Why don't DACs handle SACD?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 окт 2024
- Many receivers can accept SACD DSD files over HDMI but why can't high-performance DACs? Are there any that do and if a low-cost mass-market receiver can play DSD files from SACD why not a high-end product like from PS Audio? Have a question you want to ask Paul? www.psaudio.com...
I am getting close to publishing my memoir! It's called 99% True and it is chock full of adventures, debauchery, struggles, heartwarming stories, triumphs and failures, great belly laughs, and a peek inside the high-end audio industry you've never known before.
I plan a few surprises for early adopters, so go to www.paulmcgowa... and add your name to the list of interested readers. There's an entire gallery of never before seen photos too.
Paul, I don't own any PS Audio equipment, and because I already own a good DAC, and use nearfield studio monitors to listen to my music, it is unlikely I will soon own PS Audio's excellent equipment. However, if I was in the market tomorrow, I'd buy PS Audio purely based by the trust you build with your videos. You are very humble about your achievements; a real human in a sometimes aggressive business world.
I've owned a pair of 250 Delta monoblock amps since 1993, one repair in 29 years (I think in 2001 or 2002). Great products.
I love SACD, they sound really good to me
What an amazing explanation of this issue, thanks Paul
SACD is quite popular in Hong Kong. About 1/3 of the local language album will end up with a SACD version a few months after the release of the CD (of course this is to milk you again). Some higher grade but rare SACD only has the SACD layer which they claim has better audio performance. SACD can be ripped using modded PS3 and some older gen universal players with a specific chip.
Sony X700 UHD BLUERAY PLAYER have that in hdmi audio and setting to cd/dvd get a just that for really cheap price
dCS is the company that makes very highend DACs and transports that can do SACD.
Also, TEAC's highend brand Esoteric has dacs and transports that do sacd.
Sacd is still far and away the best digital format to my ears.
Its the best format. Sound of vinyl without the limitations
@Anthony Martino When they came put i used to back sacd simply because it made more sense amd they had a funkier logo. However its real advantage was that eventually most of them could be played on CD players.
I would agree. When I listen to CDs its only for a short time before I get put off by that digital sound - I guess I need to find a really good DAC to help smooth out the CDs. I also have a old Sony SACD player and what a difference, I can listen to my SACDs without fatigue, it reminds of when I play vinyl.
this largely depends on the artists' release and the authoring process in between to the final SA-CD product. As an example, Muddy Waters "Folk Singer" just wow..it's like Muddy is there performing in front of you. This is ***not** the case on other SA-CD's which may be marginally different as compared to CD where the human ear cannot hear the difference. The DSD release of Beck, Bogart and Appice was not nearly as satisfying. However there are jazz releases when compared to CD would blow your mind . It goes without saying your gear, setup to listening distance and room acoustics all play important roles in what your 2 ears decode in the end.
@Anthony Martino yes , but you do not have every human’s ears do you ?
Bravo to Jerry in San Diego. The question is perfectly stated and gets to the root of what I've been wondering for at least 10 years.
Speaking of Bob Rappaport, the Essence HDACC II-4K HDMI DAC can do Digital Audio Breakout for SACD; it does a HDMI Pass-Through for Native DSD up to 256 via SPDIF Outputs. I run an universal disk player, Sony UP800M2, into the Essence HDACC II, then take the DSD signal via coax into either my Cary Audio DMS-700 (DSD64, DSD128) or Eversolo DMA-A8 (DSD64). Both units DAC's can decode DSD via coax.
I just want to make 2 points here.
First, the conversion of the DSD data on an SACD in a transport a digital-to-digital process and it can be accomplished at a very high quality level for export. Not only DCS but Accuphase and others have done it well. The fundamental reason that (real) HDMI is rarely used in high-end equipment is that licensing costs are uncomfortably high for small DAC companies to encumber. One that does is NAD.
Second, despite Sony/Philips' copy protection intentions, it is easy to rip the DSD files from an SACD, put them on one's server and play them back using many digital file players. These can be connected to a large variety of DACs via S/PDIF (using DoP), USB and/or Ethernet. This is the reason that DSD files are available for download from numerous legal Internet sellers and in multichannel, too.
Kalman Rubinson How do you get the files off the SACD?
