SACD player recommendation

[insoc]

I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC conversion for
redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for DVD-Audio. There are some titles in
SACD that I would like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD player (not a
DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on sites like amazon.com or
crutchfield. I am not going to spend >$1000 on a universal player, so
my question is: should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon, Marantz, Onkyo
in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a difference? Is it worth it? Thank
you!

[Arny Krueger]

"insoc" > wrote in message
oups.com
> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten good
> reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!

As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats, respectively.
Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky. There is an
inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds
good:

Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD

[Steven Sullivan]

insoc > wrote:
> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC conversion for
> redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for DVD-Audio. There are some titles in
> SACD that I would like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD player (not a
> DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on sites like amazon.com or
> crutchfield. I am not going to spend >$1000 on a universal player

You don't have to. There are at least a few universal models for sale new
at <$1000.


___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

[ScottW]

"Steven Sullivan" > wrote in message
...
> insoc > wrote:
>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC conversion for
>> redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for DVD-Audio. There are some titles in
>> SACD that I would like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD player (not a
>> DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on sites like amazon.com or
>> crutchfield. I am not going to spend >$1000 on a universal player
>
> You don't have to. There are at least a few universal models for sale new
> at <$1000.

My neighbor just gave me a Sony DVP-NS775V
I was gonna give away.. but then I saw it will play SACD.
Anybody got an opinion on it? I don't have any SACDs to
check it out. Is it worth keeping?

ScottW

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "insoc" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
>> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
>> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
>> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
>> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten good
>> reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
>> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
>> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!
>
> As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats, respectively.
> Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky. There is
> an inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds
> good:
>
> Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD

Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!

[Harry Lavo]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
news:6OKTf.138925$0G.81529@dukeread10...
>
> "Steven Sullivan" > wrote in message
> ...
>> insoc > wrote:
>>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC conversion for
>>> redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for DVD-Audio. There are some titles in
>>> SACD that I would like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD player (not a
>>> DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on sites like amazon.com or
>>> crutchfield. I am not going to spend >$1000 on a universal player
>>
>> You don't have to. There are at least a few universal models for sale
>> new
>> at <$1000.
>
> My neighbor just gave me a Sony DVP-NS775V
> I was gonna give away.. but then I saw it will play SACD.
> Anybody got an opinion on it? I don't have any SACDs to
> check it out. Is it worth keeping?
>

It is not cosidered one of Sony's outstanding SACD players, but it is
probably as good as anything under $150. It can be modded for improved
performance.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "insoc" > wrote in message
>> oups.com

>>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
>>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
>>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
>>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
>>> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
>>> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
>>> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
>>> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
>>> good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
>>> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
>>> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!

>> As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
>> respectively. Therefore, getting a dedicated player for
>> any of them is risky. There is an inexpensive universal
>> DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds good:

>> Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD

> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!

Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable unbiased evidence that
the the SACD performance of the Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in any way,
besides your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to be
substandard".

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message

> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> news:6OKTf.138925$0G.81529@dukeread10...
>>
>> "Steven Sullivan" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> insoc > wrote:
>>>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
>>>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
>>>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
>>>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>>>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated
>>>> SACD player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo
>>>> on sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not
>>>> going to spend >$1000 on a universal player
>>>
>>> You don't have to. There are at least a few universal
>>> models for sale new
>>> at <$1000.
>>
>> My neighbor just gave me a Sony DVP-NS775V
>> I was gonna give away.. but then I saw it will play SACD.
>> Anybody got an opinion on it? I don't have any SACDs to
>> check it out. Is it worth keeping?
>>
>
> It is not cosidered one of Sony's outstanding SACD
> players, but it is probably as good as anything under
> $150. It can be modded for improved performance.

It is well known that virtually every published optical player mod on the
web is unproven in any reliable, unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt
performance.

[jeffc]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>
> Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable unbiased evidence
> that the the SACD performance of the Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in
> any way, besides your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to be
> substandard".

Oh, you mean kinda like that "Arny says you can't hear it so it can't be
heard" line. I get it.

[jeffc]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> It is well known that virtually every published optical player mod on the
> web is unproven in any reliable, unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt
> performance.

A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.

