SACD is it worth it? Whats a good player [Archive]

nickthechef

25-08-2014, 14:47

Macca

25-08-2014, 15:08

I have a few hybrid SACD albums but I have to say I don't really hear a difference between the SACD layer and the standard layer, although they do sound better than the same albums in their red book CD issue form, so I suspect the difference is in the mastering. A lot of effort went into the remastering for most SACDs. So really you are just buying a different/better mastering of the recording rather than a recording that has 'extra information' on it. There are loads of titles available for classical music I understand, so if that is your bag then may be worth considering getting a player (since not all the discs are hybrids so won't play on a standard cd player). Almost all players will output SACD in analogue only, an exception would be the players from Oppo. I think you will struggle to get a player for £150 although Sony did a few budget efforts that are worth checking out and you get the odd DVD player that will decode SACD too.

sparrow

25-08-2014, 16:54

The only one sony make now I'm lead to believe is around £200..I have one and its an excellent player. Of course there will be better ones out there..
this is my third sacd player the other two packed in pretty quickly.

daytona600

26-08-2014, 18:53

Sacd the format that will not die as they sound so good almost 10,000 titles at present
with about 40/50 new ones per month , very big in japan , states
have 100s myself Marantz/Sony good options

prestonchipfryer

26-08-2014, 18:56

I have a Pioneer PD50. Very good with SACD.

Clive197

26-08-2014, 19:39

I'm on my second OPPO, Started with the BDP-95EU and now on the BDP-105D. I have about 50 SACD's and like the improvement over CD.
I'm not sure I understand how MACCA thinks that the OPPO outputs SACD digitally because I can't get it too. I'm happy with the analogue output as this uses the ESS Sabre 32 bit DAC and my Cyrus PreXTdQx only uses a 24 bit DAC. The OPPO does output everything else digitally but I still prefer the sound via analogue with all the digital conversion done.

Clive

Macca

26-08-2014, 19:47

Clive197

26-08-2014, 19:57

You need a DAC that will decode a DSD signal.

Ahh, that will explain it. Actually I knew that, oh what a muppet.

Macca

26-08-2014, 20:05

Ahh, that will explain it. Actually I knew that, oh what a muppet.

I'm not sure if you are calling me a muppet for stating the bleeding obvious? If so fair enough you tried that and it still did not work. I've seen it done, what more can I say?

DSJR

26-08-2014, 20:09

What makes a difference quite often is different mastering and even mastering source which can make the SA-CD appear to be better. Things have moved on a long way since I first used SA-CD, but the differences I heard were so vast they just 'had' to be mastering decisions (backed up by research done by Colloms not long before, comparing the two formats).

Up to you sir :)

Andrei

26-08-2014, 20:12

The short answer is that SACD is pretty darn fabulous. Marantz, Oppo, Cambridge Audio all do great SACD players.
It seems that most of the titles are Classical, so if that floats your boat then you are in for a treat.
Check out http://www.sa-cd.net/home for titles.
However on the other side of the coin, is that fact that in order to get the higher resolution and quality of SACD there are other ways of achieving it.
Both involve obtaining your music via download. Either download high resolution PCM or download DSD. (SACDs are the physical disc for DSD content, just as CD is a physical disc for PCM).
Channel Classics for example gives you a choice of which format you want. Some people (not me) are able to hear a difference between the DSD and PCM, and those that do seem to prefer DSD.
CD vs SACD? SACD for me, especially when listening to dense orchestral music. Not only that but if you want to go multi-channel you have that option too.

Anyway SACD has long since reached takeoff in Japan and will not be going away any time soon.
Hey hey, my my, SACD will never die.

nickthechef

28-08-2014, 19:43

OK so could be a good shout getting one?
I have seen a Pioneer pd-d9-j up for sale - might have a stab at that and give it a try...

Stratmangler

28-08-2014, 21:00

Maybe opening a can of worms here..

SACD - is it worth getting in to and is there much material released on this format? I have seen a few on ebay for instance..

From what i have gleaned on the web is that there is often two DAC's on board one for normal CD and one for SACD. and that SACD is only outputted via analogue?

I have tried a few tracks from Linn Music at 24bit 98/192KHz and there is quite a difference between that and say Spotify which is 320kbps/VORB (i think).
Is there a bit difference between say that and the SACD? Is there a really big jump i suppose i am trying to ask.

Interested in your thoughts / opinions etc and what would be a good place to start for say £150'ish for a second hand player.

Spotify is a decent enough service, and sometimes the stuff you want to listen to sounds very good, but it doesn't hold a candle up to the CD (or files ripped from it) for sound quality.
So it's no wonder that some of the Linn master recordings sound better than Spotify, they're frequently better sounding than the CD.

Now SACD is a single bit at a time switched at a much higher speed, 2.8224MHz to be exact.
Any differences you'll hear will have more to do with the mastering than anything else. It is wasteful of the bandwidth of DSD systems to master things overly loud, so SACD recordings are generally quieter than their PCM equivalents.
You certainly won't get any of the loudness wars nonsense taking place - that really would be a waste of bits in a real practical sense.

As for discs and players - I stopped playing physical digital music media a long time ago, as I adopted a server/streaming method of playback.
I get a CD nowadays and it's ripped to server, never to be played again. If I want a copy of something to play in the car I'll either burn a disc of hook up my phone and play the music from that.
It's now possible to download DSD files, and it's now possible to buy external DACs which can handle DSD input, so I'd suggest that ultimately this is the path to follow.

If you want to play physical discs then check out the usual suspects online - Richer Sounds, Superfi and the like, and also Ebay.
Personally I'd avoid second hand, unless you're talking statement products from the big boys.

Clive197

28-08-2014, 21:53

I'm not sure if you are calling me a muppet for stating the bleeding obvious? If so fair enough you tried that and it still did not work. I've seen it done, what more can I say?

Sorry Martin, I meant that I am the Muppet. Just don't ask me to put that in writing.....Oops I just did. DOH!

Clive

struth

28-08-2014, 22:45

I'd say that although I dont have many, and have to play them through the players own dac they do sound good. after saying that I'd agree with Martin and David that the mastering is probably mostly at the bottom of it in my case. I find that red book cds sound better ripped with eac as well so now usually just go that way now.

AlfaGTV

29-08-2014, 07:37

OK so could be a good shout getting one?
I have seen a Pioneer pd-d9-j up for sale - might have a stab at that and give it a try...

I bought the PD-D9-J's little brother (PD-D6-J) for the very same purpose. And yes, it sounds very good on SACD material. Used to have a Marantz SA-15S1 which sounded really good too, though in a whole different league.

But to be quite honest, most of my well mastered CD's ripped to NAS and played from computer or streamer sounds as good as the SACD material played from the Pioneer.

Id really like to "rip" the SACDs to disc though, that would probably be the best option... (You sure about the digital SACD out on the Oppo Macca?, that would be a serious breach of Sonys proprietary digital rights management)

Macca

29-08-2014, 07:45

. (You sure about the digital SACD out on the Oppo Macca?, that would be a serious breach of Sonys proprietary digital rights management)

Yes quite sure. I will try and find the model number for you as I would not want to swear that every player Oppo make can do it. It is an old one now, from about 2008 and belongs to a friend of mine who uses an Onkyo reciever that decodes the DSD signal. I understand that if you get an early PS3 that is also capable but possibly not out of the box you might have to do some tweak to it. Someone else can probably fill in the blanks there. But Sony obviously weren't that bothered about the copying issue if they were happy to put the capablility into the first PS3s. In any case it would still be a struggle to get the hardware together to burn your own SACDs so a non-issue, really.

Clive197

29-08-2014, 08:13

Been doing a little research. Maybe I'm not such a muppet after all. Martin you were correct in the assumption that the Cyrus cannot play DSD files but the 2 OPPO's that I had/have both converted DSD to PCM but the Cyrus will still not play the digital files. I have read in a old ARCAM manual that their DVD players will not pass DSD digitally except through HDMI with the salient point added that this is the same for other manufacturers.

So Martin the challenge is on you to find a way to output from SACD digitally without the use of HDMI.

Interestingly I understand that OPPO's new Headphone Amplifier the HA1 can play DSD files and I'm giving serious thought to selling my Cyrus PreXdQx and getting one to use with my new OPPO PM1 Headphones.

Clive

Macca

29-08-2014, 10:02

So Martin the challenge is on you to find a way to output from SACD digitally without the use of HDMI.

I don't think it is possible without using HDMI. Certainly not from the OPPO anyway, I'm not sure about the PS3.

The real question should be why do you want to bother (except for the fun of it)?

Whether you decode in the player or decode in a seperate DAC, it is still the same signal when all is said and done. I know DSD is supposed to be the saviour of mankind but I'm not convinced it has anything more to offer over red book cd.

AlfaGTV

29-08-2014, 10:31

Thx Macca, i thought you were referring to the coaxial digital out. I know that the original PS3 also routed digital out, but only with the first firmware version. And if course it's not possible to implement that old firmware... ;)

For me, its about ripping the SACD to my computer/NAS, not just adding another DAC.

Atb Mike

Macca

29-08-2014, 10:36

Well if you rip it to PCM digital you should still get the benefit of the superior mastering. Otherwise it's Oppo and HDMI ;)

AlfaGTV

29-08-2014, 12:22

Macca

29-08-2014, 12:36

I'm probably unclear, but what i would like is the SACD layer ripped to file, ie to a .dsf file. I already have the CD layer ripped to file today. :)

The question is though will that actually bring you any benefit in terms of SQ. My own casual experience with this says no but it would be interesting to compare a hybrid SACD disc through analogue outs, SACD through digital out (and decoded externally) and the PCM layer in a proper test. I'd expect all three to sound slightly different but would be surprised if any of them came across as noticeably 'better'. I just haven't mucked around with this stuff enough to say for certain but I do suspect we are just being sold better mastering and not better playback.

Stratmangler

29-08-2014, 13:38

From what I've managed to find out about ripping the DSD part of a SACD disc involves extracting the data to an ISO file using the PS3. You need to install an application first.
The PS3 has to be a non doctored early example, because these were fitted with a SACD compatible optical drive. If the firmware of the PS3 is higher than 3.55 you're screwed, because it's not possible to return the firmware to an earlier level.

The extraction process does not involve any real time capturing of data.

Once you have your ISO file you can play it using Foobar2000 after installing the appropriate plugins, and if you can play it in Foobar you can convert it to another format.

struth

29-08-2014, 13:58

I'm probably unclear, but what i would like is the SACD layer ripped to file, ie to a .dsf file. I already have the CD layer ripped to file today. :)

And i realise it's not "ripping", more like recording the digital stream in real time...

I'm a cheap bastard and refuse to pay good money for downloads, however when i have purchased an SACD it should not be Sony's business to decide or limit how i replay the music.
(downloads is to me not worth the expenses. You get nuttin for your money IMO)

Atb Mike

Inclined to agree about downloads. I like to have the disc in physical form as well...and same applies to the likes of Amazon free rips and there books for that matter. They can take them away without a bye or leave.

nickthechef

30-08-2014, 19:31

Spotify is a decent enough service, and sometimes the stuff you want to listen to sounds very good, but it doesn't hold a candle up to the CD (or files ripped from it) for sound quality.
So it's no wonder that some of the Linn master recordings sound better than Spotify, they're frequently better sounding than the CD.

Now SACD is a single bit at a time switched at a much higher speed, 2.8224MHz to be exact.
Any differences you'll hear will have more to do with the mastering than anything else. It is wasteful of the bandwidth of DSD systems to master things overly loud, so SACD recordings are generally quieter than their PCM equivalents.
You certainly won't get any of the loudness wars nonsense taking place - that really would be a waste of bits in a real practical sense.

As for discs and players - I stopped playing physical digital music media a long time ago, as I adopted a server/streaming method of playback.
I get a CD nowadays and it's ripped to server, never to be played again. If I want a copy of something to play in the car I'll either burn a disc of hook up my phone and play the music from that.
It's now possible to download DSD files, and it's now possible to buy external DACs which can handle DSD input, so I'd suggest that ultimately this is the path to follow.

If you want to play physical discs then check out the usual suspects online - Richer Sounds, Superfi and the like, and also Ebay.
Personally I'd avoid second hand, unless you're talking statement products from the big boys.

Hi Chris,

Thanks for that, didn't know you can download DDS files.
On the DAC side of things do you know if there any you can plug in to a computer, a USB DDS DAC for example?
I have tried the Linn Recordings 24bit 192KHz etc and they are really good i have to say. I do have a DAC that can take 24bit 192KHz but that is the upper limit.

I too do rip everything to a server too - much easier!

Stratmangler

30-08-2014, 20:23

Hi Chris,

Thanks for that, didn't know you can download DDS files.
On the DAC side of things do you know if there any you can plug in to a computer, a USB DDS DAC for example?
I have tried the Linn Recordings 24bit 192KHz etc and they are really good i have to say. I do have a DAC that can take 24bit 192KHz but that is the upper limit.

I too do rip everything to a server too - much easier!

There are loads of DSD DACs available now.
This is the lower end of the market, price wise http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/251568861975?limghlpsr=true&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=108&device=c&adtype=pla&crdt=0&ff3=1&ff11=ICEP3.0.0-L&ff12=67&ff13=80&ff14=108

Google is your friend - just make sure your letters are in the right order.
You're looking for a DSD DAC, not DDS!
The DSD bit stands for Direct Stream Digital.

BTH K10A

30-08-2014, 21:46

Some observations I have gleaned from using SACD for a while now

The real benefit of SACD is only gained by having a player that does not convert to PCM. DSD converted to PCM always sounds inferior.

Music recorded in DSD and replayed as DSD is usually excellent and that includes remastering from old analogue sources.

Music recorded in PCM and remastered to DSD offers no more fidelity than the original PCM recording but may sound more pleasant due to a better / different mixdown. There seems to be a lot of Rock / Pop SACD's that are derived from PCM masters and I rarely buy any now, concentrating on Classical and the occasional Jazz recording.

Andrei

31-08-2014, 03:17

Some observations I have gleaned from using SACD for a while now

The real benefit of SACD is only gained by having a player that does not convert to PCM. DSD converted to PCM always sounds inferior.

I disagree. First, and subjectively, I cannot hear the difference*. Bear in mind you are listening to an analogue sound. Analogue via PCM or analogue via DSD - the difference, whatever that may be, is in an earlier process and not the analogue stream coming out of your speakers. In other words the difference such as it is, is only one small process of many. Second, the conversion process is benign. It is not converting analogue to digital or the other way round. It is a digital to digital conversion. It cannot make a great difference.

I have been playing a fair bit of DSD lately via an external hard drive plugged into an Oppo USB port. A coupe of websites have put up comparison tracks for DSD and PCM, both of which are at various resolutions and they sound the same (at equal resolution) to me. I suspect some of the favour of SACD has its origins in the fact that it is at higher resolution, is available in 5.1, and as Martin has postulated is better mastered. This is not to say SACD is inferior - the aforementioned are reasons why it is not - rather the advantage of DSD is insignificant. DSD recordings generally have to be converted to PCM at some stage because they have to be worked upon (merging channels, up/down sampling, equalizing, setting the volume level, balancing the inputs from several microphones, and who knows what else mastering processes. 'Pure DSD' is few and far between. There is some analogy in the vinyl world in that it is rare that between the microphone and ultimately your speakers, the signal has never been in the digital domain. I cannot recall where (probably in Stereophile, or SACD net) but Kalman Rubinson (MR multi-channel) has come out in favour of pure DSD and if that is good enough for him , it is good enough for me. But the reason I disagree is that the difference is both small and rare.

* Actually the PCM sounds better to me when I play converted files via my PC (which is well specced) and DAC.

BTH K10A

31-08-2014, 08:15

I stand by what I hear and the less processes, conversions etc there are, the less fatiguing i find the sound. Whilst multi channel certainly adds another dimension to films I've yet to hear any surround system sound right with music. 3 channel yes, but even then the centre channel often needs adjustment between recordings to get it right which can become a bit wearysome.

