SACD or 24;96 downloads?

[Kippyy]

I've invested in a nice 2 channel audio system, and listen to mostly popular music via computer-based server and primarily ripped CD's + a few downloads.
I've purchased a number of MFSL audiophile hybrid-SACD discs over the years, but I have no SACD player, so listen to their redbook layer. Still, most of these discs sound very good to me.
Question:
Would it be wise for me to invest in either a lone SACD player for the 13-15 SACD's I own, and play these manually as the physical disc in anticipation that more SACD's are to come, or to wait for the 24;96 and hi-res market to take hold?
When HD Tracks first came out, I was so excited by access to hi-res music, but its become clear that hi-res doesn't mean better sonics. I just want to maximize the best sound I can get from my system.
Thanks

 

[Bruce B]

We have ripped a few thousand SACD's for HDtracks. Are the titles that you have on HDtracks?

If not, I would not invest in a standalone SACD player for the few that you have. Hopefully someday we will get around to doing transfers of the titles you need.

 

[LL21]

FWIW, i agree. MFSL generally does an excellent job on 16/44 layers, and imho much of the quality of what one hears is the mastering job before the transfer to the final format, be it sacd or 16/44 redbook. so i do not think you are missing much by not having sacd...and certainly not worth buying sacd for 13 discs. and by the way, there are those who find the well mastered redbooks on great redbook players to be comparable to or occassionally better than some so-so sacd editions of the same album.