[Clyde Slick]

"insoc" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC conversion for
> redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for DVD-Audio. There are some titles in
> SACD that I would like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD player (not a
> DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on sites like amazon.com or
> crutchfield. I am not going to spend >$1000 on a universal player, so
> my question is: should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
> good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon, Marantz, Onkyo
> in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a difference? Is it worth it? Thank
> you!
>

ignore Arny



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[Arny Krueger]

"jeffc" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>>
>> Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable
>> unbiased evidence that the the SACD performance of the
>> Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in any way, besides
>> your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to
>> be substandard".

> Oh, you mean kinda like that "Arny says you can't hear it
> so it can't be heard" line. I get it.

No, I mean kinda like the truth will out.

In the case of SACD and DVD-A the truth has pretty much outed, and they are
well on their way to becoming dead formats. Most everybody who invested in
them got a lot less than they initially expected, particularly among the
business people who promoted them the most heavily. A few people have even
lost their jobs.

Jeff, if you know anything about psychoacoustics, you'd know why SACD and
DVD-A failed to obtain a critical mass with the music-loving public. Your
posturing above speaks to your lack of relevant education.

[Arny Krueger]

"François Yves Le Gal" > wrote in
message
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:58:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
> > wrote:
>
>> As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
>> respectively.
>
> Don't generalize from a US viewpoint, Arny: SACD is
> thriving in the rest of the world, particularly when it
> comes to classical music releases.

I'd like to see relevant evidence of that. In the US we know exactly what's
happening because the RIAA is a central public distribution point for the
relevant stats. I know of no similar source that works on a world-wide
basis, so whatever is happening is a complete mystery.

Given the way they supported Beta to the bitter end, there's no reason to
not believe that Sony is propping SACD up with a fire hose spewing cash.

> And yes, DVD-A is dead.

The bad news is that there were DVD-A subformats that could actually make
psychoacoustic sense - those that bypassed AC-3 for multichannel.

[Arny Krueger]

"jeffc" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>
> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.

Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has nothing of substance
to say?

[Arny Krueger]

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> "insoc" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
>> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
>> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
>> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
>> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
>> good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
>> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
>> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!

> ignore Arny

This is about the most impressive positive recommendation that I could hope
for.

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>
>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>
> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has nothing of
> substance to say?
No.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>>
>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>
>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>> nothing of substance to say?

> No.

So what of substance was there in Jeff's post?

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> . ..
>>>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>>>
>>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>>
>>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>>> nothing of substance to say?
>
>> No.
>
> So what of substance was there in Jeff's post?
>
Anybody notice how Arny postures a lot, but really has nothing of substance
to say?

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>>> . ..
>>>>>> It is well known that virtually every published
>>>>>> optical player mod on the web is unproven in any
>>>>>> reliable, unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt
>>>>>> performance.
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>>>
>>>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>>>> nothing of substance to say?
>>
>>> No.
>>
>> So what of substance was there in Jeff's post?
>>
> Anybody notice how Arny postures a lot, but really has
> nothing of substance to say?


Just goes to show that Robert can't tell the difference between a simple
relevant question and posturing.

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>>>> . ..
>>>>>>> It is well known that virtually every published
>>>>>>> optical player mod on the web is unproven in any
>>>>>>> reliable, unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt
>>>>>>> performance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>>>>> nothing of substance to say?
>>>
>>>> No.
>>>
>>> So what of substance was there in Jeff's post?
>>>
>> Anybody notice how Arny postures a lot, but really has
>> nothing of substance to say?
>
>
> Just goes to show that Robert can't tell the difference between a simple
> relevant question and posturing.
If irony killed.

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> . ..
>>>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>>>
>>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>>
>>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>>> nothing of substance to say?
>
>> No.
>
> So what of substance was there in Jeff's post?
>
Just like the substance of Robert's posts, absent, that's why I killfiled
him.

[George M. Middius]

Robert Morein said:

> Anybody notice how Arny postures a lot, but really has nothing of substance
> to say?

Thanks Mr. Morien for admitting the debating trade is "nothing of substance"
Mr. Moiren.





--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

[George M. Middius]

duh-Mikey pounds his scrawny little chest.

> Just like the substance of Robert's posts, absent, that's why I killfiled
> him.

Prove it!™




--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "insoc" > wrote in message
>>> oups.com
>
>>>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
>>>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
>>>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
>>>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
>>>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
>>>> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
>>>> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
>>>> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
>>>> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
>>>> good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
>>>> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
>>>> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!
>
>>> As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
>>> respectively. Therefore, getting a dedicated player for
>>> any of them is risky. There is an inexpensive universal
>>> DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds good:
>
>>> Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
>
>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>
> Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable unbiased evidence
> that the the SACD performance of the Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in
> any way, besides your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to be
> substandard".