Whilst you initially state you cannot hear a difference, you later say that PCM sounds better via your PC & DAC. A bit of a dichotomy but may well be down to the DAC chip which may handle PCM better than SACD. The Wolfson WM8741's certainly sound better when in pure DSD mode than when converting DSD to PCM.

I would also challenge your statement that it is rare for recordings on vinyl not to have been through a digital process. I own well over 4000 records and I doubt that even 10% have been through any digital process at all. I am a firm believer that less is more when it comes to the number of mics and channels used to make recordings and the less the recording and mastering engineers bugger around with it the better. :)

Gazjam

31-08-2014, 08:27

Macca

31-08-2014, 08:28

.

I would also challenge your statement that it is rare for recordings on vinyl not to have been through a digital process. I own well over 4000 records and I doubt that even 10% have been through any digital process at all. I am a firm believer that less is more when it comes to the number of mics and channels used to make recordings and the less the recording and mastering engineers bugger around with it the better. :)

That will depend on the sort of music you listen to and when it was made. After about '79/'80 everything on vinyl has been through the digital loop of the cutting lathe even if it was all-analogue up to that point. I'd say my collection was roughly 30/70 all-analogue/digital in that respect but then I have next to no classical or jazz on vinyl and most of the sought after recordings in those genres pre-date the appearance of digital at any step in the chain.

Clive197

31-08-2014, 09:24

For native DSD playback to your (compatible?) Dac, the recent Oppo bluray players can output DSD via its 2nd HDMI output.
A good quality HDMI audio extractor can take this bitstream and output it to SPDIF into your Dac.

A good approach as it lets you use your (possibly) superior dac to the one in the SACD player.

I was under the impression that the reason you can only use HDMI was that the HDMI protocols have Rights Management built-in. SPDIF is obviously unprotected, the record companies were afraid of mass copying of HD material. They failed protecting CD and they were dammed sure that was not going to happen with SACD.

As I mentioned in a earlier post, I'm happy to let my OPPO's 32bit DAC output after processing to my amp in the analogue domain as that only has a 24bit DAC installed, as have most HiFi DAC's. 32bit DAC's are mainly (but not exclusively) installed in A/V amps, which have different demands.

The question I now have is, are 32bit DACS better than 24bit DACS? That is the question. :scratch:

Clive

Macca

31-08-2014, 09:39

Re my earlier point about the mastering - if you compare the SACD of Sinatra's Live At The Sands with the CD version the differences in the mastering are extremely obvious, the main difference being that on the SACD Sinatra is much more forward in the mix. I've done this comparison on 3 very different systems. I actually gave the SACD away in the end since I much prefer the way the CD version is mastered.

destroysall

31-08-2014, 10:05

Interested in your thoughts / opinions etc and what would be a good place to start for say £150'ish for a second hand player.

Hitting the used market would probably be your best bet. Like all have recommended, any old Oppo player would suffice. Pioneer and Marantz as well as Onkyo made some excellent products as well that could be found for a bargain if you look hard enough.

Cheers,
Chris.

Andrei

01-09-2014, 00:39

For native DSD playback to your (compatible?) Dac, the recent Oppo bluray players can output DSD via its 2nd HDMI output.
A good quality HDMI audio extractor can take this bitstream and output it to SPDIF into your Dac.

A good approach as it lets you use your (possibly) superior dac to the one in the SACD player.

My brother has an Oppo105 and we discussed this. He had two options: HDMI into his receiver - as you have pointed out, OR 7.1 analogue outs. He went for the latter although that's a lot of cables. One of the factors to bear in mind was the relative quality of the DACs. The 105 has the Sabre 9018 DAC which we thought would be superior to that of his Cambridge Audio Receiver. With other permutations, it could well be better (and certainly cheaper) to output DSD into the receiver.

Thetiminator

07-09-2014, 20:01

Macca

07-09-2014, 20:32

I only have around 30 sacd's and I find in most cases I prefer the standard cd. It may be system related but generally I find the sacd version to be overly warm, with reduced attack and dynamics and less pin point imaging/soundstaging.

What SACD player do you use, Tim? Do you have any hybrid SACDs and have you tried comparing the CD layer with the SACD layer?

