Santana 'ABRAXAS' SACD will probably be my first selection when I get my player, Wha

[Khorn]

Are there any comprehensive reviews of this title on this SACD?
How does it compare with the latest legacy CD re-masters? Those were quite good in many respects when compared to the older ones BUT seem to kill the top end to a degree that takes a bit of getting used to. There was a two disc Santana compilation out a few years back with some pretty good sound in some respects although the latest Legacy redoes were the best on an overall basis. Abraxas is one of the first titles that I want to get as soon as I get my SACD player. What will be/was yours?

[Steve w]

It's better than the CD version. I have both.

[Sckott]

The MFSL CD is still VERY good. I can't decide if the SACD kills it though. Maybe in time.

[Khorn]

Originally posted by Sckott
The MFSL CD is still VERY good. I can't decide if the SACD kills it though. Maybe in time.

Originally posted by STEVE w
It's better than the CD version. I have both.

In what respect is the SACD better? What are any obvious differences?

[MikeT]

I have many version of "Abraxas" on CD, LP, SACD, DTS CD, etc. I I feel the SACD is good - better the CD in depth of soundstage, definition of each instrument and overall resolution of the recording.

I feel that the MFSL Gold CD has a much warmer feel to it than the SACD, and both are very close - but the SACD seems to have just a bit more definition.

Strangely though, I feel that the Columbia 1/2 speed mastered vinyl version from the mid 80's actually sounds better than any digital version I own. I was astounded. I recently bought a MMF-5 TT to put a TT back into my system after 10 years without one. The first LP I listened to was the Abraxas 1/2 speed master - I compared it to the SACD on my XA777ES - and, IMHO, the vinyl beat the SACD hands down.

[Sckott]

Most every SACD I've heard seems to be more forthcomming with definition. It does not however, mean the SACD sounds perfect. Actually, a lot of the Sony SACDs sound wonderful, but I had a bit of a few thoughts last night...

I was listening to D3 of Stevie Wonder's 4CD set, "At The Close Of The Century" in the car. Ya wanna talk about thick bleeding high-frequency headache? Holy freaking Toledo. I started gobbling Excedrin like cashews. (not really, but it's THAT horrible) I brought the CDs to the tube chain downstairs. Same kinda thing. Ouch, ooh, yeoow, ow, ouchie-ouch, squint.

Then, I took the Cds over to the SACD player. Woah. This player (CE775) totally puts the definition back in, and the heavy ultra-brightness out. it was like the player was a decoder for modern, overbright Cds.

Another reason this CD player saves your newly made Redbook Cds' ***. It really does a wonderful job at putting the beauty back in.

It was then when I cranked up my Boston SACD. The biggest differences are, the guitar arrangements, possibly one of the last things dubbed in later, was really up-front and personal. Even the Canadian remaster didn't sound as good, generally, but the SACD had a bit more detailed charm overall.

SACds are a lot cheaper than the DVD-A's of yesterday. It's just that you have the crappy old CD reissue packaging. Ah, who realli cares.

[Khorn]

Originally posted by Sckott
I was listening to D3 of Stevie Wonder's 4CD set, "At The Close Of The Century" in the car. Ya wanna talk about thick bleeding high-frequency headache? Holy freaking Toledo. I started gobbling Excedrin like cashews. (not really, but it's THAT horrible) I brought the CDs to the tube chain downstairs. Same kinda thing. Ouch, ooh, yeoow, ow, ouchie-ouch, squint.

Then, I took the Cds over to the SACD player. Woah. This player (CE775) totally puts the definition back in, and the heavy ultra-brightness out. it was like the player was a decoder for modern, overbright Cds.

Another reason this CD player saves your newly made Redbook Cds' ***. It really does a wonderful job at putting the beauty back in.

Good to hear about the Wonder set improvement as I have that set myself (Ouch!!! My teeth still hurt every time I think about it). Can't wait to hear it on my new SACD player.

[Rspaight]

Hmmmm. I've always thought the Wonder set sounded OK, but then I've only ever listened to it on my CE775. Interesting.

Ryan

[audiomixer]

The album sounds great! Even if they did cut off the first two measures
of "Hope Your Feeling Better"....What's up with that? It is fine on the Legacy remaster...

[nashreed]

Y'all make the SACD player(s) sound so interesting- and I sure would love to have a player that softens the modern CD's harshness. I don't want to give up the benefits of my Denon HDCD player, though. Is there a SACD/HDCD player on the market?

nashreed

[Tullman]

Khorn, if you have a turntable, get the the ARS lp. It is really good. I was blown away by the sound on this record.