Obviously I can't "prove" anything and won't even try on a usenet discussion
entititled R-A-Opinion.

But since I have a Sony XA2000ES (plus two earlier Sony SACD/CD players) and
have auditioned against Toshiba and Panasonic CD/DVD-A players, as well as a
Denon 2905 universal....and most importantly, USE a 578a for DVD-V and
DVD-A, I am in position to directly compared the SACD capability of the 578a
versus the Sony XA2000ES. I also have several SACD's where I deliberately
bought two copies to do comparisons. The most revealing of these is Genius
Loves Company and there is no comparison...the Sony presents the studio
space and singing voices, drums, etc. that are dimensional in space (I have
a five full-range 5.0 system). By comparison, the 578 dries up the ambiance
almost completely, and sounds pretty much like a somewhat "dry" conventional
CD player. It's CD layer is actually more transparent. My guess is that it
is processed as PCM, because my Sony's (particularly the earlier ones) do
the same thing when they have PCM switched in to process speaker distances
and bass management. Whether this is intrinsic to PCM processing, or simply
an inferior implementation when it comes to SACD I don't know. What I do
know is that side-by-side and level matched one is markedly superior....and
it is not the Pioneer.

[Steven Sullivan]

Harry Lavo > wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
> >
> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> "insoc" > wrote in message
> >>> oups.com
> >
> >>>> I already have a NAD cd player (521i) with 20bit DAC
> >>>> conversion for redbook cds and a Panasonic S97 for
> >>>> DVD-Audio. There are some titles in SACD that I would
> >>>> like to get, thus I need a SACD player. I am very
> >>>> interested in the Sony SCD-CE595. It is a dedicated SACD
> >>>> player (not a DVD) and you can get it at <$150,oo on
> >>>> sites like amazon.com or crutchfield. I am not going to
> >>>> spend >$1000 on a universal player, so my question is:
> >>>> should I stick with this Sony player that has gotten
> >>>> good reviews or get a better SACD player, like a Denon,
> >>>> Marantz, Onkyo in the $300-500 range? Would I hear a
> >>>> difference? Is it worth it? Thank you!
> >
> >>> As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
> >>> respectively. Therefore, getting a dedicated player for
> >>> any of them is risky. There is an inexpensive universal
> >>> DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds good:
> >
> >>> Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
> >
> >> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
> >
> > Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable unbiased evidence
> > that the the SACD performance of the Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in
> > any way, besides your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to be
> > substandard".

> Obviously I can't "prove" anything and won't even try on a usenet discussion
> entititled R-A-Opinion.

> But since I have a Sony XA2000ES (plus two earlier Sony SACD/CD players) and
> have auditioned against Toshiba and Panasonic CD/DVD-A players, as well as a
> Denon 2905 universal....and most importantly, USE a 578a for DVD-V and
> DVD-A, I am in position to directly compared the SACD capability of the 578a
> versus the Sony XA2000ES. I also have several SACD's where I deliberately
> bought two copies to do comparisons. The most revealing of these is Genius
> Loves Company and there is no comparison...the Sony presents the studio
> space and singing voices, drums, etc. that are dimensional in space (I have
> a five full-range 5.0 system). By comparison, the 578 dries up the ambiance
> almost completely, and sounds pretty much like a somewhat "dry" conventional
> CD player. It's CD layer is actually more transparent. My guess is that it
> is processed as PCM, because my Sony's (particularly the earlier ones) do
> the same thing when they have PCM switched in to process speaker distances
> and bass management. Whether this is intrinsic to PCM processing, or simply
> an inferior implementation when it comes to SACD I don't know. What I do
> know is that side-by-side and level matched one is markedly superior....and
> it is not the Pioneer.

What I do know is that your comparisons are typically sighted, not levelmatched,
and there's no measurements to back them up --- and therefore just more of the
same old same old.

Remember, even you have conceded that sighted listening is prone to error,
and the blind comparison....'monodic' or whatever ...is what will produce
reliable results.

So why should anyone take your report here as anything but 'prone to
error' too?

How about you at least measure the output of each player, and see if you
aren't hearing some simple, verifiable level differences? Before leaping
off into the speculative void, I mean.