Thetiminator

07-09-2014, 21:16

What SACD player do you use, Tim? Do you have any hybrid SACDs and have you tried comparing the CD layer with the SACD layer?

Until recently I had an Esoteric (now everything is ripped and on my server), I find the same difference in the ripped/downloaded versions. I'm a bit if a techno-tard so don't know about the layer thing....i was just comparing albums that I had on both cd and sacd. Like I say it may be system dependent...

Macca

07-09-2014, 21:42

The SACD versions are re-mastered. If it is a hybrid disc you have the same re-master in both SACD and CD versions. So compared to the original CD release both layers will sound different. So probably not a system thing. I reckon that the superior sound of hi res is down to better mastering of the original recording and not the higher resolution, which makes no practical difference.

Gazjam

07-09-2014, 21:51

My brother has an Oppo105 and we discussed this. He had two options: HDMI into his receiver - as you have pointed out, OR 7.1 analogue outs. He went for the latter although that's a lot of cables. One of the factors to bear in mind was the relative quality of the DACs. The 105 has the Sabre 9018 DAC which we thought would be superior to that of his Cambridge Audio Receiver. With other permutations, it could well be better (and certainly cheaper) to output DSD into the receiver.

Hi Andre,
Speaking strictly in the two channel realm, a third option is how I have it setup in my own system, Oppo HDMI out into Audio extractor which outputs DSD via coaxial or toslink into my dac.
I have my 103d set to output SACD as PCM as my Young dac cant do Dsd.
But if it did I could have native Dsd from the Oppo digitally transmitted to my Dac.

Agree about the quality of the internal Dac, not all players can output SACD stream digitally to a dac, and need to rely on analogue outs.

Andrei

07-09-2014, 22:07

Hi Andre,
Speaking strictly in the two channel realm, a third option is how I have it setup in my own system, Oppo HDMI out into Audio extractor which outputs DSD via coaxial or toslink into my dac.
I have my 103d set to output SACD as PCM as my Young dac cant do Dsd.
But if it did I could have native Dsd from the Oppo digitally transmitted to my Dac?

Agree about the quality of the internal Dac, not all players can output SACD stream digitally to a dac, and need to rely on analogue outs.

Not sure what you mean Gary. What does the 'Audio extractor' do? (never heard of it sorry).
Also if you output SACD as PCM why would you want it to go into a DAC? I am guessing the Young DAC is better than the 103.
Also, I'm not sure if the penultimate sentence is a question.

Gazjam

07-09-2014, 23:34

Not sure what you mean Gary. What does the 'Audio extractor' do? (never heard of it sorry).
Also if you output SACD as PCM why would you want it to go into a DAC? I am guessing the Young DAC is better than the 103.
Also, I'm not sure if the penultimate sentence is a question.

No worries Andre, didn't know these things existed till I did a lot of forum hunting!
I had mine up for sale a while ago Andre, info on it there.
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?33311-FS-HDMI-Audio-Extractor-%A338-delivered-ono

Basically, HDMI output from the Oppo carries the DSD bitstream, normally into an AV receiver with an HDMI input.
Using the extractor box, the audio part of the HDMI signal is stripped out and sent to its digital outputs, which can then be hooked up to your dac.

SACD audio hits my Young dac as a 24/88 stream, normal digital output via built in coax is hardware limited to 16/44 I think.

If the Dac in a player is top notch then fair enough, but this little box of tricks lets you output SACD sound digitally to your Dac at 24/88 quality, great if you have a high quality dac.

Andrei

08-09-2014, 00:47

No worries Andre, didn't know these things existed till I did a lot of forum hunting!
I had mine up for sale a while ago Andre, info on it there.
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?33311-FS-HDMI-Audio-Extractor-%A338-delivered-ono

Basically, HDMI output from the Oppo carries the DSD bitstream, normally into an AV receiver with an HDMI input.
Using the extractor box, the audio part of the HDMI signal is stripped out and sent to its digital outputs, which can then be hooked up to your dac.

SACD audio hits my Young dac as a 24/88 stream, normal digital output via built in coax is hardware limited to 16/44 I think.

If the Dac in a player is top notch then fair enough, but this little box of tricks lets you output SACD sound digitally to your Dac at 24/88 quality, great if you have a high quality dac.