See www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/28569-sacd-ripping-using-an-oppo-or-pioneer-yes-its-true/ In addition to the Oppo 103 / 105 and some Pioneer players, there are some Sonys as well as a few other players that use the same chipset as the Oppos.
Also, I have prepared a précis of the procedure for my next column.
There are 2 annual fee structures associated with being an HDMI Adopter:
High-volume (more than 10,000 units) HDMI Adopter Agreement - US$10k/year
Low-volume (10,000 units or fewer) HDMI Adopter Agreement - US$5k/year + flat US$1/unit administration fee
The royalty fee structure is the same for all volumes. The following variable per-unit royalty is device-based and not dependent on number of ports, chips or connectors:
US$0.15 - for each end-user licensed product.
US$0.05 - if the HDMI logo is used on the product and promotional material, the per-unit fee drops from US$0.15 to US$0.05.
US$0.04 - if HDCP is implemented and HDMI logo is used, the per-unit fee drops from US$0.05 to US$0.04
I have an Arcam SACD player outputing through digital coax to a Stellar GCD. The GCD shows 44.1k on red book cds and 88.1k on SACD. I don't know if that is a true SACD but it is double the red book resolution and I can hear the difference in detail.
Paul is accurate in saying that you've probably never heard the true fidelity of your SACD's because even dedicated SACD players in many cases converted the DSD to PCM. No I'm not getting paid for that comment...
All sacd players wirh HDMI out will have dsd out. The first one being the original ps3 i believe in 2006
Hdmi? Audio and video? I think what Paul was sayin is hdmi for i2s signal
I bought a Sony SCD CSE595 player 15 years ago and just realized what it is. The last couple days I've done a lot of research on it and most say it has a pretty good DAC. Not like I need a better one being it's the only digital thing I have hooked up to my system. There is a lot of CD's out there but they do cost like 3 times the average CD.
I also have noticed Sony has removed the SACD symbol from their mass market BD players and it can now only be had in their more expensive BD players. I only have the Sony mass market SACD bluray player. But I can tell you this. Man, that SACD mix of Captain Fantastic in 5.1 sounds good!! It's a whole new listening experience! But according to Paul, even that Sony transponder isn't worth much compared to the audiophile ones. So Scotty, Beam Me Up!! Or maybe I'll just listen to Blonde on Blonde in 5.1 again and cry in my green tea!
@6:03 "...raw, unprotected data stream" = Fatherhood!
i use a Bryston BDA-3 with my oppo 103D and its just outstanding!!
Thank you for this interesting video. I have a Sony Blu Ray player that reads SACD’s. It only has digital outputs (HDMI & coaxial) and it displays what bandwidth it runs on together with track number and time. I have it hooked to my NAD M33 via coaxial output and it displays 2.88 Mbit/second at 1 bit for SACD. Normal CD’s are 44.1 at 16 bit. I didn’t know the story behind the Sony license part but now I know this it makes sense this player supports SACD.
Love these segments. Thanks for all the posts.
How come everything in the audio world that Sony developed ended up flopping e.g. DAT, SACD, S/PDIF, CDDA (RedBook), etc.??
they get overwhelmed with greed and paranoia when they try to make something.
Nothing is forever. Many of their formats were used in specific areas (and the rest of the brands just followed and died in the end). Are there other brands in this world which lanced ideas we still use??
1:01 he's looking for dCS (Digital Conversion Systems, LTD) .. they're the cream of the crop when it comes to DACs..
1:03 you mean?
Thanks. Was McIntosh the company you were thinking of? There are actually 4 layers on an SACD. The regular CD layer, the high resolution 2 channel layer, the high resolution 5 channel layer, and a text layer which scrolls the track title across the display (even if it's in a foreign language, which is useful for classical or opera recordings, although you must have a player with this capability). Cheers.
It would have been Linn
@@atomicinv2 it's DCS actually. Expensive, but very nice gear.
I love SACDs, awesome quality!!!
Hi Paul. I have a Pioneer UDP-LX500 with SACD going by HDMI to my CLASSE SIGMA 2200i. Witch is almost totally digital. Doe this mean that the CLASSE DAC does the work?
