My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA

On 9 Aug 2004 15:09:38 GMT, Mike Prager wrote:

My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Gee, Mike, how can you still ask this question? It has been asked
and answered innumerable times on the Internet and embedded in
every SACD announcement since the idea was born.

YES!

Kal

"Mike Prager" wrote in message
...
My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA

That is correct, unless the SACD is a mono SACD (rare, but some are).

"Mike Prager" wrote in message
...
My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA
Yes, SACD has a seperate stereo layer. Whereas DVD-audio, from what I've
heard (someone correct me if I'm wrong), downmixes the multi-channel audio
to two channel.

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 9 Aug 2004 15:09:38 GMT, Mike Prager wrote:

My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Gee, Mike, how can you still ask this question? It has been asked
and answered innumerable times on the Internet and embedded in
every SACD announcement since the idea was born.


Easy, he never cared (nor do) I. If I bother acquiring any SACDs they will
most often be heard in my stereo set-up. I bought a "universal" player over
a month ago, took it out its box but haven't plugged it into the wall outlet
yet. Perhaps I'm waiting for dual layer SACDs prices to come down to
standard CD prices. I remember early Telarc CDs with about 30 minutes of
music retailing for $18.98. Lately the material from two Telarc discs
combined onto a single disc can often be found for $2.99 at the Berkshire
Record Outlet. There are so many great sounding performances in the various
2 channel formats (including LPs!), I can't see any real necessity for MC
material, all the more if your 2 channel rig offers better sound than a MC
system which shares room space with a big screen TV.

Mike Prager wrote:
My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Yes, but the reverse is not true: some do not have multichannel
mixes.

--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth

"Norman Schwartz" wrote in message
...
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 9 Aug 2004 15:09:38 GMT, Mike Prager wrote:

My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Gee, Mike, how can you still ask this question? It has been asked
and answered innumerable times on the Internet and embedded in
every SACD announcement since the idea was born.


Easy, he never cared (nor do) I. If I bother acquiring any SACDs they will
most often be heard in my stereo set-up. I bought a "universal" player
over
a month ago, took it out its box but haven't plugged it into the wall
outlet
yet. Perhaps I'm waiting for dual layer SACDs prices to come down to
standard CD prices. I remember early Telarc CDs with about 30 minutes of
music retailing for $18.98. Lately the material from two Telarc discs
combined onto a single disc can often be found for $2.99 at the Berkshire
Record Outlet. There are so many great sounding performances in the
various
2 channel formats (including LPs!), I can't see any real necessity for MC
material, all the more if your 2 channel rig offers better sound than a MC
system which shares room space with a big screen TV.

All this is true. That's why there are still a lot of 2-channel SACD
aficionados. However, if you can assemble a good five (or more) channel
system around your stereo rig, you are in for a whole new dimension in
reproduction of music...especially of classical symphony and live
concerts..but equally applicable to small ensembles, just not as dramatic.
Once you've experienced it, it is hard to go back.

I sat near the rear of Tanglewood's shed recently, with my eyes closed (as I
have almost always done at concerts, finding the visual distracting) and
listened to the BSO play Shostakovich's First Symphony and Emmanuel Ax play
one of Mozart's piano concertos (number 23 or 27, I believe). I was struck
how closely my Thiel-Audionics-ARC-Sony C222ES SACD system comes to
delivering that same "symphonic" sound on a well recorded multi-channel disk
in my own living room As good as many stereo disks sound, none can come
close to capturing that same "you are there" verisimilitude.

ftran999 wrote:
"Mike Prager" wrote in message
...
My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA
Yes, SACD has a seperate stereo layer. Whereas DVD-audio, from what I've
heard (someone correct me if I'm wrong), downmixes the multi-channel audio
to two channel.

No, only a few early ones do that. Most now have a separate stereo mix, usually the original
release mix.

--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth

Thanks to all for the answers. Kal, Norm gave the answer to
why I didn't know already. But now that I've got a universal
player, I'd like to try SACD and see what the fuss is about.
However, I have no plans for multichannel any time soon.

Mike

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...
"Norman Schwartz" wrote in message
...
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 9 Aug 2004 15:09:38 GMT, Mike Prager wrote:

My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Gee, Mike, how can you still ask this question? It has been asked
and answered innumerable times on the Internet and embedded in
every SACD announcement since the idea was born.


Easy, he never cared (nor do) I. If I bother acquiring any SACDs they
will
most often be heard in my stereo set-up. I bought a "universal" player
over
a month ago, took it out its box but haven't plugged it into the wall
outlet
yet. Perhaps I'm waiting for dual layer SACDs prices to come down to
standard CD prices. I remember early Telarc CDs with about 30 minutes of
music retailing for $18.98. Lately the material from two Telarc discs
combined onto a single disc can often be found for $2.99 at the
Berkshire
Record Outlet. There are so many great sounding performances in the
various
2 channel formats (including LPs!), I can't see any real necessity for
MC
material, all the more if your 2 channel rig offers better sound than a
MC
system which shares room space with a big screen TV.