All is revealed! Actually this opens up a can of germs. I wonder if this could be a way of ripping SACDs?

Gazjam

08-09-2014, 08:07

All is revealed! Actually this opens up a can of germs. I wonder if this could be a way of ripping SACDs?

Now the game's afoot Watson... :)
I wonder...

oldson

15-09-2014, 19:34

this thread has got me interested.
so if i had one of these oppo players and used an hdmi to usb adapter , could this directly feed a dsd dac?

Gazjam

15-09-2014, 21:28

Yup.
Though it would be HDMI to Spdif, not usb.

Stratmangler

15-09-2014, 22:23

Yup.
Though it would be HDMI to Spdif, not usb.

DSD no worky over SPDIF!
Proprietary connection or USB only (dCS use twin firewire connections)
A number of SACD reading players will convert DSD over to PCM and output that over HDMI.

Gazjam

18-09-2014, 08:31

Chris,
The Oppo player outputs native DSD over its HDMI.
In Jriver, if you enable the DSD bitstream in DoP format option, it works over S/PDIF at 176400 kbps.

Emailed the manufacturer of the audio splitter box to see if any conversion is done of the DSD input from HDMI to PCM.
Not sure if it does, will wait and see what they say.

Stratmangler

18-09-2014, 10:26

Gaz

I think there may well be something else going on with your processing chain.
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=87057.0

How many of the DACs currently capable of processing DSD material can do it over a standard SPDIF connection?
I think they all utilise a USB connection to receive DSD data.
The SPDIF interface that they will nearly all have is for standard SPDIF protocols only.

Accudazed

20-09-2014, 16:49

Bit of a late reply to this thread from me but for what it's worth, here is my 'two penneth'.

SACD is superb and well worth having. It really is.

What makes a "good player" can be summed up with one word:

RELIABILITY

SACD and CD players are of course complex machines that frequently exhibit what can best be described as 'biscuit tin' build quality. That's okay, I can live with that because when something goes wrong you can always get them repaired by your friendly local engineer, right? Well, no actually because the manufacturer's spares backup is, frankly, appalling/shocking/shameful/etc. The achilles heel of all SACD and CD machines is the laser. Ordinarily they are fairly reliable items which should see 16000 or so hours use. But, YOU will find that if your beloved SACD player's laser goes, that's it, you have virtually no chance of getting it repaired.

Only the other day an engineer specialising in high end audio repairs advised me that any SACD/CD player over 6 years old is virtually unrepairable should the laser go pop. Think about that; just 6 years :(. He told me of one horror story where an £8000 machine had to be scrapped because the manufacturer had, surprise, surprise no lasers in stock. Imagine the pain that would cause - being left with an £8000 paper weight. It's a effin disgrace!

It's not just the chronic lack of spares availability that is a problem. How about finding a good engineer who can fix SACD/CD players? Nah, it's nigh on impossible in the UK. Even if you can find one, chances are he can do nothing any way because there are virtually no spares available. What a mess...

If you look on hifi forums, especially DIY ones, you will see there are loads of posts from people trying to find a way of keeping their SACD/CD machine going. Sadly most of them have to be given the bad news; "sorry mate....you can't get the spares anymore".

I have spent thousands on these little disc players - it's my favourite medium (yes, even more than vinyl) but it always seems to end the same way...It's a bit of an irony really. SACDs and CDs are long lived but the machines that play them have a life expectancy not dissimilar to a turntable's cartridge. But at least you can replace those...

They may be some hope on the horizon. The Chinese hifi industry is now making replicas of long since gone lasers such as the widely used SONY KSS series but tales of patchy build quality could potentially spoil the party (odd that as the Chinese are good engineers).

So, what makes a good SACD player then? Ultimately, one that will last. Has to be. SACDs are not cheap and it's nice to think that you can keep on playing them for more than 5 minutes. Pity the manufacturers have other ideas though.

I'm sick of it.

Cheers

Steve

Gazjam

24-09-2014, 06:53

Good post.

