..he he, måtte smile litt når jeg leste denne fra dagens Audiophilia forum/high rez highway:
XRCD v. SACD - interesting comparison
I had been so far unable to make sensible comparisons between XRCD and SA-CD versions of the same material other than by comparing the two versions of Mahler's 4th under Reiner (CSO).
My general (past) feeling was that either version had its merits: very broadly speaking, the XRCD more pleasing to the ear, the SACD slightly more aggressive with a - little - bit more sound image.
Last Saturday a friend lent me "just to try" (I am afraid it will stay in the home for long) a brand new Monster Pro Power 5100 PowerCenter conditioner. My system already included power conditioning, but switching to the Monster immediately proved that the Monster is a monster indeed, which brings to the surface many details I was absolutely unaware of in a number of recordings I have always used for testing.
Incidentally, I came to spinning both of the Reiner/Mahler 4ths above and, ... gosh, the XRCD comes out simply shattered from the comparison, with the SACD being a world apart and coming closest than ever to the experience of listening to an orchestra live.
Two basic questions thus arise:
- what does the Monster do that my earlier conditioning was unable to do?
- why did the difference turn out to be so evident in the XRCD/SACD comparison?
Dette stemmer meget godt med mine egne erfaringer.
Det er når jeg virkelig har satt fokus på "strømproblematikken" , og fått senket støygulvet i anlegget mitt at high-rez stikker fra CD'en i lydkvalitet. Selv har jeg følgende innspilling på XRCD og SACD: RCA Living Stereo "Scheherazade" m/Reiner 1960. Begge er uten tvil mastret fra samme mastertaper.
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/230519.html
XRCD v. SACD - interesting comparison
I had been so far unable to make sensible comparisons between XRCD and SA-CD versions of the same material other than by comparing the two versions of Mahler's 4th under Reiner (CSO).
My general (past) feeling was that either version had its merits: very broadly speaking, the XRCD more pleasing to the ear, the SACD slightly more aggressive with a - little - bit more sound image.
Last Saturday a friend lent me "just to try" (I am afraid it will stay in the home for long) a brand new Monster Pro Power 5100 PowerCenter conditioner. My system already included power conditioning, but switching to the Monster immediately proved that the Monster is a monster indeed, which brings to the surface many details I was absolutely unaware of in a number of recordings I have always used for testing.
Incidentally, I came to spinning both of the Reiner/Mahler 4ths above and, ... gosh, the XRCD comes out simply shattered from the comparison, with the SACD being a world apart and coming closest than ever to the experience of listening to an orchestra live.
Two basic questions thus arise:
- what does the Monster do that my earlier conditioning was unable to do?
- why did the difference turn out to be so evident in the XRCD/SACD comparison?
Dette stemmer meget godt med mine egne erfaringer.
Det er når jeg virkelig har satt fokus på "strømproblematikken" , og fått senket støygulvet i anlegget mitt at high-rez stikker fra CD'en i lydkvalitet. Selv har jeg følgende innspilling på XRCD og SACD: RCA Living Stereo "Scheherazade" m/Reiner 1960. Begge er uten tvil mastret fra samme mastertaper.
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/230519.html