___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

[jeffc]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>>>
>>> Harry, prove or even give just one shred of reliable
>>> unbiased evidence that the the SACD performance of the
>>> Pioneer DV-578A-S is substandard in any way, besides
>>> your typical "Harry says its substandard, so it has to
>>> be substandard".
>
>> Oh, you mean kinda like that "Arny says you can't hear it
>> so it can't be heard" line. I get it.
>
> No, I mean kinda like the truth will out.
>
> In the case of SACD and DVD-A the truth has pretty much outed, and they
> are well on their way to becoming dead formats. Most everybody who
> invested in them got a lot less than they initially expected, particularly
> among the business people who promoted them the most heavily. A few people
> have even lost their jobs.
>
> Jeff, if you know anything about psychoacoustics, you'd know why SACD and
> DVD-A failed to obtain a critical mass with the music-loving public. Your
> posturing above speaks to your lack of relevant education.

What the hell are you talking about? I didn't say anything about SACD, so
you went off and used it as an excuse to blather more. I simply pointed out
how clueless you are in general.

[jeffc]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>
>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>
> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has nothing of
> substance to say?

Anybody notice what a douche bag Arny is?

[Arny Krueger]

"jeffc" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>>
>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>
>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has
>> nothing of substance to say?
>
> Anybody notice what a douche bag Arny is?

Yet another subjectivist poster, a picture of tact and maturity.

"jeffc" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "jeffc" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>> It is well known that virtually every published optical
>>>> player mod on the web is unproven in any reliable,
>>>> unbiased way. Some of them probably hurt performance.
>>>
>>> A lot like your opinions, now that you mention it.
>>
>> Anybody notice how Jeff postures a lot, but really has nothing of
>> substance to say?
>
> Anybody notice what a douche bag Arny is?
Then why try out douche bag him?

[George M. Middius]

The Bug Eater makes a stab at embracing reality.

> > Anybody notice what a douche bag Arny is?

> Then why try out douche bag him?

It's one thing to cry your eyes out because the Krooborg receives so much
"abuse". It's another thing to admit he's a douchebag and *still* continue
to idolize him.

Now that you've admitted Krooger is a douchebag, Mickey, what does that
make you?




--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth

[RalphH]

Harry Lavo wrote:
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>
> >
> > As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats, respectively.
> > Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky. There is
> > an inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say sounds
> > good:
> >
> > Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
>
> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!

I was surprised/shocked by this comment Harry as you recommended this
the Pioneer 578A inm a impromptu review on rec.audio.highend dated Sept
14, 2004 calling it "a minor miracle".

Your comments on the SACD playback were:

"SACD - acceptably good - converted to PCM and in the process looses a
bit of
transparency...the ambience is drier than either of the above...same
slight
"house sound" .. but to it's credit it "fixes" instruments in space
with
stability that eludes my Sony C222ES "

comments on the CD playback:

"CD - very, very good. Has the Pioneer "house sound" of slightly warm
upper
bass and slightly rolled off deep bass, but very transparent in the
midrange
and very dynamic. Excellent CD sound. "

I bought the unit largely on your recommendation as a 1st step to
developing a SACD collection.

Why the sudden about face?

[Harry Lavo]

"RalphH" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Harry Lavo wrote:
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>
>> >
>> > As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats, respectively.
>> > Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky. There
>> > is
>> > an inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say
>> > sounds
>> > good:
>> >
>> > Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
>>
>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>
> I was surprised/shocked by this comment Harry as you recommended this
> the Pioneer 578A inm a impromptu review on rec.audio.highend dated Sept
> 14, 2004 calling it "a minor miracle".
>
> Your comments on the SACD playback were:
>
> "SACD - acceptably good - converted to PCM and in the process looses a
> bit of
> transparency...the ambience is drier than either of the above...same
> slight
> "house sound" .. but to it's credit it "fixes" instruments in space
> with
> stability that eludes my Sony C222ES "
>
> comments on the CD playback:
>
> "CD - very, very good. Has the Pioneer "house sound" of slightly warm
> upper
> bass and slightly rolled off deep bass, but very transparent in the
> midrange
> and very dynamic. Excellent CD sound. "
>
> I bought the unit largely on your recommendation as a 1st step to
> developing a SACD collection.
>
> Why the sudden about face?

No about face. I still think its far and away the best value in a universal
for under $500. But I have had a shift of reference, for as inferior as the
578a was to my C222ES on SACD, so is my C222ES to the newer XA2000ES that
Sony has replaced it with. So the standards have elevated. And in a head
to head comparison on SACD, the XA2000ES pretty markedly beats the 578a.
Now the 578's DVD-A, that's another story.

