Is High-end audio worth-it?

I have had only brief episodes when I experienced much angst due to the hobby. The most severe one was at the beginning of my audiophile journey when within a few years I had four CD players wander through my system(s). After having settled on a Wadia 8/12 combo and my current amps and speakers I have been happy with my system and experienced much joy with it for almost 20 years and have had added only some modifications to my amps and speakers, and midway incorporated a REL subwoofer that I still own. The last two years have been busy again with upgrades, but most of it has been additions (room treatment, external power supplies for amps) and only one substitute upgrade, the DAC (I don't count the switch from my old Wadia 8 transport as an upgrade, since on the Berkeley DAC the new unit sounds the same and was only necessary because the 20 year old Wadia 8 had started to have problems, with no spare parts being available anymore). Here every upgrade has been a definite winner.

I have avoided a lot of angst by deliberately missing out on the format wars, in hindsight now an even more fortunate decision than it seemed to me at the time when SACD was *the* hi-res thing. Not only did SACD turn out to be the flop that I predicted it would be, now it is superseded by 24/176 and 24/192, so why should I even have bothered. And while there are people who still hold that the hi-res formats are ssooo superior to CD, many audiophiles think differently. They assert that while it is true that they are of higher quality than CD, the differences are not huge, especially now that CD playback has made so much dramatic progress in recent years, and that quality of recording and mastering itself make a much bigger difference (witness many posts on this forum and comments elsewhere *)). Indeed, I get a stunning resolution from CD out of my Berkeley DAC that I would never have thought possible from the medium in my wildest dreams, and apparently the Berkeley DACs, as fantastic as it is in its own right, doesn't even reach the ceiling with CD. I just don't see any compelling reason to jump on hi-res since CD, where all the music is, has become so good, and comparatively very little music is available in hi-res, something that will never change. People who think otherwise are deluding themselves, just like they did about SACD. Sure, Sony has recently said they would open their vaults to all their hi-res but I believe it when I see it. Certainly, many CDs sound crappy, but this is not a problem of the CD medium itself but a result of the loudness wars, among others, and unlike others I am not much affected by this since most of my consumption is classical and classical avantgarde, where recordings on average actually have become better over the years -- most of my CDs sound very good and a good majority even sounds great.

Overall, since I am under no illusion that a stereo system will ever come close to live music, and I simply can enjoy all the exciting things that my system can provide instead (some recent inner unrest has died down once more), the audiophile hobby has brought me immeasurably much more joy over the years than teeth gnashing, angst, desire and jealousy.

__________

*) also confirming what I have heard before, that often the difference in quality between CD and SACD simply comes down to better mastering of the latter and has little to do with the formats themselves

I am also in "show me" mode when it comes to Sony opening up the hirez vaults. We have been fooled several times before with these jokers.

Still, I love DSD and the SACD format. It very much reinvigorated my love of music playback when it came out in 1999.

To my ears, very well done SACD slightly exceeds 24/192 but both formats are very good.

Also, I don't think you can say SACD is a "flop". It has in part created and sustained many small audiophile labels and for a while created a revenue stream for Sony. I don't think hirez was ever going to be a full-on mass market item and it suffered from the war with DVD-Audio which also did not get wide acceptance. And in the process Sony mastered lots of catalog into DSD. The selling (again "show me" please) of DSD downloads may make that another profitable stream for Sony. And DSD has served its purpose as an archival medium for Sony's tapes.

I think we can point to things like SACDs lack of "single inventory" CDs, DVD-Audio's horrific navigation that was different for almost every disc that made 2 channel playback all but impossible without a monitor...but we got a lot of great sound out of these formats. I have roughly 200 DVD-Audio discs and nearly a thousand SACDs and most of them sound excellent.
 
Still, I love DSD and the SACD format. It very much reinvigorated my love of music playback when it came out in 1999.

Interesting. Obviously everyone has their own personal story.
 
I don't think that SACD is a flop either and I am not sure if SACD/DSD is being superseded by 24/96, 24/176 hi rez PCM either.
I agree that remastering DSD from analogue tape, the remastering process and quality of master tape probably is more important
and will make or break any digital format if not done well. However, many Sony original DSD recordings are quite spectacular and
some DSD recording even made its way to vinyl which is also excellent. Thanks to Sony's extensive DSD recording, many of the download high rez PCM
that came out were nothing more than conversion from DSD to PCM. I am not sure but think that there aren't actually all that many high rez PCM recording
that were originally high rez PCM, at least in comparison to DSD. The only problem is that it is only the last few years that you can stream DSD from computer/server and there are still limited hardware that can support DSD streaming. Now that it is slowly changing so DSD/SACD is not dead and it is certainly not a flop but may be not as big a thing as Sony wished it to be.
Granted, not all SACD sounds great. Several SACDs that I ripped only contained about 600 mb of data rather than 2-4 GB. I assume that these are basically 16/44 that was converted to DSD and I don't think that that made any improvement in sound quality and is more like a scam.
I am glad that we have DSD recording and appreciate any recording company that is willing to record at higher than 16/44 resolution. I find most native DSD recording sounds better than SACD layer than CD layer but those remastered SACDs from analogue are quite variable in quality.
 
In fact, I had heard this since the very first review of SACD by Martin Colloms in Hifi & Record Review in 1999 (or was it earlier?), which reported different frequency spectrographs for SACD and CD layers.

Maybe in a few cases but what about something like Channel Classics where care was taken? The 24/192 or DSD versions are clearly superior to the 16/44 (putting finger down throat).
 
(...) To my ears, very well done SACD slightly exceeds 24/192 but both formats are very good.

Lee,

Can you refer half a dozen recordings in each format that one can use to support and debate such statement? I would be particularly happy with classic and jazz nominations.
 
Lee,

Can you refer half a dozen recordings in each format that one can use to support and debate such statement? I would be particularly happy with classic and jazz nominations.

I could provide a list of great SACDs like Blue & The Abstract Truth, Blues in Orbit, John Hammond on Chesky, etc. but the best would be the DSD recordings that Todd Garfinkle does for his label ma recordings. He records in DSD and then offers 24/176 DVD-Roms. But you can listen to the "masters" at audio shows.

But the most important test was the split mic feed tests I have heard with DSD and 24/192 PCM playback. DSD just does a little better job capturing the live event. This is a better test as you are comparing playback directly to a live event.

Double DSD is even better! And Todd Garfinkle is now using double DSD exclusively.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing