Not another POLL SACD vs CD

[beerandmusic]

Given:

all hardware the same

Highend Transport that plays both CD and SACD using digital out to

Highend DAC that plays both PCM and DSD

highend quality analog recording

SACD and CD from Major company remastered from same analog recording

Listen at native resolution CD 44.1 vs SACD64 both in stereo

Which will sound better

 

if you pick last one, means you have no preference..e.g. whether one sounds warmer and the other brighter, you don't have a preference. If you have a preference, then you should pick one of the first two options.

[sandyk]

Haven't you learned anything from all your previous polls ?

 

Weren't you supposed to be taking a break ?

Perhaps too much beer and not enough music ? (grin)

[Allan F]

Weren't you supposed to be taking a break ?

Perhaps too much beer and not enough music ? (grin)

+1

 

Well put, Alex.

[baddog]

Elvis is back in the building...

[Sal1950]

Haven't you learned anything from all your previous polls ?

 

Weren't you supposed to be taking a break ?

Perhaps too much beer and not enough music ? (grin)

+1

[esldude]

I think I now just read beerandpolls.

[Sal1950]

I think this might be Chris just messin with us all. :-)

[17629]

I really want to give you an answer on this but I can't. Maybe just get dual layer SACD's so you get both options on the same disc.

[sandyk]

I really want to give you an answer on this but I can't. Maybe just get dual layer SACD's so you get both options on the same disc.

 

"Norah Jones-Come Away With Me" is one such example that is also available as a dual layer disc.

IIRC, the same master is used for both layers.

[esldude]

I really want to give you an answer on this but I can't. Maybe just get dual layer SACD's so you get both options on the same disc.

Even then it is not uncommon for mastering to be different on CD vs SACD on the same disc.

[17629]

Both of you are correct. I'm just trying to come up with something for him to go on.

[firedog]

Given:

all hardware the same

Highend Transport that plays both CD and SACD using digital out to

Highend DAC that plays both PCM and DSD

highend <script id="gpt-impl-0.30729703451014783" src="http://partner.googleadservices.com/gpt/pubads_impl_84.js"></script>quality analog recording

SACD and CD from Major company remastered from same analog recording

Listen at native resolution CD 44.1 vs SACD64 both in stereo

Which will sound better

 

if you pick last one, means you have no preference..e.g. whether one sounds warmer and the other brighter, you don't have a preference. If you have a preference, then you should pick one of the first two options.

 

+1 Please stop with all the silly polls.

 

Beyond that, again you setup conditions that make no sense. SACD players don't have digital outs of the DSD stream, as that is in violation of the SACD license. They only have direct analog outs (i.e. analog coversion) from the DSD stream. Any other digital out from an SACD player will be DSD converted to PCM.

In addition, you have no way of knowing if the CD or SACD master is "the same". Even if they are on the same hybrid disk, you can't know that the mastering is identical, unless you have a record of the producer/record company saying it is.

 

And I again request: instead of using your time to obsess over this issue and write polls, devote some time to a basic understanding of what you are talking about. You repeatedly show you don't know the basics, and involve yourself and us in a senseless quest for answers to non-existent questions.

[17629]

"SACD players don't have digital outs of the DSD stream, as that is in violation of the SACD license."

 

Actually, I think there were a few. The dCS Scarlatti transport I know for sure puts out an actual DSD signal. I assume they made some kind of deal with Sony that allowed them to do this.

[gmgraves]

Given:

all hardware the same

Highend Transport that plays both CD and SACD using digital out to

Highend DAC that plays both PCM and DSD

highend quality analog recording

SACD and CD from Major company remastered from same analog recording

Listen at native resolution CD 44.1 vs SACD64 both in stereo

Which will sound better

 

if you pick last one, means you have no preference..e.g. whether one sounds warmer and the other brighter, you don't have a preference. If you have a preference, then you should pick one of the first two options.

 

All things being equal, SACD should always sound better than CD. Unfortunately, things are almost never equal. I have CDs that beat the pants off of some SACDs - often when both releases are of the SAME performance!

[Allan F]

"Norah Jones-Come Away With Me" is one such example that is also available as a dual layer disc.

IIRC, the same master is used for both layers.

You recall correctly. That was the originally released SACD. It was a complete ripoff because the DSD layer was nothing more than a conversion of the 16/44 Redbook master. I may be wrong, but I believe that a true dual layer SACD, i.e. one with a properly mastered DSD layer produced from the original master tape, has been released since that time.

[17629]

All things being equal, SACD should always sound better than CD. Unfortunately, things are almost never equal. I have CDs that beat the pants off of some SACDs - often when both releases are of the SAME performance!

 

 

If the recordings are genuine to each format, then it depends on the player. A lot of people went out and bought cheap SACD players (Myself included, Sony 9000ES) to try the format, and found out quickly you need an SACD player that can compete with your Redbook player. The format alone wasn't able to make up for an inferior player. I suspect most of us thought we were going to hear vinyl to CD differences. Turned out that wasn't the case.

[sandyk]

If the recordings are genuine to each format, then it depends on the player. A lot of people went out and bought cheap SACD players (Myself included, Sony 9000ES) to try the format, and found out quickly you need an SACD player that can compete with your Redbook player. The format alone wasn't able to make up for an inferior player. I suspect most of us thought we were going to hear vinyl to CD differences. Turned out that wasn't the case.

 

The same applied to DVD-A.

[Solstice380]

"SACD players don't have digital outs of the DSD stream, as that is in violation of the SACD license."

