[Sonnova]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:58:18 -0800, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ):

willbill wrote:
Doug McDonald wrote:

willbill wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:

Hardly anybody buys into the pseudo-science behind those overpriced,
oversold toys. Note that the SACD and DVD-A formats are slowly dying
in the marketplace.


i'm sure that others here know the answer,
but are you a fan of SACD, or not?

again, i'm not trolling! if you think that
SACD has little merit, then what does have merit?



The SACD has great merit because it is multichannel. Many
of the SACDs I have are really really good heard on
my 5-speaker system.

Doug McDonald

1st thanks to you, steve sullivan and sonnova for
your very recent answers in the "impressions" thread

to me, of the "big 3" (read inexpensive, yet very good;
SACD, CD and vinyl), the clear current volume leader
has been and continues to be CD

(i'm discounting mp3 coz what little i know about it
is that it is a compressed sound format (2 channel?),
similar to the compressed DD and DTS multichannel
formats used with DVD movies)

It is, but 1) you may not be able to tell an
mp3 from a lossless source by ear, if the mp3 is well-made and 2) mp3 sales
and popularity *far* outstrip SACD's and vinyl's.

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason

Depends on the music. I can always tell an MP3 on classical, but a well-made
MP3 can fool me on pop stuff.