All this is true. That's why there are still a lot of 2-channel SACD
aficionados. However, if you can assemble a good five (or more) channel
system around your stereo rig, you are in for a whole new dimension in
reproduction of music

Putting high-end MC around a pair of Tympanis which dominate the room
already, would be nuts. Putting high-end MC around a 60" rear projection TV
would also be nuts.

.....especially of classical symphony and live
concerts..but equally applicable to small ensembles, just not as dramatic.
Once you've experienced it, it is hard to go back.

I sat near the rear of Tanglewood's shed recently, with my eyes closed (as
I
have almost always done at concerts, finding the visual distracting) and
listened to the BSO play Shostakovich's First Symphony and Emmanuel Ax
play
one of Mozart's piano concertos (number 23 or 27, I believe). I was
struck
how closely my Thiel-Audionics-ARC-Sony C222ES SACD system comes to
delivering that same "symphonic" sound on a well recorded multi-channel
disk
in my own living room As good as many stereo disks sound, none can come
close to capturing that same "you are there" verisimilitude.

Been there done all that. IMO listening at home vs. listening live will (and
should) never be the same and it's not my goal to make them sound the same.
I know where my favorite hall seats are and at home I want my music to sound
just as the recording engineers got it down on the tape, and I know my
favorite engineers. When in the hall I expect and want my music to sound
differently than it does at home and vice versa. At home, I do not what any
diluting and distracting of the music quality provided by hall ambiance, I
simply prefer my room ambiance. (I really do not prefer sitting at the rear
anywhere.)

"Norman Schwartz" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...
"Norman Schwartz" wrote in message
...
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 9 Aug 2004 15:09:38 GMT, Mike Prager wrote:

My impression is that all SACDs, including multichannel ones,
include a stereo mix. Is that correct?

Gee, Mike, how can you still ask this question? It has been asked
and answered innumerable times on the Internet and embedded in
every SACD announcement since the idea was born.


Easy, he never cared (nor do) I. If I bother acquiring any SACDs they
will
most often be heard in my stereo set-up. I bought a "universal" player
over
a month ago, took it out its box but haven't plugged it into the wall
outlet
yet. Perhaps I'm waiting for dual layer SACDs prices to come down to
standard CD prices. I remember early Telarc CDs with about 30 minutes
of
music retailing for $18.98. Lately the material from two Telarc discs
combined onto a single disc can often be found for $2.99 at the
Berkshire
Record Outlet. There are so many great sounding performances in the
various
2 channel formats (including LPs!), I can't see any real necessity for
MC
material, all the more if your 2 channel rig offers better sound than
a
MC
system which shares room space with a big screen TV.

All this is true. That's why there are still a lot of 2-channel SACD
aficionados. However, if you can assemble a good five (or more) channel
system around your stereo rig, you are in for a whole new dimension in
reproduction of music

Putting high-end MC around a pair of Tympanis which dominate the room
already, would be nuts. Putting high-end MC around a 60" rear projection
TV
would also be nuts.


You actually are in luck, as Magnapan makes some very unobtrusive
wall-mounted surround panels, as well as a center-channel speaker (or use of
smaller Maggies). If you can live with Tympanis, all of this will seem
insignifcant.

....especially of classical symphony and live
concerts..but equally applicable to small ensembles, just not as
dramatic.
Once you've experienced it, it is hard to go back.

I sat near the rear of Tanglewood's shed recently, with my eyes closed
(as
I
have almost always done at concerts, finding the visual distracting) and
listened to the BSO play Shostakovich's First Symphony and Emmanuel Ax
play
one of Mozart's piano concertos (number 23 or 27, I believe). I was
struck
how closely my Thiel-Audionics-ARC-Sony C222ES SACD system comes to
delivering that same "symphonic" sound on a well recorded multi-channel
disk
in my own living room As good as many stereo disks sound, none can come
close to capturing that same "you are there" verisimilitude.

Been there done all that. IMO listening at home vs. listening live will
(and
should) never be the same and it's not my goal to make them sound the
same.
I know where my favorite hall seats are and at home I want my music to
sound
just as the recording engineers got it down on the tape, and I know my
favorite engineers. When in the hall I expect and want my music to sound
differently than it does at home and vice versa. At home, I do not what
any
diluting and distracting of the music quality provided by hall ambiance, I
simply prefer my room ambiance. (I really do not prefer sitting at the
rear
anywhere.)