@paulmcgowanpsaudio --- Why doesn't Sony sell the decryption chip to companies so that it can be added to better DACs?
Hey Paul the Scottish company is based in Cambridgeshire and its name is not DCM but dCS as for DCM time window that was not Bob rappaport but the legendary Bob Waterstripe
This is almost scary! Almost every episode bring up the problems/questions I face at the moment. I was wondering why I didn’t get any sound...
Copyrights is just one of many reasons. I don't understand why majority of DACs do have only stereo analogue out while there are many multichannel mixes available in Hi-Res (96 kHz+/24 bit): SACD, Blu-Ray Audio, DVD-Audio etc. You can legally rip those contents for your personal NAS storage... and yet even expansive DACs can't handle them.
Thank you Paul for another great tutorial.
You definitely know what you're talking about, but I'm confused. If copy protection is the problem, what about the Hi-Res audio files which are far easier to copy than a SACD would even be? Ease of copy has not seemed to stop labels from releasing master quality content to FLAC. Am I missing something?
Online FLAX releasing wasn't yet a thing when the SACD format / standard came into play. The standard specifications are what they are, no room to modify anything, and so the format dies a horrible drawn out death. It's always the case, easy to copy (or archive of course) stuff thrives, formats that fight even their rightful owners die.
Time already told the other way actually, more and more DACs are capable to decode SACD and even DSD128,DSD256 or even higher... instead of less and less. :)
copyright is killed the SACD. If Sony and its labels would allow people to rip SACDs, that would be great and we may still have SACDs from Sony.
Hi-Fi Insider Yeah, and it's quite silly because audiophiles are so much less likely to commit piracy. Those who are committing piracy are usually converting the audio from a RUclips video, or torrenting MP3's... because they aren't willing to spend any money. Audiophiles are perfectly willing to spend money on an expensive DSD capable DAC, why wouldn't we buy their discs?
Lack of demand killed the SACD. Remember that audiophiles are a very small minority of customers - most people are more than happy with their CD played on a budget CD player, or an MP3 through their phone earbuds. It was always a niche format.
sacd isn't dead they are still being produced and some great recordings are available on them.
Just received a LSO recording set today that includes SACD and Blu-ray Discs so they are covering all bases!
SACD is dead because it doesn't sound any better than regular cd. I had a Marantz SACD player and quality of SACD and equivalent CD sounds the same. With my Golden Ear Triton 2 speakers at least it sounds the same. If there was a difference I would say 2% - 3% at most. Or Maybe you need a $4k+ speakers to hear the difference along with an amazing imagination of a very serious audiophile.
And nowadays you can get yourself a dirt cheap used Sony Blu-ray player (paid $20 for mine), a couple free programs and easily rip SACDs and do whatever you please with the ISO/DSD files from them.
Sure, you can but... it doesn't solve the problem that you can't play multichannel DSD (even saved as flac) on most high-end DACs. Basically you can play those on AVRs...
If you want to "get your feet wet" with SACDs before jumping in and committing to an expensive, audiophile-level system you can easily do that today with any of Sony's higher-end, consumer-level 4K UHD Blu-ray players: UPB-X1100ES ($600), UPB-X800M2 ($360) or UPB-X700 ($250). I just purchased a demo/open box UPB-X800M2 myself last week for a great price and bought my first SACD (Eagles - Hotel California) new off eBay from Japan for $30. The first thing you notice right away about the SACD (DSD) recordings are how much more depth and texture they have to them compared to regular CDs. When you listen to a CD, you feel like you are listening to a really good recording of the track. When you listen to a SACD (DSD) you feel like you are sitting in the studio with the musicians ten feet away from you while they record the original track. That's how entirely different the experience is between the two. So much more depth and realism in the SACD (DSD) recordings. Whereas CDs let you hear the recording, SACD (DSD) make you believe you attended the original recording session. Trust me, once you experience SACD (DSD) and hear what it can do, you'll WANT to upgrade to an audiophile-level system...if you didn't already.
The major problem is that DSD cannot be handled by optical or coaxial cables.
Over HDMI it works. So you can use some dac which works with HDMI ARC.
