In Reply to: Fair enough........ posted by Sordidman on December 22, 2004 at 09:47:06:
... at that time i couldn't care less about SACD (if anything, i would probably have preferred to support DVD-A as I already owned two DVD-A discs and have yet to own a single SACD due to my perception that it was a proprietary format unlikely to survive long). i know a few people who even today primarily use their xa777es as a cd player and seldom play sacds on it - they seem to think the price was worth it compared to cd-only players.looking at the design of this player, i don't think it has any design or performance compromises for cd playing - in other words, it seems to be as well designed as a pure cd player as it possibly could be at it's price point - the signal path for cd is separate from dsd all the way to the DAC, even to the inclusion of a very good digital filter that supports 0dBFS+ that is used only for cd playback.
There are much more expensive cd only players out there that do not handle 0dBFS+ (for example, apparently the burr brown digital filters, which are used in high end players like wadia and cary, do NOT support 0dBFS+). i liked the fact that sony cared enough about the issue to put in special effort to resolve it for a player primarily marketed as a m-ch sacd player.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- i bought my xa777es purely on its strength as a cd player ... - Christine Tham 17:53:30 12/22/04 (5)
- You are one of a kind, Christine - jeromelang 21:35:29 12/22/04 (4)
- A recent anecdote ... - Christine Tham 22:38:10 12/22/04 (3)
- Not me......... I agree that SACD sounds "better" - Sordidman 09:06:32 12/23/04 (2)
- Re: Not me......... I agree that SACD sounds "better" - Christine Tham 12:10:30 12/23/04 (1)
- Thanks for the tip. I hadn't realized the distinction - Sordidman 12:24:03 12/23/04 (0)