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the hall.
What's your beef?

On 11 Aug 2004 23:23:18 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

Putting high-end MC around a pair of Tympanis which dominate the room
already, would be nuts.

Magnepan and AudioResearch did a dandy such arrangement at CES.

Putting high-end MC around a 60" rear projection TV
would also be nuts.

That's why I got a plasma (although an FP would work, too).

Kal

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the hall.
What's your beef?

Its useless for my stereo library and most often puts me in a seat that I
wouldn't have chosen.

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 11 Aug 2004 23:23:18 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

Putting high-end MC around a pair of Tympanis which dominate the room
already, would be nuts.

Magnepan and AudioResearch did a dandy such arrangement at CES.

I would expect them to. Was their 20.1 front L & R?, still not as wide as a
Tympani. I don't see matching the output level of a Tympani to any surround
speaker, even theirs.

Putting high-end MC around a 60" rear projection TV
would also be nuts.

That's why I got a plasma (although an FP would work, too).

Most everything is Full Screen for me, including cable (which seems to be
remaining so for a long time). I had "dish", but that was also FS (and low
def).

On 12 Aug 2004 23:18:44 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 11 Aug 2004 23:23:18 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

Putting high-end MC around a pair of Tympanis which dominate the room
already, would be nuts.

Magnepan and AudioResearch did a dandy such arrangement at CES.

I would expect them to. Was their 20.1 front L & R?, still not as wide as a
Tympani. I don't see matching the output level of a Tympani to any surround
speaker, even theirs.

IIRC, there were 20.1s for FL/FR/SL/SR and a pair(!) for center.

Putting high-end MC around a 60" rear projection TV
would also be nuts.

That's why I got a plasma (although an FP would work, too).

Most everything is Full Screen for me, including cable (which seems to be
remaining so for a long time). I had "dish", but that was also FS (and low
def).

Sure.

Kal

On 12 Aug 2004 23:17:58 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the hall.
What's your beef?

Its useless for my stereo library

That's likie saying that CDs are useless for your turntable.

and most often puts me in a seat that I
wouldn't have chosen.

At least, it's a real seat on the better recordings. Besides, those
RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence SACDs have the original
3channels!

Kal

Mike Prager wrote:

Thanks to all for the answers. Kal, Norm gave the answer to
why I didn't know already. But now that I've got a universal
player, I'd like to try SACD and see what the fuss is about.
However, I have no plans for multichannel any time soon.

Mike
A word of advice: review the players carefully. Having heard all the
great raves about the Pioneer dv 563 player, I picked one up. Like you,
I was delving into the high definition digital audio medium for the 1st
time. I still have no DVD-As or SACDs. Buying the Pioneer gave me a
budget minded player with good reviews that does all three.

After a week of break-in and listening to just CDs, I came away a bit
disappointed. For CDs, the dv 563 seems to be just OK. Since 100% of my
digital audio collection was still CDs, I couldn't deal with that. I
plugged my old player back in, a Panasonic S-35 (junior to the highly
regarded S55 and I feel benefiting GREATLY from similar electronics to
the S55) and immediately felt pleasantly surrounded by good audio.

Looking back at the reviews for the DV 563, I see that they were highly
praising its SACD and DVDa capability whilst also saying that CD audio
was OK, albeit in an easily forgettable manner. Lesson learned.

CD

I guess I have been out of the game for way too long. I was happy with
every aspect of my 563 driving my creek phone amp and senn 580s. Of course,
the last new digital component I bought was the second adcom d2a driven by a
sony 7700 dvd player. As I was organizing my office this weekend, I found
the receipt for the adcom d2a - almost 10 years old! How the time flies...
New home, new spaces, new toys to come. Whooo Hoo!


"Codifus" wrote in message
...
Mike Prager wrote:

Thanks to all for the answers. Kal, Norm gave the answer to
why I didn't know already. But now that I've got a universal
player, I'd like to try SACD and see what the fuss is about.
However, I have no plans for multichannel any time soon.

Mike
A word of advice: review the players carefully. Having heard all the
great raves about the Pioneer dv 563 player, I picked one up. Like you,
I was delving into the high definition digital audio medium for the 1st
time. I still have no DVD-As or SACDs. Buying the Pioneer gave me a
budget minded player with good reviews that does all three.

After a week of break-in and listening to just CDs, I came away a bit
disappointed. For CDs, the dv 563 seems to be just OK. Since 100% of my
digital audio collection was still CDs, I couldn't deal with that. I
plugged my old player back in, a Panasonic S-35 (junior to the highly
regarded S55 and I feel benefiting GREATLY from similar electronics to
the S55) and immediately felt pleasantly surrounded by good audio.