Sometimes I guess. I tried hooking my Sony Ultra Bluray to my Marantz 40N through the HDMDI Arc port. No joy,. Turns ouf The Marantz will support DSD from ethernet or USB, but not through HDMI. Looks like the player can convert DSD to high res PCM, for output through coax. A compromise to be sure, but but hey, what can you do?
Hey Paul can you do an interview with Ari Margolis, he's an audiophile and musician in Denver. He owns Golden Ear Digital which provides a service of converting people's cds into wav or flac and sacds into iso dsd.
Lots of sacd rips out there in ISO. Hasn't been virtually unbreakable for years. As some PS3 version can do it.
Why you need a crappy modern dac when there is philips or burr brone chip dacs on great sacd players
SACD playback using a computer over a good audio setup, is the best way to enjoy audio for me, pure quality.
How
@@Rayyarhs you have to get an iso file from the SACD and use a compatible media player software for it.
@@danielgeorge4566 OK, itied to read it but my dvd/cd reader on my laptop can not reat it. Maby i dont hawe a right software.?
@@Rayyarhs only some players can read it. I have heard that some PS3s with hacked firmware are used to extract the iso file.
@@Rayyarhs the software used to play the iso file is foobar2000 you can search google for a tutorial there are lots of forums that explain how to use foobar2000 to play the iso.
Biggest problem about DSD is almost all manufacturer have their own interface for DSD. My accuphase use HS-link and my dcs uses firewire, some uses HDMI. They don’t compatible to each other like spdif or AES. As much as i want to use it, it is unusable.
The other problem is Sony only focus on protecting the sell side, buyer (who is the market maker) will eventually give up.
It's a real shame that SACD didn't become more popular when it first appeared. I remember at that time that a British audio magazine let all its reviewers borrow Sony's flagship SCD-1 player so they could judge the new format for themselves and it seems a number of those reviewers weren't particularly impressed with what they heard. I took to the format like a duck takes to water and I've been impressed with it ever since, and continue to buy the discs whenever I can.
That was truly excellent. Thank you.
That explains why my sony UP800M2 4K player that plays DACD's and DVD Audio through my Sennheiser AMBEO Max sound bar just fine that has 6 Taxas Inst DAC's in it sounds about the same as when I play MQA through my Shanling ET3 transport and EH3 Dac .. I love MQA BTW
SACD was for surround systems more than anything else.Why they published a lot of classical music on SACD that took advantage of the directional listening.
Hi Paul, the handshake is fine, but if the data going over the cable is in the clear, then it can be sniffed quite easily.. Why don't the owners of the technology refabricate the chip with updated analog section?
The answer is spelled "M - O - N - E - Y ". There isn't enough to be made from an update.
Time 01:10
The Scottish company Paul mentioned may refer to Linn; where their Majik DSM has built-in HDMI(ARC) input and output in their 2 channel products.
Also McIntosh includes HDMI (handle audio signal only) modulus sold separately for their modern (post 2020s) amplifier products.
Why I aware such product / function? It is because I enjoy many RUclips HD music videos, which I need to feed the digital audio part into my 2 channel system for enjoyment. If I just buy above mentioned products (the premium is too high for just acquiring the only function for decoding HDMI audio signal for 2 channel music).
My final solution for enjoyment HQ music video through RUclips is using the standard optical output (Toslink : default in most modern TVs), then feel to an old secondhand DAC: Tech-503 for decoding the audio signal from youtube channel.
Indeed the results are too deem satisfactory, which also leads to expose the weaknesses of my 12 years old 2 channel system (Harbeth P3 speaker + Chinese made KT88 22W amp + Linn DS).
The system unable to handle dynamic sound from most RUclips HQ concert videos.
At the end, I consider to upgrade my 12 years old 2 channel system (i.e. floor stand speakers + more power class AB solid-state amplifier) just because I bought a 2nd hand DAC for decoding RUclips digital audio for less than 3 months.
Remarks - I am not a serious Hi-Fi enthusiast, however I do have little demands on music quality (focusing more on music enjoyment rather than music audition - my hears are saturated and cannot tell the different between hi-fi and hi-end).
I wasn't sure if he was talking about Linn who are based in Scotland or dCS who are not.
