SACD from CD player ???

[palace]

I have had a Cambridge Audio CD4se CD player from new ie it's at least 10 years old.

I have the original LP & CD version of War of The Worlds (1978 Jeff Wayne).

A while ago my daughter gave me the 2005 remix 96khz 24 Bit dual layer version with CD & 5.1 surround/ SACD of WOW;
When played on the CD4se in analogue ie CD4se direct to pre amp via RCA leads through my valve sound system, it perhaps sounded a little "cleaner" than the original CD, My One Thing Quad 57's are quite revealing.

Recently I bought a Fiio D3 DAT to provide optical output from TV to the sound system the D3 is allegedly capable of 192KHz/24 Bit.

As an inveterate "tweaker" I made up a BNC to RCA using Radon CT100 (Air Spaced) coaxial cable. which I connected via BNC on the CD4se to RCA on the Fiio D3. I played a selection of CD's using the CD4se as a transport, sounded good digital has moved on.

I then played the 96/24 remix of the War of the Worlds it sounded totally different, incredible quality up there with my turntable, the RCA's were still connected so a twist of the selector dial & to analogue good but not as exceptional as from the digital output; reverting to digital again amazing SQ. I had tried to match the volume levels as the CD4se has twice the output of my phono stage.

Now how is this possible; the Cambridge CD4se is as far as I know a 16/44 player, is it possible that it can output 96/24 from the CD layer, I can't believe the CD4se laser can focus on the 5.1 surround/ SACD layer. sensible answers/hypothesis would be appreciated; oh I repeated the above on 3 separate days/times the results were the same...

 

[Mooly]

The Cambridge can't recognise anything other than the standard CD layer. SACD spins at a different speed too.

Guesses... you just like the sound of the DAC and this CD happens to "show the DAC to good effect". Maybe the original CD (Japanese ?) should be played back with de-emphasis (which many early players did correctly in the analogue domain) and some players omitted the feature due to cost cutting.

Dunno

 

[gk7]

There is no way a CD player could play the SACD layer. But a remastered version might (will) sound different (hopefully better).

 

[boldname]

The CT100 cable may be your problem. I find this sort of cable is dull. It could be that the CD layer has not had the same treatment as the SACD in the preparation and this is likely.

I personally cannot hear the difference per se between 16/44.1 and 24/96. Try the NAIM website for samples of identcal music through the different formats from FLAC down to MP3 . of course you will not hear true flac on a streaming download but it is good to try this comparison. I believe CD format is having rebirth with the latest music technology

 

[palace]

Thank you folks it still puzzles me I appreciate that a 1980 red book CD can't play anything other than a standard CD layer 20 discs played (more than in 5 years Vinyl is my medium) only one a composite CD why is this disc so great & different digitally played from the original 1978 French CBS & when playing this disc CD player alone as for the CT100 being dull if that was the case why does it sound so alive & vibrant via the coax...

 

[DF96]

CT100 is neither dull nor bright. Genuine CT100 cable is merely high quality low-loss 75R coaxial cable. The most it can do is deliver the SPDIF signal undamaged. Almost all 75R cables can do this too. On a short run even a 50R cable can do it. Note that 'CT100' has suffered from the fate of most good components: the name is now applied to cables which can fall far short of genuine CT100 quality. Fortunately this matters little for SPDIF.

You are hearing the mix and the DAC, at standard CD quality.

 

[palace]

CT100 is neither dull nor bright. Genuine CT100 cable is merely high quality low-loss 75R coaxial cable. The most it can do is deliver the SPDIF signal undamaged. Almost all 75R cables can do this too. On a short run even a 50R cable can do it. Note that 'CT100' has suffered from the fate of most good components: the name is now applied to cables which can fall far short of genuine CT100 quality. Fortunately this matters little for SPDIF.

You are hearing the mix and the DAC, at standard CD quality.

.

I agree entirely; genuine CT100 has not been made since 2005. I may have caused confusion by calling the manufacturer "Radon" as a result of a recent conversation re venting a house; instead of correctly "Raydex" the cable I used is genuine Raydex CT100 circa 1999. And there is a lot of cr*p out there purporting to be genuine. I have used the good stuff & their CT125 to make phono leads for friends re CT125 10 mm phono plugs were a bugger to find built as an experiment;My guinea pig never gave them back though.

DF96 I can't argue with your final line logically or mischievously, just that only the dual layer CD sounds so much better via external DAT, why not the other normal CD's there must be a perfect match. must borrow another dual layer disc!

 

[marce]

CT100 is neither dull nor bright. Genuine CT100 cable is merely high quality low-loss 75R coaxial cable. The most it can do is deliver the SPDIF signal undamaged. Almost all 75R cables can do this too. On a short run even a 50R cable can do it. Note that 'CT100' has suffered from the fate of most good components: the name is now applied to cables which can fall far short of genuine CT100 quality. Fortunately this matters little for SPDIF.

Spoil-sport

 

[DF96]

Sorry. As I said earlier in another thread, it seems to be our lot in life to burst balloons.