There's definitly some good information in that article. Up until now I didn't know exactly what it was. After reading through a few pages I've decided that I'll buy DVD Audio rather than SACD. But they guy who wrote that article is terrible. He took eight paragraphs to compare sound to a winding mountain road, repeating the same sentence over and over. It drove me crazy. Oh well, I failed english lots of times, I can't hold it against them if they know what they're talking about.
It seems to me that SACD does for digital what vacuum tubes do for analog, but with some differences. Both tend to improve low and mid frequency sound without improving high frequencies. They both perform an averaging function on the sound, but while tubes average sounds across frequency SACD averages sounds across time (well that's how I understand it, maybe I'm wrong). Averaging frequency tends not to alter the overall pitch of a high frequency, but averaging samples over time does reduce the pitch of short, transient sounds. Like the author says, SACD makes the 'tinggg' of a triangle sound like a 'dinggg.' Without actually hearing the different mediums I'd say this is the best reason not to go with SACD.
|