 

Actually, I think there were a few. The dCS Scarlatti transport I know for sure puts out an actual DSD signal. I assume they made some kind of deal with Sony that allowed them to do this.

 

I have a McIntosh transport and DAC/pre that are connected by an umbilical cable. The transport can also be connected to any of their newer preamps with a digital section. So there is some signal passing, but I'd bet that there is a license handshaking going on in there to allow playback. Not sure if you could actually get the signal out of the umbilical in a form you could manipulate (without a license).

[esldude]

All things being equal, SACD should always sound better than CD. Unfortunately, things are almost never equal. I have CDs that beat the pants off of some SACDs - often when both releases are of the SAME performance!

 

Do I remember right that you do some of your recording to DSD? If so, can you give us a breakdown of the differences between PCM and DSD as you hear it in recordings you have done?

[gmgraves]

If the recordings are genuine to each format, then it depends on the player. A lot of people went out and bought cheap SACD players (Myself included, Sony 9000ES) to try the format, and found out quickly you need an SACD player that can compete with your Redbook player. The format alone wasn't able to make up for an inferior player. I suspect most of us thought we were going to hear vinyl to CD differences. Turned out that wasn't the case.

 

No, it doesn't. I have both the BMC SACD reissue of Prokofiev's Lt. Kiki with Reiner/CSO and the JVC XRCD red book remastering of same. The XRCD sounds so much better than the SACD, that it's hard to believe that they are both derived from the same master tape! It's the execution that is most important, not so much the format. That's what I meant when I said that SACD should always sound better than CD all things being equal - which they almost never are.

 

BTW, my SACD and CD player are the same unit: a Sony XA777ES obtained new. Not a cheap player!

[gmgraves]

Do I remember right that you do some of your recording to DSD? If so, can you give us a breakdown of the differences between PCM and DSD as you hear it in recordings you have done?

 

Well, it's kind of hard to say. Yes, I "capture" in DSD. I have both a Korg MR-1 and a MR2000. The MR-1, is of course, a portable recorder and the MR-2000 is a rack/desktop model. I started with the MR-1 and made a lot of recordings with it before purchasing an MR-2000. I bought the Korgs as opposed to the TEAC or any other DSD recorder because of the Korg software package called "AudioGate". At the time, only Korg recorder owners could use it because it required that the app be "married" to the recorder which meant that in order to use the software, the recorder had to initially be connected to the computer. That's not true any more, but it was when I started using DSD.

 

The thing that AudioGate does is allow one to capture in DSD and then convert it to other formats all the way from 24/192 LPCM down to MP3. This was necessary because mortal humans cannot possibly afford the software required to turn the DSD file into an SACD disc. Now of course, one of the options available is to just burn the DSD file, raw, to a DVD as many modern DACs will read a raw DSD file. When I started I had to be able to output the recordings to clients as red book CDs or 24-bit LPCM files.

 

Now, with that background out of the way, I'm going to try to answer your question. I have always thought that the DSD capture file sounded superior to the 24-bit LPCM files output by AudioGate. I find that the DSD noise floor is lower than that of the LPCM files and that the highs just sound smoother. Not a by a lot, you understand, but certainly enough to be easily heard in a side-by-side comparison. Now, what I haven't tried, (because at a live recording session, the opportunity simply doesn't present itself), is to record the proceedings partially in DSD and partially in LPCM using the same recorder (both the MR-1 and the MR-2000 will record in the various DSD formats as well as in up-to 24/192 LPCM). One would have to use the same recorder for both recordings, you understand, lest we complicate the matter with more variables. I realize that this is not exactly the answer you were looking for, but It's the best I can do. I will say that neither the DSD nor the 24/96 (which is what I generally do, seeing little call for 192 at this time) derived from it with AudioGate sound anything less than superb.

[gmgraves]

"SACD players don't have digital outs of the DSD stream, as that is in violation of the SACD license."

 

Actually, I think there were a few. The dCS Scarlatti transport I know for sure puts out an actual DSD signal. I assume they made some kind of deal with Sony that allowed them to do this.

 

Do we know whether Sony even cares anymore? I mean they virtually abandoned the format, did they not?

[firedog]

"SACD players don't have digital outs of the DSD stream, as that is in violation of the SACD license."

 

Actually, I think there were a few. The dCS Scarlatti transport I know for sure puts out an actual DSD signal. I assume they made some kind of deal with Sony that allowed them to do this.

 

 

from dCS:

Scarlatti Transport features both IEEE 1394 FireWire link and an enhanced Dual AES interface which output dCS-encrypted DSD (1-bit data at 2.822MHz) to a dCS DAC from CD or SACD.

 

I have a McIntosh transport and DAC/pre that are connected by an umbilical cable. The transport can also be connected to any of their newer preamps with a digital section. So there is some signal passing, but I'd bet that there is a license handshaking going on in there to allow playback. Not sure if you could actually get the signal out of the umbilical in a form you could manipulate (without a license).

 

Yes but in this case I think that isn't considered a digital "out". The Scarlatti outputs DSD in encrypted form to dCS DACs. It doesn't output straight DSD that anybody can use on any DSD DAC. I assume the Macintosh is doing something similar. PS Audio is about to come out with something similar - DSD output from an SACD player - but only to their own decoder.

[Norton]

SACD is my favourite digital format. Providing the original recording was analogue or DSD, I've never heard a RBCD/layer that equals or betters the SACD. I would concede though that the superiority of SACD may be less marked when original recording was PCM.

[JW Audio]

I have several hundred JVC XRCD's from Japan and think they outperform many of the DSD's I have. K2 and XRCD show just how good 16/44.1 can be. I enjoy them immensely.