In his review of the Burmester CD player in TAS's latest issue, Anthony Cordesman (virtually) did something that no other print reviewer has ever done - admit that CD sounded better than SACD. This comes as a particular shock being that Cordesman just reviewed EMM's CDSA player in the March issue of Hi-Fi + and was *certain* - then - that SACD was superior to CD.
This supports my theory that every time - and I mean *every* time - an equipment reviewer prefers SACD over CD, it's through a "mixed" format player.
* This is not the way to compare the formats * As I stated in my post "Questions for Reviewers" (in the Absolute Sound section of AVGuide), CD needs its own, dedicated machine to hear its true potential.
More troubling, however, were Mr. Cordesman's remarks in Hi-Fi + from March. Here, he told us that he *did not* hear the gains made by high-end CD players over the past upteen years. Really ? Then he must be the only one.....EVERYBODY has heard the massive gains CD playback has made.
And to state that CD is "hopefully inadequate" of a format is another folly. Cordesman joins the long list of reviewers who are unaware of the fact that audiophile CDs contain 20-bit resolution and have since 1993. So, not so inadequate after all......
I don't mean to berate AC, but if we keep going down the path of misleading and confusing reviews, then audiophiles will continue to feel like they're in a bind....and will be somewhat reluctant to open their wallets and spring for an equipment upgrade.