So what's the deal with SACD?

So here's the story: I'm ordering a couple of videos for my wife at Chapter's website. (Chapters=Canadian analogue to Borders) To bump the purchase over $40 to get free shipping I order myself Coltrane's A Love Supreme on CD. (I only have it only vinyl and we haven't had an operational turntable here in a few years.) Since the normal version is out of stock, I get what's called the Super Audio CD version, thinking this SACD is some sort of new form of digital remastering aimed at getting anal retentive audiophiles to purchase another copy of a CD they already own.

Well, today it comes in the mail, so I unwrap it, put it in the CD player, hit play, then nothing happens. When I look at the case I see fine print on the back near the bottom that says SACD only works on special SACD players. WTF? Do I need to watch more TV or something so I'm aware of things like this? I'm only 33. I'm surely not a totally out of touch curmudgeon yet, am I? The damn website said "Format: Compact Disc". I may be old fashioned, but to me that means when I put it in my CD player, the fucking thing is gonna play. Am I the only person in North America that hasn't heard of this?

Furthermore, why is it necessary to carry this recording only on some new fancy ass digital medium? The music was recorded 40 years ago on analog equipment. What the hell can SACD capture from these original recordings that a normal CD can't?

:mad:

Under DU Groups. They might not know either, but presumably the thread would stick around longer. You might also get more attention if you write out Super Audio CD in the thread subject line. Good luck!

some special features or something.

...SACD is some sort of digital encoding to prevent unlawful digital duplication (ie burning onto CD).

If your CD player is an older model with a lower bitrate, it may not be able to read the disc.

SACD has nothing to do with copy-protection. It's a higher-resolution, multichannel format. See my answer below.

When I look at the case I see fine print on the back near the bottom that says SACD only works on special SACD players. WTF?

Over the past few years, two new high-resolution audio media have been introduced: DVD-Audio and Super Audio Compact Disc (SACD). The first was created by the DVD Group (mainly Hitachi and Warner) and the latter by the creators of CD, Sony and Phillips.

Both formats offer higher bitrate sampling than CD, as well as offering support for 5.1 channels of audio. While they are incompatible with each other (although there are a number of "universal players" that play both, along with DVD and CD), DVD-Audio discs come complete with a second layer in Dolby Digital, so they can play on regular DVD players. While it's not required by the spec, most SACDs are similar "hybrid" discs, with a second two-channel CD-resolution layer that will play in all CD players. Unfortunately, it seems that A Love Supreme is one of those SACDs (mainly released early in the life of the format) that come without a CD layer and can only play in an SACD player. (For your reference, if you're shopping in a regular store, an SACD with a CD layer will have a sticker on the front that includes the word "hybrid" or says "can be played in SACD or CD players," while one without a CD layer will likely have a similar sticker saying "can only be played in an SACD player.") As far as I'm concerned, record companies that release non-hybrid, SACD-only discs are idiots that probably want the consumer to buy two discs: an SACD for home and a regular CD for the car. I repeat that the vast majority of SACDs are hybrid discs that can play on CD machines.


The damn website said "Format: Compact Disc".

Did it say so for the SACD disc, or only for the CD that was out of stock? If the former, demand your money back -- they put the wrong information on the website.


Furthermore, why is it necessary to carry this recording only on some new fancy ass digital medium? The music was recorded 40 years ago on analog equipment.

That "analog equipment," if used correctly, likely produced master tapes far superior to CD. While CD became popular due to its relative indestructability and freedom from LP surface noise, digitizing good analog material to CD's 16-bit/44.1MHz standard (based more on the limited processing power of 1982-era computers rather than some theoretical ideal) results in a loss of a considerable amount of musical information. The trade-off was that the loss was a one-time-only thing, as opposed to the LP, where some resolution was lost every step from tape to vinyl...and more was lost to record wear every time the LP was played. But if you put a decent analog master tape up against the "digital master" made from digitizing it to 16/44.1, you'll hear that there is no question which is better.


What the hell can SACD capture from these original recordings that a normal CD can't?

Lots of musical detail, better highs, more faithful reproduction of lower-volume information (which is really vital for a sense of realism), you name it. Plus, as I said before, SACD can handle 5.1 channels of sound, just like DVDs in a home-theater system. Currently, almost all classical recordings and some jazz discs are using 5-channel surround (with the rear channels used for ambience in most cases). Beyond that, though, many old recordings were made with three front channels, later mixed-down to two. Those recordings are being reissued on SACD with both a three-channel and a two-channel layer, along with the CD layer that most discs (yours excepted) include.

For example, RCA and Mercury (two labels renowned for sound quality in the 50s and early 60s) are now starting to release their classical catalog from that era in three- and two-channel SACD (these all come with a CD layer as well). I've been grabbing these discs as they come out -- and believe me, the difference between them and the mid-90s "audiophile" CD releases is not subtle. The SACDs make the CDs sound like low-bitrate MP3 by comparison!

:hi:

archiving older recordings to a format that offered long term storage without loss in resolution. SACD and DVD-A use a disc storage of 4.7 gigabytes versus cd which store only 640 megabytes. LP and tape formats deteriorate over time but theoretically SACD's will last forever. Pioneer has a player close to $100 that will play all formats, DVD-Audio, SACD,CD,MP3. The only other thing you'll need is a reciever that has multichannel inputs as recievers do not decode the new formats as they do with CD and DVD movies. The decoding is done within the new players and sent out as 6 analog channels. Can't wait for The Wall to be released in one of these new formats:)

Most SACDs come as hybrid that works on normal CD players. My copy of Björk's Medulla is a hybrid SACD.

Made by Sony - really a wonderful item. Most of the SACDs are hybrids as arcos sez, and will play on either. What's really cool are the SACD reissues that are also 5.1 surround sound. Roxie Music's 'Avalon' is available in that format, and Bowie is releasing new material that way. The Stones also reissued 'Sympathy For The Devil' in SACD 5.1 surround sound and it's simply amazing.

The DVD/SACD/CD player combination is the "wave of the future" and more new releases will be in 5.1.