Sony debuts $1,500 SACD player with HDMI output
By Donald Melanson 
posted Aug 27th 2008 1:54PM
posted Aug 27th 2008 1:54PM
We have to admit, that headline makes us a little bit giddy, and Sony seems to be betting there's enough folks giddy enough to throw down their credit card to snag its new high-end SACD player, which has just made its debut in Japan. In addition to making a bold statement of non-conformity in your A/V rack, the SCD-XA5400ES is particularly notable for its inclusion of an HDMI output, which nicely complements the usual digital optical, coax, and analog audio options. According to Sony, you can also expect nearly zero distortion from the twin R-core transformer and D/A system, which is independent from the general processing chipset. What's more, unlike many such product announcements, while this one made its debut in Japan, it's already available for pre-order from at least one US retailer (JR.com), although there's no promised release date just yet (it lands in Japan in October).
SACD is interesting, it's a natively backward compatible format in that CD players can play SACDs (but at CD quality), and SACD players can play SACD discs at SACD quality and CDs at, well, CD quality. Thus far SACD's failed to take off largely because CDs are already "good enough" for most consumers, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have some good ideas.
The backwards compatibility thing is what Blu-ray needs and HD DVD should have had too. HD DVD had "combo" discs, but nobody in the DVD Forum thought to make it a mandatory part of the spec. The result is that anyone who buys Blu-ray discs can only play them on Blu-ray players, which means, in practice, the only TV they can watch them on is the big one in the living room. A parent considering buying Disney movies for their kids is better off getting the DVD version, as it'll play in the kid's room, and on the minivan system, etc.
It would be nice to see the same approach as with SACD taken with Blu-ray. Making a Combo disc can't be impossible, and it's probably one of many things that are necessary to get the format out there to everyone, not just the magic 10% with high-def infrastructure, especially as, arguably, DVDs are still more useful than Blu-ray discs even to that 10% given that nobody has 100% HD infrastructure.
Regular CD players can NOT play SACDs (even at CD quality). What they can do is read the CD layer on a "hybrid" SACD. Not all SACDs are hybrids though.
JVC revealed a DVD / BD hybrid disc several years ago. Why it was not commercialized is open to debate but frankly there is no need for combo discs any more. They're expensive and only necessary to allay consumer's concerns about buying into a potentially losing HD format.
The purpose of a combo disc is to ensure you only have to buy one copy of the movie to play on all your players.
Here's an example: My Sister-in-law wants the latest Disney movie for my nieces. She has two choices: A Blu-ray disc to play on the (admittedly non-existent, but let's pretend she has one) Blu-ray player in the living room, or a DVD that'll play on the living room player (albeit in poorer quality), the kid's room DVD player/TV, and her SUV's entertainment system.
Which do you think she'd buy? Which would she buy if the Blu-ray disc was actually combo DVD/Blu-ray format?
For Blu-ray to succeed, it has to be more useful than DVD. Better does not just mean higher quality, it means there should be no downside to using it.
I continue to be surprised at the number of Blu-ray fans who don't "get it" and insist Blu-ray should be as limited as possible, nothing more than an incompatible high definition format.
blu-ray has to have no downsides in order to succeed? your logic is horribly flawed. i suppose the fact that in 1998 many families had a dvd player in the living room and a vcr in the kids' room should have doomed that format as well?
i'm surprised at the number of people who don't seem to remember dvd players as expensive and limited in the format's infancy
@squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs. If they were interested they would have made them, just as some are already packing digital copies on a supplemental DVD even though there is no compulsion to do so. BTW those digital copies are on a DVD so Disney & co. could pack a lower quality DVD on that same disk if they wanted, or even an executable which when run burned a DVD from the digital copy for you. But they don't want to. It is no good complaining at the blu ray format if studios don't want hybrids. If you must have two formats, the answer is simple - buy the Blu Ray version and rent the DVD and rip it, or if you have the know-how rip the Blu Ray version and make the DVD from it yourself, or rip to MP4/DiVx and stream to your XBox 360 or PS3 or AppleTV, or just buy the DVD and watch it on all your devices.
: @squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs
Well, gee, do you think? And there was I thinking that I could wave a magic wand and force them to do what's necessary to make Blu-ray viable.
Seriously, what kind of an answer is that to my post? How does that in any way address the issues it raises? "X has fault Y" "Oh yeah, well it's up to Z to fix it, not you". Really?
It absolutely astonishes me that Blu-ray enthusiasts are not interested in addressing the issues with their format. Somehow you all believe it's going to succeed, regardless of how many faults it has. You're not interested in making it better than DVD (except in definition), you're not interested in making it work in people's existing infrastructure, you all seem to believe that people will blindly just drop DVD and switch to Blu-ray.
They're not going to. It's up to Warner, Disney, et al to fix it. It's up to consumers to want it.
Consumers don't want it, and will not until it's actually beneficial to them.