In fact, you may recall I originally brought a Panasonic to the attention of
the RAHE group because of its transparency. At the time it was the only low
priced dVD-A player that had it. But I also commented on its timbral
balance being off...the the Pioneer came along. On DVD-A, it has the
transparency of the Panasonic, and dead-on timbral accuracy. As does the
XA2000ES on SACD. How do I know? I a-b'd them, using the Chesky "Swing
Live" disk which I have in both the DVD-A and SACD version, and which were
cut directly to two different recording/playback technologies from the same
mic feed. With the units level matched, I could discern no difference in
sound. But switch the Pioneer to SACD, and there was a noticeable drying up
of the live ambience of the club. The sound lost it's "aliveness", if you
will.

So, for DVD-A the 578a is a clear winner as I stated earlier.

On CD, it's fair..not terrible, but I've reduced my "rating" a bit from my
earlier assessment...it's just acceptable.

On SACD, my evaluation hasn't changed. Timbre is still good, as are bass
dynamics. But it is dry and fairly lifeless. The competition has just
gotten that much better to the point where the 578a just doesn't show what
SACD can do, even at a low price point.

[Steven Sullivan]

Harry Lavo > wrote:

> "RalphH" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Harry Lavo wrote:
> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>
> >> >
> >> > As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats, respectively.
> >> > Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky. There
> >> > is
> >> > an inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say
> >> > sounds
> >> > good:
> >> >
> >> > Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
> >>
> >> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
> >
> > I was surprised/shocked by this comment Harry as you recommended this
> > the Pioneer 578A inm a impromptu review on rec.audio.highend dated Sept
> > 14, 2004 calling it "a minor miracle".
> >
> > Your comments on the SACD playback were:
> >
> > "SACD - acceptably good - converted to PCM and in the process looses a
> > bit of
> > transparency...the ambience is drier than either of the above...same
> > slight
> > "house sound" .. but to it's credit it "fixes" instruments in space
> > with
> > stability that eludes my Sony C222ES "
> >
> > comments on the CD playback:
> >
> > "CD - very, very good. Has the Pioneer "house sound" of slightly warm
> > upper
> > bass and slightly rolled off deep bass, but very transparent in the
> > midrange
> > and very dynamic. Excellent CD sound. "
> >
> > I bought the unit largely on your recommendation as a 1st step to
> > developing a SACD collection.
> >
> > Why the sudden about face?

> No about face. I still think its far and away the best value in a universal
> for under $500.

A rather limited field, that.



___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

[Harry Lavo]

"Steven Sullivan" > wrote in message
...
> Harry Lavo > wrote:
>
>> "RalphH" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > Harry Lavo wrote:
>> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
>> >> > respectively.
>> >> > Therefore, getting a dedicated player for any of them is risky.
>> >> > There
>> >> > is
>> >> > an inexpensive universal DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say
>> >> > sounds
>> >> > good:
>> >> >
>> >> > Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
>> >>
>> >> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>> >
>> > I was surprised/shocked by this comment Harry as you recommended this
>> > the Pioneer 578A inm a impromptu review on rec.audio.highend dated Sept
>> > 14, 2004 calling it "a minor miracle".
>> >
>> > Your comments on the SACD playback were:
>> >
>> > "SACD - acceptably good - converted to PCM and in the process looses a
>> > bit of
>> > transparency...the ambience is drier than either of the above...same
>> > slight
>> > "house sound" .. but to it's credit it "fixes" instruments in space
>> > with
>> > stability that eludes my Sony C222ES "
>> >
>> > comments on the CD playback:
>> >
>> > "CD - very, very good. Has the Pioneer "house sound" of slightly warm
>> > upper
>> > bass and slightly rolled off deep bass, but very transparent in the
>> > midrange
>> > and very dynamic. Excellent CD sound. "
>> >
>> > I bought the unit largely on your recommendation as a 1st step to
>> > developing a SACD collection.
>> >
>> > Why the sudden about face?
>
>> No about face. I still think its far and away the best value in a
>> universal
>> for under $500.
>
> A rather limited field, that.

Yeah, not too large but it does encompass Pioneer, Samsung, Denon, Onkyo,
and Yamaha.

