RobertLang wrote:
Your statement that SACDs sound better than XRCDs isn't at issue. Your
statement that SACDs have greater dynamic range than XRCDs is. That's
why Steven asked for specific examples that could be measured. If
you're right, that would be a very good thing for audiophiles to
know.

To clear up confusion that you have about what I have said, please see
(the link below) my initial post on the subject as well as my subsequent
posts.

http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/...es/174440.html

I attribute (my opinion only) the differences in dynamic range between my
XRCDs and my SACDs in my collection and why my SACDs, as a group, exhibit
greater dynamic range, is due to mastering *not* format.

Yes, yes, we know, and we agree that if SACDs have greater dynamic
range, it will be because of the mastering. But it would be interesting
to some of us to know whether they do tend to have greater dynamic
range than even XRCDs, and if so how much. That's why Steven asked you
for a few examples where you've compared the two, so that this can be
measured.

bob