In theory yes, but the implementations I have heard so far sounded pretty bad.. You can recover the audio by passively integrating the dsd signal and low pass filtering it, can sound a lot better if done carefully.
Very simplistically! SACD on a disk is ENCODED, and to date no one has been able to crack it. I went through a number of SACD players back before we started the Upgrading service, and you can trace audio, or RF carrying audio, just so far, then before that it just looks like "mirror imaged" noise. Very weird and you can't hear any intelligence in it at all. Very well encoded.
regards, Allen
regards, Allen
Yeah no way you're cracking SACD. I remember when I read about how much copy protection they used though it seems kind of stupid. It's not stopping any bootlegger exactly - they could give a crap about quality and just re-record it with a DSD>Analog>PCM chain. it's just stopping people from making backups of the stuff they bought. The thing is with SACD even if you get through the first layers of encoding and copy protection and self corruption - you wont - you still have a watermark which will shut off the SACD player if a copy is played.
Last edited:
More or less yes.. Not multiplexed in any of the players with which I am familiar.. (Mostly Sony) The TI DSD1794/A current output DAC for example also has left and right DSD inputs and is commonly used in some of the better recent universal players. (I should probably try cobbling up a dac board for the 770 which uses this DAC instead of the Sony VI out dac which sounds pretty mediocre to put it kindly - but this machine does have pure DSD which I could also tap.) Note that TI also makes the DSD1792/A voltage output dac as well. Other vendors such as AD also support DSD format digital in their dac product line.
Last edited:
If you can find the DSD stream in a SACD player, you get by FAR the best audio out if you don't use any comercail DACchip, but just a simple low pass filter on the DSD stream - after it's been decoded of course.
This is what we've done for 9 years now with great results on the original SONYs.
Some other brands don't work so well done this way (Marantz for one) with lots of chirps and birdie noises. They need the addition of the digital fitering in a DAC chip.
Regards, Allen
This is what we've done for 9 years now with great results on the original SONYs.
Some other brands don't work so well done this way (Marantz for one) with lots of chirps and birdie noises. They need the addition of the digital fitering in a DAC chip.
Regards, Allen
I just got a mint Sony CE595 player for $20. I replaced the op amps (to AD8066) as well as many capacitors. Then I put in my RCA/BMG Living Stereo SACD hybrids (a bunch of them).
I didn't expect much, for I have been listening to CDs with an Ariston CD player (TDA1541A S1, OPA627s, good caps, said to be the "most analog cd player at the time"). I also have a NOS TDA1543x4 DAC. But wow, now I really understand why people say CDs are "edgy". Listening to them now is like seeing a picture of an object captured from a mediocre camera with limited pixels and lens:the basic form of the music is certainly there, but the sound is recorded into inadequate bits under insufficient sampling rate, which manifest themselves in the lack of smoothness and dynamics.
Even on my lowly CE595, the sound coming from the SACD stereo layers is much much more natural and transparent: the introduction and decaying of a note/sound/attack now feel unrestrainedly smooth, and the dynamics seems totally uncompressed.
My Ariston cd player still plays CDs better than the Sony does. But the SACD sound is in a different league. I also did a double-blind test (with my friend's assistance, and I was literally blind-folded) and I could tell the difference every single time. I certainly didn't realize what I was missing until now, and this was based on transfers of recordings originally made in the 50's. Just amazing! Now I will stop buying CDs and start replacing the ones I already have with SACDs. It's going to be costly!
I didn't expect much, for I have been listening to CDs with an Ariston CD player (TDA1541A S1, OPA627s, good caps, said to be the "most analog cd player at the time"). I also have a NOS TDA1543x4 DAC. But wow, now I really understand why people say CDs are "edgy". Listening to them now is like seeing a picture of an object captured from a mediocre camera with limited pixels and lens:the basic form of the music is certainly there, but the sound is recorded into inadequate bits under insufficient sampling rate, which manifest themselves in the lack of smoothness and dynamics.
Even on my lowly CE595, the sound coming from the SACD stereo layers is much much more natural and transparent: the introduction and decaying of a note/sound/attack now feel unrestrainedly smooth, and the dynamics seems totally uncompressed.
My Ariston cd player still plays CDs better than the Sony does. But the SACD sound is in a different league. I also did a double-blind test (with my friend's assistance, and I was literally blind-folded) and I could tell the difference every single time. I certainly didn't realize what I was missing until now, and this was based on transfers of recordings originally made in the 50's. Just amazing! Now I will stop buying CDs and start replacing the ones I already have with SACDs. It's going to be costly!
Last edited:
Mudihan,
Now you know what the fuss is about! Very well done.