[Khorn]

Originally posted by nashreed
Y'all make the SACD player(s) sound so interesting- and I sure would love to have a player that softens the modern CD's harshness. I don't want to give up the benefits of my Denon HDCD player, though. Is there a SACD/HDCD player on the market?

nashreed

I guess the best solution would be to obtain an SACD player that had DACs good enough with redbook to eliminate the need for HDCD altogether. These can be had but, most likely in the mid to upper price range units, the Sony XA777ES for example.

I can see where it could make sense to include the HDCD decoder in lower priced SACD players but, I am not aware of any out there at the moment.

[bmoura]

Originally posted by Khorn
Are there any comprehensive reviews of this title on this SACD?
How does it compare with the latest legacy CD re-masters? Those were quite good in many respects when compared to the older ones BUT seem to kill the top end to a degree that takes a bit of getting used to. There was a two disc Santana compilation out a few years back with some pretty good sound in some respects although the latest Legacy redoes were the best on an overall basis. Abraxas is one of the first titles that I want to get as soon as I get my SACD player. What will be/was yours?

Good choice! The Santana Abraxas Stereo SACD is a very good one - highly recommended.

[AliMorid]

I own both the Abraxas SACD and the MOFI Gold UDII disc. I've pondered which to keep, but kept both. Until now. The SACD has better seperation of instruments and a larger soundstage while sounding clearer. The MOFI sounds more tonally correct, though. This comparison was done using Samba Pa Ti. The version on the MoFi just feels right. This song reminds me of different times in my life and the SACD is too new of a feeling for me to get the same emotional reaction as I do from the MoFi. I guess some people may get the same feeling listening to an old favorite in multichannel.
That's my take. The MoFi stays for me. Ali

[Mike V]

Originally posted by Tullman
Khorn, if you have a turntable, get the the ARS lp. It is really good. I was blown away by the sound on this record.

I'll second that! I'd go so far to say this is the definitive Abraxas.

[lsupro]

The re-mastered SACD is leaps and bounds bettter than the regular CD. ( I have both) I have not heard the MOFI. The DTS, INHO lacks the "fatness" of the SACD. Nothing is fatter than the vinyl. I love the SACD. Maybe I'll change my view when I hear the MOFI

[Tullman]

Originally posted by Mike V


I'll second that! I'd go so far to say this is the definitive Abraxas.

Yep, this is the best one I've heard.

[krabapple]

Originally posted by Sckott
Most every SACD I've heard seems to be more forthcomming with definition. It does not however, mean the SACD sounds perfect. Actually, a lot of the Sony SACDs sound wonderful, but I had a bit of a few thoughts last night...

I was listening to D3 of Stevie Wonder's 4CD set, "At The Close Of The Century" in the car. Ya wanna talk about thick bleeding high-frequency headache? Holy freaking Toledo. I started gobbling Excedrin like cashews. (not really, but it's THAT horrible) I brought the CDs to the tube chain downstairs. Same kinda thing. Ouch, ooh, yeoow, ow, ouchie-ouch, squint.

Then, I took the Cds over to the SACD player. Woah. This player (CE775) totally puts the definition back in, and the heavy ultra-brightness out. it was like the player was a decoder for modern, overbright Cds.

Another reason this CD player saves your newly made Redbook Cds' ***. It really does a wonderful job at putting the beauty back in.

It was then when I cranked up my Boston SACD. The biggest differences are, the guitar arrangements, possibly one of the last things dubbed in later, was really up-front and personal. Even the Canadian remaster didn't sound as good, generally, but the SACD had a bit more detailed charm overall.

SACds are a lot cheaper than the DVD-A's of yesterday. It's just that you have the crappy old CD reissue packaging. Ah, who realli cares.

SACDs and DVD-As are comparably priced, at least in my neighborhood
(Washington DC).. Both go for between $18-$26 depending on the store.

[krabapple]

Originally posted by Khorn


I guess the best solution would be to obtain an SACD player that had DACs good enough with redbook to eliminate the need for HDCD altogether. These can be had but, most likely in the mid to upper price range units, the Sony XA777ES for example.

I can see where it could make sense to include the HDCD decoder in lower priced SACD players but, I am not aware of any out there at the moment.

