|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.246.117.176
In Reply to: Just for kicks.... posted by Penguin on January 2, 2007 at 15:11:52:
I had a Marantz SA 14 v.2, two channel, (Vandy 3a sigs fed into a Musical Fidelity A308 with Audioquest cables with the silly little batteries. Then went to 5 channel with a Sony XA777ES and added Vandy center and surrounds), listened intently for a little less than a year with these players. For a month or two I went back to two channel on the Sony, and directly after that I purchased a VPI Scoutmaster, and was given a Nottingham Horizon turntable, as a loaner until the VPI arrived.I listened to the Channel Mahler recently on a Sony DVP NC685V, a $250 SACD player that got rave reviews in TAS(?) re: all things musical, in two channel with the Audioquest cables. Broken in for 200 hours. I hope no one gets hung up on this player's price or suspect quality. I made my original decision comparing a $1600 Nottingham turntable with an originally $3500 SACD player.
Follow Ups:
close enough for a fair game of compare.dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
I have a Sony CE775 changer (MSRP $349) which got rave reviews in many publications. That is a more fair component for me to compare SACD to LP with on the Music Hall MMF-5. The XA777ES I have cost me $2k when it first became available.I'm not sure what other SACDs you have tried and their quality. I can say however the Mahler 2nd is one of the better SACDS amongst what I own. I don't have any vinyl for the Mahler 2nd though to compare.
Have you tried any of the RCA LS, Opus 3, APO SACDs???????
Being relatively close to PREX, I still do not LOAD up on vinyl. Many folks do not have that luxury of access to vinyl. I have basically stuck with cheap used jazz LPs (I'll take those two-fers any day for value). I do like and enjoy what I hear on the $500 TT I have. I'd say it was one of the better audio purchases I've ever made. That TT had received many accolades on the vinyl forum for bang for the buck.
"I'm not sure what other SACDs you have tried and their quality. I can say however the Mahler 2nd is one of the better SACDS amongst what I own. I don't have any vinyl for the Mahler 2nd though to compare.Have you tried any of the RCA LS, Opus 3, APO SACDs???????"
Yes, I had around 30--Linns, RCA LS's, Telarcs, Pentatones.
Let's just say that the SACD, DSD signature sound came back and was instantly recognisable--a good, dark rich sound with sparkling highs and smoother strings and an overall ensemble sound that is clearly more integrated yet dimensional--but I just slightly prefer the set-back sound of vinyl that has the above positives, but adds even more dimensionality, a laser-like focus on wind instruments, such as clarinet or oboe, better planar imaging, and even more a sense of hall acoustic.
Finally--all precise rationalists out there, hold your nose--there's just more of a sense of the "essence of music," there's something about the rhythms and delicacy of sound on vinyl that I prefer, but SACD clearly got me into the bliss zone too. Maybe if I win the lottery I'll try the Meitner.
If you listen(ed) to vinyl you know what I mean. If you're scratching your head, but you lived in America and your vinyl collection was about 95% Bernstein and Ormandy, (they were gods to me and I wouldn't buy any other conductor LOL), pressed on god-awful Columbia, RCA or Angel in the '70's--, you might want to try a few Londons, Deccas, EMIs, Philips for the most part, and DG. There are millions of them floating around still in perfect condition.
but, who cares, right? ;-0As long as we're talking record labels, I would not agree entirely with your choices.
No question that the Columbia pressings suck -- too bad, considering the quality of the performers. However, the RCAs do not uniformly suck and, in fact, the Red Seals are pretty good. Same for the Angels. Avoid any of the "dynagrooves" however.
On your "good" list, I would note that DGG recordings seem uniformly thin -- not much bass; lots of treble. These really do call for application of the classic tone controls, if your preamp has them. And they've always sounded that way to me . . . for 30+ years on a variety of 'tables, with different phono stages, cartridges, etc. That said, re-equalized to favor the bass, they're fine . . . unlike the Columbias, which are simply beyond salvation.
I concur with your positive assessment of the Phillips, Decca and EMIs.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: