Man, am I out of the loop.
My life is electronics and some things fly right by me.
Just heard of SACD (don't laugh) and have a few questions --
(1) Is it worth it?
(2) I do love classical music and from some initial reading, seems the majority of the CD's are classical?
Just saw a Yamaha DVD/SACD player under 100 bucks -- may grab one.
Any of the ripping software working on SACD? (I use Exact audio copy, EAC).
My life is electronics and some things fly right by me.
Just heard of SACD (don't laugh) and have a few questions --
(1) Is it worth it?
(2) I do love classical music and from some initial reading, seems the majority of the CD's are classical?
Just saw a Yamaha DVD/SACD player under 100 bucks -- may grab one.
Any of the ripping software working on SACD? (I use Exact audio copy, EAC).
I doubt if a $100 player will give you any sonmic advantgae over red Book CD.
The SACD format does (potentially) have a great increase in dynamics, frequency response and detail, but 99% of players are not good enough to really hear the difference.
But when you get one that does, it's as good as very good vinyl!
Regards, Allen
The SACD format does (potentially) have a great increase in dynamics, frequency response and detail, but 99% of players are not good enough to really hear the difference.
But when you get one that does, it's as good as very good vinyl!
Regards, Allen
Well -- there is this:
Boston Audio Society, Lincoln, MA 01773, USA
Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz ?bottleneck.? The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels.
This is the Meyer-Moran test and, needless to say, it's very controversial.
I know of at least one recording company that has dropped the SACD format recently. I don't know if this is a trend or not.
Cheers.
ZAP
Boston Audio Society, Lincoln, MA 01773, USA
Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz ?bottleneck.? The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels.
This is the Meyer-Moran test and, needless to say, it's very controversial.
I know of at least one recording company that has dropped the SACD format recently. I don't know if this is a trend or not.
Cheers.
ZAP
Last edited:
I have a heavily modified Sony SCD-777ES SACD player, and good SACD recordings get about as close to analog sound as I have heard for a digital format. Even used these players are not particularly inexpensive. (Mine was a mint low hours unit I acquired from a close friend who owns several) I also have a much less expensive SCD-770 (Not sold in the USA) and frankly its SACD playback quality even with mods is not in the same league as a very good CD player - almost ended my dabbling with SACD before it began. So in short a cheap SACD player is not likely to give you any bang for the buck over a comparably priced CD player.
The first generation Sony SACD players (with the exception of the SCD-1 and SCD-777ES single players) can often be found for a reasonable sum of money and are worth modding - note that they are all 5 disk changers. These units all use the theoretically superior DSD DAC ics which almost nothing newer with the exception of some very premium and expensive hardware from DCS does. You'll need to read up on the issues and I recommend you read the high res forum on audio asylum for insight.
So far no one has broken the DRM on the SACD, and last time I checked the only computers that could play SACD disks (no copying capability) were some premium Sony desktops and laptops.
The number of titles on SACD is limited, but in the last year or so some avowedly anti-sacd labels have joined the fold - one such example is Reference Recordings. There is a fair amount of Jazz, Chamber, and Classical music on SACD. A lot of classic rock has also made it onto the format. The best place to get them is online at either acoustic sounds or elusive disc... CD Universe has some as well.
Last edited:
Apparently some SACD players measure little better than Redbook as well. The Meyer-Moran test uses one, an independent test found its effective resolution barely exceeded 17 bit.
To experience high rez quality for free investigate some live performance recordings on the Internet Archive. Search for 24/96 versions. I've found it's worth checking them with a software spectrum analyzer for >20kHz content, many files saved in 96/24 format were obviously Redbook brick-walled.
Sacd
That's been my experience as well.
But I've switched to buying hi rez downloads from HDTracks and others instead of buying discs, since these also typically have higher production quality. The SACD player is gathering dust.
That's been my experience as well.
But I've switched to buying hi rez downloads from HDTracks and others instead of buying discs, since these also typically have higher production quality. The SACD player is gathering dust.
Dude... I am an EE and I rather spend my spare time tweaking my CD-Pro transport and TDA1541 Dac... No SACD for me yet.
I only heard of SACD a year or so back myself... and am still reading up on it...and the other standards... HD-CDs and others.
Many folks here and other sites have said that a high end CD transport & good dac can be as good as SACD.
Once I have run my course and tired myself out with my current transport and DAC... I am going to give the SACD a spin....of course building a kit of some sorts or from scratch.
The technology is no fun for me unless I actually learn what it is doing...I know what it is doing now...just need to figure out what I want to do with it.
jk
Last edited:
Unfortunately you probably will not be building an SACD player from scratch, the required chipsets are protected under very strong licensing from Sony and Philips - however modding an existing player or building one from parts salvaged from a working player is a distinct possibility.
I would look for a machine that has native dsd available somewhere internally and integrate/low pass that to recover audio, many of the newer players use delta sigma dacs to do the conversion and the few I have heard(mostly a couple of pioneer universal players and the SCD-770) sound pretty mediocre..
I am a convert, I was a skeptic, but good SACDs are very good and a heck of a lot more convenient than LPs. Sound quality is very comparable with good analog. (Some disks are much better than others - many of the RCA LSC reissues on SACD provided more than a subtle hint at what the format can do.) Wish I could afford a DCS, any DCS...
Last edited:
Hi jmar,
I have a huge quantity (more than 1,000, many CD’s and some SACD’s) of classical music. I must say IMHO that I have very good CD’s that I enjoy more than SACD’s with the same kind of music. The contrary is also true. It is how they have registered the music that makes a big difference. Not only the machine. There are also much less SACD’s than CD’s BTW, and SACD’s are more expensive with a quality that you can’t appreciate when buying them. You loose very little if you get ‘only’ a CD player and not a SACD player.
Best regards
rephil
I have a huge quantity (more than 1,000, many CD’s and some SACD’s) of classical music. I must say IMHO that I have very good CD’s that I enjoy more than SACD’s with the same kind of music. The contrary is also true. It is how they have registered the music that makes a big difference. Not only the machine. There are also much less SACD’s than CD’s BTW, and SACD’s are more expensive with a quality that you can’t appreciate when buying them. You loose very little if you get ‘only’ a CD player and not a SACD player.
Best regards
rephil
There is a whole forum just for SACD:
Hi-Rez Highway
And yes, there is no way to build your own player from the ground up, unless you want to pay the $20,000 license fee to SONY/Philips for "Scarlet Book" acceptance, and perhaps the same again for a minimum order of transports and SACD decoder chips.
Most hi-end manufacturers simply buy a basic machine from their local discount store, throw the case away and use the (license paid) digital front end with their own DAC, analog outputs and case.
As a DIYer, you can hugely improve any regular commercial product by some good work on the audio section - been doing it for 8 years now.
Regards, Allen
Hi-Rez Highway
And yes, there is no way to build your own player from the ground up, unless you want to pay the $20,000 license fee to SONY/Philips for "Scarlet Book" acceptance, and perhaps the same again for a minimum order of transports and SACD decoder chips.
Most hi-end manufacturers simply buy a basic machine from their local discount store, throw the case away and use the (license paid) digital front end with their own DAC, analog outputs and case.
As a DIYer, you can hugely improve any regular commercial product by some good work on the audio section - been doing it for 8 years now.
Regards, Allen
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.