Looking back at the reviews for the DV 563, I see that they were highly
praising its SACD and DVDa capability whilst also saying that CD audio
was OK, albeit in an easily forgettable manner. Lesson learned.

CD

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 12 Aug 2004 23:17:58 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the hall.
What's your beef?

Its useless for my stereo library

That's likie saying that CDs are useless for your turntable.

Sure, but not only my turntable also my preferred pre-amp, amp and speakers,
and "last but not least" my listening room!

and most often puts me in a seat that I
wouldn't have chosen.

At least, it's a real seat on the better recordings. Besides, those
RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence SACDs have the original
3channels!

Besides I've seen it written (on usenet) that 3 track MLP multi level
players will appear in the fall, along with such recordings (?) presumably
designed to play such recordings, so SACDs are not going to serve that
purpose at all.

On 16 Aug 2004 23:05:40 GMT, "Norman Schwartz"
wrote:

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 12 Aug 2004 23:17:58 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the hall.
What's your beef?

Its useless for my stereo library

That's likie saying that CDs are useless for your turntable.

Sure, but not only my turntable also my preferred pre-amp, amp and speakers,
and "last but not least" my listening room!

At least, you didn't mention your spouse.

and most often puts me in a seat that I
wouldn't have chosen.

At least, it's a real seat on the better recordings. Besides, those
RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence SACDs have the original
3channels!

Besides I've seen it written (on usenet) that 3 track MLP multi level
players will appear in the fall, along with such recordings (?) presumably
designed to play such recordings, so SACDs are not going to serve that
purpose at all.

? They are already SACDs (3channel on the MCH track, 2channel DSD and
2channel CD layer) and they sound fantastic.

Kal

"Norman Schwartz" wrote in message
...
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On 12 Aug 2004 23:17:58 GMT, "Norman Schwartz" wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

With multichannel, you capture *exactly* what the engineers got down
on
tape, which is a reasonable facsimile of sitting in a seat in the
hall.
What's your beef?

Its useless for my stereo library

That's likie saying that CDs are useless for your turntable.

Sure, but not only my turntable also my preferred pre-amp, amp and
speakers,
and "last but not least" my listening room!


The point is, don't diss multichannel because *you* choose to ignore the
format.

and most often puts me in a seat that I
wouldn't have chosen.

At least, it's a real seat on the better recordings. Besides, those
RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence SACDs have the original
3channels!

Besides I've seen it written (on usenet) that 3 track MLP multi level
players will appear in the fall, along with such recordings (?) presumably
designed to play such recordings, so SACDs are not going to serve that
purpose at all.

Reading it on usenet doesn't mean it is true. Be careful in your
assumptions.

james w wrote:
I guess I have been out of the game for way too long. I was happy with
every aspect of my 563 driving my creek phone amp and senn 580s. Of course,
the last new digital component I bought was the second adcom d2a driven by a
sony 7700 dvd player. As I was organizing my office this weekend, I found
the receipt for the adcom d2a - almost 10 years old! How the time flies...
New home, new spaces, new toys to come. Whooo Hoo!


"Codifus" wrote in message
...

Mike Prager wrote:


Thanks to all for the answers. Kal, Norm gave the answer to
why I didn't know already. But now that I've got a universal
player, I'd like to try SACD and see what the fuss is about.
However, I have no plans for multichannel any time soon.

Mike

A word of advice: review the players carefully. Having heard all the
great raves about the Pioneer dv 563 player, I picked one up. Like you,
I was delving into the high definition digital audio medium for the 1st
time. I still have no DVD-As or SACDs. Buying the Pioneer gave me a
budget minded player with good reviews that does all three.

After a week of break-in and listening to just CDs, I came away a bit
disappointed. For CDs, the dv 563 seems to be just OK. Since 100% of my
digital audio collection was still CDs, I couldn't deal with that. I
plugged my old player back in, a Panasonic S-35 (junior to the highly
regarded S55 and I feel benefiting GREATLY from similar electronics to
the S55) and immediately felt pleasantly surrounded by good audio.

Looking back at the reviews for the DV 563, I see that they were highly
praising its SACD and DVDa capability whilst also saying that CD audio
was OK, albeit in an easily forgettable manner. Lesson learned.

CD
I will admit that on CDs, even though the Pioneer 563 didn't sound that
good to me compared to my Panasonic S35, the 563 did present a much
larger 3D soundstage, imaging was way better, and the instruments
sounded more "real" than the Panasonic. Coming back to the Panasonic
from the Pioneer, the Panny sounded more electronic, but also much more
pleasant on the ears. I really really wished the Pioneer sounded better,
especially with everthing else it had going for it.

CD