Andrei

24-09-2014, 07:38

RELIABILITY

Is the answer for SACD the same as the answer for motor cars? Go for Toyota, Honda or Nissan because they are good value and there will always be plenty of original and third party spares. So for SACD, go for Marantz, Cambridge Audio or Oppo as they are reliable and popular.

Gazjam

25-09-2014, 17:15

Pick a Brand name yer Grannies heard of and you wont go wrong.

struth

25-09-2014, 18:23

I have to say I am coming to the conclusion that cd players are a needless expense and I wont likely be buying another expensive one. I can play them from disc through my external cdrom and from flac. The hi end Denon I have is about a year old and ot hard pressed but is already playing up with cd's. fortunately I bought a laser for it when I got it so will be able to get it fixed should I wish to but probably wont. The 30£ pioneer second hand unit is more relyable and can just be tossed when finished. My next purchase will be a server with bluray/cd in it from Gary.

Spectral Morn

25-09-2014, 21:12

Until recently I had an Esoteric (now everything is ripped and on my server), I find the same difference in the ripped/downloaded versions. I'm a bit if a techno-tard so don't know about the layer thing....i was just comparing albums that I had on both cd and sacd. Like I say it may be system dependent...

Which one Tim, I have a P3 and D5 and overly warm would not be how I would describe the sound. My Marantz SA7 would certainly be warmer.

If you ever want to sell the SACDs any I don't have I would be interested in.

Regards Neil

SLS

26-09-2014, 10:15

I've been looking into this as my CD ripper cannot rip the CD layer of dual layer SACD's. My interest was to play SACD's issued by Harmonia Mundi.

It transpires (was I the only one not to know?) that the Sony license does not allow a digital output, so you cannot get a SACD transport to feed an existing DSD DAC, so as I already have a good DAC I would effectively be doubling up on DACs.

The music I'm after is now starting to appear on Qobuz in 24/192.

I've decided to spend the money on more music rather than an extra bit of kit.

Gazjam

26-09-2014, 21:44

Steven,
I get digital SACD output from my Oppo to my Dac.

Interesting reading...
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/oppo-103-105-does-stereo-multi-channel-direct-stream-digital-15575/

Andrei

26-09-2014, 22:48

I've been looking into this as my CD ripper cannot rip the CD layer of dual layer SACD's. My interest was to play SACD's issued by Harmonia Mundi.

Are you able to pinpoint where this has come unstuck? I have ripped the CD layer from a hybrid a couple of times and TBH I did not know that there could be a problem in doing this. I have used a standard ASUS DVD rdrive in a PC and EAC (Exact Audio Copy) software. I don't do this a lot because I prefer the resolution of the SACD.

Incidentally most SACDs have three tracks.

2 channel DSD
5.1 channel DSD
2 channel PCM - the CD 'layer'

windhoek

12-10-2014, 06:54

What makes a "good player" can be summed up with one word:

RELIABILITY

SACD and CD players are of course complex machines that frequently exhibit what can best be described as 'biscuit tin' build quality. That's okay, I can live with that because when something goes wrong you can always get them repaired by your friendly local engineer, right? Well, no actually because the manufacturer's spares backup is, frankly, appalling/shocking/shameful/etc. The achilles heel of all SACD and CD machines is the laser. Ordinarily they are fairly reliable items which should see 16000 or so hours use. But, YOU will find that if your beloved SACD player's laser goes, that's it, you have virtually no chance of getting it repaired.

So, what makes a good SACD player then? Ultimately, one that will last. Has to be. SACDs are not cheap and it's nice to think that you can keep on playing them for more than 5 minutes. Pity the manufacturers have other ideas though.

This is another reason why ripping SACD's hi-res layer via PS3 is important because once you've extracted the hi-res content onto a HDD, your collection can be played from a much more reliable medium i.e. PC/ streamer. I've backed my collection onto my HTPC and use JRiver to stream to my DAC.

Indeed, considering the recent change media copyrights law, which now allows legitimate backing up and format shifting (as well as SACD laser unreliability), it's a no brainier!
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/361788/Exceptions_to_copyright_-_Guidance_for_consumers.pdf

In fact, if it's ok to say so, I'd be happy for others to come over (I live in Glasgow) and use my PS3 to back up their SACDs. :)