This completely backs up my statement over on HiRez forum that most people can't hear any advantage from SACD because their players are just not good enough - of course me being an Upgrader I got shouted down - but your experience adds to my statement and experience.
Yes, go get as many SACD discs as you can, but also look out for a better SACD player, the steal at the moment is the DVP-S9000ES, a DVD/SACD/CD player that goes for around $300 on ebay.
With no more work on it, although different, that you have done to this CE595, it becomes as good a player as has ever ben built!
Regards, Allen
Now you know what the fuss is about! Very well done.
This completely backs up my statement over on HiRez forum that most people can't hear any advantage from SACD because their players are just not good enough - of course me being an Upgrader I got shouted down - but your experience adds to my statement and experience.
Yes, go get as many SACD discs as you can, but also look out for a better SACD player, the steal at the moment is the DVP-S9000ES, a DVD/SACD/CD player that goes for around $300 on ebay.
With no more work on it, although different, that you have done to this CE595, it becomes as good a player as has ever ben built!
Regards, Allen
OK, thanks! For some reason I had it in my mind that the DSD streams were multiplexed 2 channels per stream. That's not the case.
I looked at a few datasheets, all single channels on the DSD inputs into a multichannel DAC. I might have to hack into my Sony again to see what can be done with those streams.
If you look at those streams with a low pass filter on your scope (say -3dB at 20kHz) and a SACD music disc playing, you'll be able to quickly see where there is usable audio available.
SACD test discs with test tones are available direct from Philips, but a tad expensive at Euro 100 each!
Regards, Allen
SACD test discs with test tones are available direct from Philips, but a tad expensive at Euro 100 each!
Regards, Allen
Yes, for people with "OK" equipments, the difference may just be 10-20%, which they may or may not notice. But for someone with good equipments who really enjoys hearing the true-to-life (or true-to-the-original-tape) reproduction, the improvement is a NECESSITY. The red book remastering of those Living Stereo CDs were very already an improvement over the past (they were down-converted from the DSD transfer), but they are still no comparison to the SACD transfers.
By the way, what are the sound differences among DVP-S9000es, the newer DVP-N999ES, and the various SCD-XXXes models? Very interested.
THe best approach to the sound of the 9000ES is this review, which covers our Upgrades on both the 9000Es and SCD-1/SCD-777ES.
They were in SONY's original releases of SACD players and were bitstream all the way, using a SONY exclusively made chipset.
The later models, expensive or cheap, all used commercail DACs, none of which allow anything like the same Upgrading possibilities. In the original players, you can bypass ALL the opamps, and at least one, maybe two DAC/filter chips!
vsei
Regards, Allen
They were in SONY's original releases of SACD players and were bitstream all the way, using a SONY exclusively made chipset.
The later models, expensive or cheap, all used commercail DACs, none of which allow anything like the same Upgrading possibilities. In the original players, you can bypass ALL the opamps, and at least one, maybe two DAC/filter chips!
vsei
Regards, Allen
My 2 cents; I have some 400 sacd's, all classical. I can tell you that only DSD recorded sacd's are really better than redbook/vinyl. Hirez-PCM recorded sacd's are nice too but very good cd's can sometimes be at par.
Recordings older than 2000 are most likely no DSD. Please pay attention on recording information in booklet.
Recordings tranfered from 70's 80's 90's digital recordings; don't bother. DSD-remasterd analog recordings are very nice too but not very old recording; they can be done on a good redbook.
Try listening to dsd-recorded Pentatone/Channelclassics/Linn/Telarc.(and many more!)
See; SA-CD.net - Labels for more labels. Watch the DSD-logo behind record-name. Read reviews, as sacd's can be as bad as any other medium
I find sacd's only really better on limited(or not at all)mixed recordings. So as with every product you buy; it differs very much, but the best dsd-sacd's are better than any of the best other medium (for home-use that is.)
And the other bottleneck is your setup! (old vs new; expensive vs cheap blahblah)
Hope I make some sense here....
Recordings older than 2000 are most likely no DSD. Please pay attention on recording information in booklet.
Recordings tranfered from 70's 80's 90's digital recordings; don't bother. DSD-remasterd analog recordings are very nice too but not very old recording; they can be done on a good redbook.
Try listening to dsd-recorded Pentatone/Channelclassics/Linn/Telarc.(and many more!)
See; SA-CD.net - Labels for more labels. Watch the DSD-logo behind record-name. Read reviews, as sacd's can be as bad as any other medium
I find sacd's only really better on limited(or not at all)mixed recordings. So as with every product you buy; it differs very much, but the best dsd-sacd's are better than any of the best other medium (for home-use that is.)
And the other bottleneck is your setup! (old vs new; expensive vs cheap blahblah)
Hope I make some sense here....
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.