comparisons are important - tunenut 13:27:08 10/11/04 (5)
- Never said they weren't - Stephen 15:43:36 10/11/04 (4)
- no cop-out - tunenut 10:12:54 10/12/04 (2)
- Re: no cop-out - Stephen 14:45:43 10/12/04 (1)
- Starker - tunenut 16:25:55 10/12/04 (0)
- Thanks, tunenut and racerguy - bublitchki 07:03:52 10/12/04 (0)