The only reason to include and HDCD decoder would be to decode HDCD CDs. An SACD player on its own could not do this.

THe Toshiba SD5700 DVD-A player also features HDCD decoding of HDCD CDs. And it costs less than $300.

[Khorn]

Originally posted by krabapple


The only reason to include and HDCD decoder would be to decode HDCD CDs. An SACD player on its own could not do this.

I think that is why nashreed wants a player with the HDCD chip. From what I have been able to gather, on players with the newest most advance DACs (read expensive) the redbook preformance is so good that it obliviates the need for HDCD. They produce better sound by themselves than possible with HDCD. HDCD has its place (and I liked it when I used it) until you get to true native Hi-Rez formats.

[Mike V]

Originally posted by Khorn

From what I have been able to gather, on players with the newest most advance DACs (read expensive) the redbook preformance is so good that it obliviates the need for HDCD. They produce better sound by themselves than possible with HDCD. HDCD has its place (and I liked it when I used it) until you get to true native Hi-Rez formats.

HDCD is an encode/decode algorithm. The quality of the DAC will not eliminate the need to decode HDCD discs. If you play back an HDCD disc on a player without the HDCD decoder, there will always be a loss of quality over an identical system which does employ HDCD.

It is not necessary to master (encode) and playback (decode) using the HDCD algorithm to get excellent sonic results. I think we've all known this for years, as we've been listening to Steve's masterings without complaint :)

BUT if a disc is mastered in HDCD, it should be decoded to get the best results.

[MikeT]

Originally posted by Mike V

BUT if a disc is mastered in HDCD, it should be decoded to get the best results.

In theory yes, but it depends on the players being used.

I have Toshiba DVD player SD-2200 which decodes HDCD. I used to use this specifically for HDCD discs (and yes I used the stereo analog outputs), even though I have two SACD machines, the Sony C333ES and XA777ES hooked up to my system.

Well one day I decided to do a comparision, using the same CD on two machines at once - obviously an HDCD encoded CD. Much to my amazement - both the C333ES and XA777ES, BLEW the SD-2200 out of the water playing the same exact HDCD encoded disc in an A/B comparison. Now as you might know the C333ES and XA777ES are great CD players, but they do not decode HDCD, the SD-2200 does.

So my conclusions are, in my limited testing, that an excellent CD player will probably play an HDCD encoded CD better than a player with an HDCD decoder chip inside, when the former is a superior player to the latter.

So, theoretically, yes an HDCD should sound better with an HDCD decoder, but not always. I think the overall quality of the CD player, with or without HDCD decoder, is the overriding factor.

Suffice to say I removed the Toshiba SD-2200 from my system, and only use my XA777ES (or C333ES) to play all redbook CDs (HDCD encoding notwithstanding).

[Metralla]

HDCD seems to have had its day. The latest BAT VK-5SE CD player no longer includes a converter that pays special attention to the HDCD cues. If one is considering SACD, do not let the absence of HDCD decoding influence your decision.

Regards,
Metralla

[nashreed]

I would miss the happy little green HDCD light that comes on when it's an HDCD-encoded disc. I think it's cool when a CD has only some songs that are HDCD on it (comps/soundtracks). Hey, you gotta have something when you're staring between the two speakers! (The counter is very mesmerizing as well...:o )

nashreed

[krabapple]

Originally posted by Khorn


I think that is why nashreed wants a player with the HDCD chip. From what I have been able to gather, on players with the newest most advance DACs (read expensive) the redbook preformance is so good that it obliviates the need for HDCD. They produce better sound by themselves than possible with HDCD. HDCD has its place (and I liked it when I used it) until you get to true native Hi-Rez formats.

This presumes that the 'better sound' sometimes perceived on HDCDs is due to the HDCD encoding process, rather than other differences in mastering, or the 6 dB difference in playback between HDCD and non-HDCD encoded discs that Pacific Microsonics (and now Microsoft) enforced as part of its licensing agreement.

HDCD is really just a bitmapping process, as are Sony's SuperBitmapping and XRCD -- it was invented to address the idea that
the 16-bit limit of Redbook 'misses' important audible information.
They're all ways of trying ot pack >16 bits into a 16 bit playback format. It wasn't invented to address limitations of DACs, per se.
HDCD decode filters were commonly paired with high-quality, redbook-conforming Burr-Brown DACs, at least when PM was running the show.


Are the DACs in the expensive SACD players responsible for CD playback outputting >16 bit signal?