Don't the Japanese, by in large, live in really small homes??? How then do the have room for all these large consumer electronics? The PS3, this SACD player, big screen tv, or any number of the rather large home theatre components i hear about on this site only being released in Japan. I just wonder because I always see them folding beds out of walls and such, just seems they wouldnt be so keen to have such large components. L8r!
you dont say what sacd is...surely it isnt super duper audio cd, no way they are still making those players
Too bad this isn't a Blu-ray, SACD, redbook player for $1500. That would interest some
Audio Video tweaks.
I think the original 20 & 60Gb PS3s could play SACD, Blu Ray and CDs.
Here's the real question. Where the heck do you buy a SACD to begin with? I've never seen one.
The Fuzz53, you order them at Music Direct.
http://www.musicdirect.com/category/2
You may even own a couple without even knowing it. ABKCO released all of the Pre-1971 discs on hybrid SACDs. Those did not have the SACD logo on the package. They were distributed in Digipaks. They were later re-releeased as standard CDs in jewel cases.
Universal released many of their "Deluxe Editions" as hybrid SACDs.
SACDs DO NOT play in regular CD players. There are hybrid discs that have both regular CD data and SACD data on them, but plain vanilla SACDs will only play in deicated machines, or a first-generation PS3s.
correction...you're not just limited to the 60 and 20 gb for SACD support. But also the 80 gig, new 160, and new 80 gig
Except for the newest models, the PS3 can play SACDs too. In fact, I bought 4 or 5 SACDs after buying my PS3 and was floored by the music quality. I have the Dire Straits Brothers In Arms SACD. It is phenomenal. I also have the Pink Floyd Dark side of the Moon. I got this one for $10 from Amazon. These are all hybrid disks which means they have a CD layer for playing in normal cd players.
the crippled format is still alive???
My DVD player plays SACDs, but they restrict digital output (i.e. TOSLINK). Hard to justify wiring up analog sound just for the occasional SACD. HDMI offers a digital out option, but my biggest complaint remains...
They should have required all SACDs to be hybrid. For non-hybrids you have no easy way of ripping.
Even if it were a hybrid SACD, you would only be able to rip the standard-def CD layer, not the hi-def SACD layer. Indeed, there's not just no easy way to rip an SACD layer; there's utterly NO WAY to rip that layer, as no single computer CD, DVD, or even BD drive in this world can read SACDs. What you are asking for is impossible, unless Sony decides to make a computer drive that can read SACD.
This is an awesome announcement, and I'm happy to see that Sony is continuing to support SACD so fully. I know that in the broader music world SACD is mostly a curiosity, but for classical/jazz aficionados/nerds it's a huge deal, with wide availability of discs. I personally have a Sony SCD-CE595 wired up to analog on my receiver solely for SACD (and CDs), with a BH-200 taking care of all my video needs.
Even on my fairly cheap system (Onkyo 605 and Polk RM6800 5.1 Speakers) the difference between CD and SACD is huge. After a busy day it's nice to sit on my couch, pop in a disc from the excellent set of Sibelius symphonies from DG ($43 for 4 discs isn't a bad price either), and experience it like I'm at Carnegie Hall. Even my girlfriend is blown away, whereas she just doesn't get DTS-HD Master on "Master and Commander." And Pink Floyd and Deep Purple sound fantastic in SACD also.
even with all the latest in remastering, do you really think that you'd notice the difference from the regular CD version of Pink Floyd to the SACD? have you tried a blind experiment like that?
There's no question that you would notice a difference. They can sweeten a CD all they want and they never get close to SACD or DVD-A. I have a dual format player that hasn't been hooked up lately, but it's going back in the rack when I move next week. Whole different world except on those discs that were just terribly mastered.
I've run the test between SACD and the CD layer on Deep Purple's Machine head. The difference in sonic quality was considerable.
I forgot to mention that even though there are some SACDs that can't be played in regular players (non-hybrid SACDS), they're the distinct minority. The majority (I saw 80% somewhere) are hybrid discs, which means you get the best of both worlds - rip it to the iPod and then enjoy it at full quality as a SACD.
The PS3 supposedly had some of the developers of SACD working on its SACD function, and it's supposedly pretty good, although it has to convert the discs to PCM. But if you have a PS3 and a good set of speakers, you owe it to yourself to give it a try.
I almost posted a bunch of my thoughts until I found out that you are talking about SACD and not Mini Disc. Very disappointed!
AMAZING that Sony finally come out with a HDMI SACD player.
I'm assuming this means it has a pure digital DSD path from the player to your (HDMI 1.2 or above) receiver. But the player has a high quality DAC anyway, so unless they come out with a CHEAP SACD player with HDMI, there's no point adding it in. I'll just go with the Oppo 980H for that.
But good on ya Sony, it's a start.
The Sony XA5400ES is an excellent CD/SACD player despite converting to PCM It sounds better than the Oppo 980H which I only use for video.