[Harry Lavo]

"fathom" > wrote in message
...
> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "RalphH" > wrote in message
>> oups.com..
>> .
>>>
>>> Harry Lavo wrote:
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > As you know, SACD and DVD-A are dying and dead formats,
>>>> > respectively. Therefore, getting a dedicated player for
>>>> > any of them is risky. There is an inexpensive universal
>>>> > DVD-A/SACD/DVD player that many people say
>>>> > sounds good:
>>>> >
>>>> > Pioneer DV-578A-S DVD Player with DVD-Audio / SACD
>>>>
>>>> Great DVD-A, so-so CD, poor SACD. He wants SACD!
>>>
>>> I was surprised/shocked by this comment Harry as you
>>> recommended this the Pioneer 578A inm a impromptu review
>>> on rec.audio.highend dated Sept 14, 2004 calling it "a
>>> minor miracle".
>>>
>>> Your comments on the SACD playback were:
>>>
>>> "SACD - acceptably good - converted to PCM and in the
>>> process looses a bit of
>>> transparency...the ambience is drier than either of the
>>> above...same slight "house sound" .. but to it's credit it
>>> "fixes" instruments in space with stability that eludes my
>>> Sony C222ES "
>>>
>>> comments on the CD playback:
>>>
>>> "CD - very, very good. Has the Pioneer "house sound" of
>>> slightly warm upper bass and slightly rolled off deep
>>> bass, but very transparent in the midrange and very
>>> dynamic. Excellent CD sound. "
>>>
>>> I bought the unit largely on your recommendation as a 1st
>>> step to developing a SACD collection.
>>>
>>> Why the sudden about face?
>>
>> No about face. I still think its far and away the best
>> value in a universal for under $500. But I have had a
>> shift of reference, for as inferior as the 578a was to my
>> C222ES on SACD, so is my C222ES to the newer XA2000ES that
>> Sony has replaced it with. So the standards have elevated.
>> And in a head to head comparison on SACD, the XA2000ES
>> pretty markedly beats the 578a. Now the 578's DVD-A, that's
>> another story.
>>
>> In fact, you may recall I originally brought a Panasonic to
>> the attention of the RAHE group because of its
>> transparency. At the time it was the only low priced dVD-A
>> player that had it. But I also commented on its timbral
>> balance being off...the the Pioneer came along. On DVD-A,
>> it has the transparency of the Panasonic, and dead-on
>> timbral accuracy. As does the XA2000ES on SACD. How do I
>> know? I a-b'd them, using the Chesky "Swing Live" disk
>> which I have in both the DVD-A and SACD version, and which
>> were cut directly to two different recording/playback
>> technologies from the same mic feed. With the units level
>> matched, I could discern no difference in sound. But
>> switch the Pioneer to SACD, and there was a noticeable
>> drying up of the live ambience of the club. The sound lost
>> it's "aliveness", if you will.
>>
>> So, for DVD-A the 578a is a clear winner as I stated
>> earlier.
>>
>> On CD, it's fair..not terrible, but I've reduced my
>> "rating" a bit from my earlier assessment...it's just
>> acceptable.
>>
>> On SACD, my evaluation hasn't changed. Timbre is still
>> good, as are bass dynamics. But it is dry and fairly
>> lifeless. The competition has just gotten that much better
>> to the point where the 578a just doesn't show what SACD can
>> do, even at a low price point.
>
> Audio Advisor is carrying the newer Pioneer 588a for $129.00
> with free shipping. I've had one for a month and I'm quite
> pleased with it. It may not compare with Sony's top-line SACD
> players, but it sounds as good as my $900 Sony DVP-NS900V.
> The DVD-A playback was excellent. It also works very well as
> a DVD video player (even plays Divx files as well as mpg, jpg,
> mp3).
>
> For the price it's one of the best values in audio. For a guy
> who wants to get his feet wet in SACD it's perfect - and he
> won't have to mess around with switching 6 wires every time he
> wants to go from DVD-A to SACD like he would with 2 separate
> players.
>
> I even like the remote and the on-screen menus. Vastly
> superior to what you get with most cheap DVD players.
>
> It's really hard to go wrong with the 588a. Even as just a
> DVD player, it's a great bargain.
>

Sounds like it fills the same niche as the 578a did. It (as did the 578a)
simply provide a quality that does not exist elsewhere in low-end
universals. But if it is like the 578a, it will be at it's best on DVD-A
and worst on SACD. Hope they've made progress.