Many AVR's can accept DSD from SACD over HDMI but convert it to PCM as do most universal players if you play the disc 'on-board'. You can rip SACD's to files (bit of a faff but you can) and then play the DSD through any suitable DAC.The majority of SACD's have been through PCM processing at some point or are sourced from PCM so worrying too much about all this is a bit pointless. There are some really great recordings available on SACD and many are multi channel.
John Deas How do you rip the SACD to files? I thought you needed a PS3 to do that.
Google SACD ripping.....
Richard Larson There is a company from Paul's neck of the woods called Golden Ear Digital that rips them for you, check them out.
In a nutshell, due to DRM they made an incomparable format at high cost, so almost nobody purchased the high cost content. With a very limited library and an incompatible format, DAC's could not play it due to the encryption. This is the same fate of the DAT for consumer use. A much more comparable and universally accepted MP3 became the de-facto standard.
mct500 transport. sacd. can?
in 1:00 when he's talking about the Scottish company that makes a DAC ... he's referring to dCS.. (Digital Conversion Systems)... they make $115K DACs and their cheap stuff is $15K or more.
What about Blu Ray Pure Audio?
Hello Paul. So you bought the Sony decoder chip and put it in your own transport, maybe it's the same CXD9675R chip that is in my Sony SACD player. How did you intercept the decrypted DSD stream before it became analog? Did you rip the plastic lid off the chip package and tap a gold whisker onto the chip's die? Or did Sony allow one of the chip's 48 pins to output a decrypted data stream? Curious audio technicians want to know. Thanks.
No, we did not. That doesn't work. We built ours from the ground up.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio Thanks for your answer. At 5:40 on the video, Paul says "our player decrypts it because it has that Sony chip, but then we grab it before it goes into analog...........". Maybe Paul was referring to a player that is no longer made, and your new players avoid the need for a Sony chip by having a better solution? I imagine that as long as your player prevents anyone from hacking into the decrypted bit stream, Sony doesn't care if you have your own decryption technology as long as people continue to buy their SACD disks.
@@lewisheilig3623 Yes, you're correct and I was being too simplistic in my answer. The Sony "chip" I refer to isn't the same chip one can, as an OEM, purchase and implement for DAC playback. On that chip there's no way to hack inside it and service the signal before the DAC. I misspoke.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio It's nice that Sony gave you the keys to the kingdom in order to allow you to create a product that far exceeded what they were prepared to do with their own line of SACD players. Did you improve on Sony's clock jitter as well?
@@lewisheilig3623 Yes, buy a great deal. It's what our galvanically isolated output stage achieves. Remarkable low jitter levels.
SACD of DSF files Sound really great Just try Thriller on SACD It sounds amazing!
+1, SACD is the best version of Thriller.
I tried it, ehh... Aside from the higher dinamic range, it was quieter and I really didn't picked up anything different from just the nornal cd version
There are more DACs now available that will decode DSD, including Naim.
Back in the 2000s only rich people owned Snobby Ass Computer Disk (SACD) because it was so damn expensive the younger generation resorted to listening to low quality MP3s on their Computers and iPods. Also, modern music was recorded and created in PCM, there was no sense in releasing those songs in DSD format. We never got an SACD player because it was an extra investment for us. Today it is terrible how we can only play those snobby ass computer disks onto dedicated consumer players which only rich people had, where the DVD layer cannot be outputted digitally. I am glad the PS3 were able to rip the DVD layer of those Snobby Ass Computer Disks (SACDs) to get the master DSD files off them so that we can now listen to them on our computers in very high quality audio.
One correction: publishers don't want to protect the artists. They want to protect their own commercial interests. And it's this paranoia about "piracy" that killed SACD. Also, any half-decent crypto expert views SACD encryption as pathetic.
Sony 1080 Reciver have something nice in DAC build in 👌
Copyright law is like cancer, it kills everything it comes close to.
If you really want you customers to enjoy music you don't do that shit.
Are SACDs better than DVD-As for audio?
Sony makes one of the best DACs out there. Look it up before making such statements.
Draconian DRM, so the format dies on the vine. Not a surprise. They will never learn.
Nobody copies digital sources in real-time by tapping the audio stream. It’s a ridiculous notion. Motivated hackers would just break some (any!) player once, source and rip the entire catalog, and post it online. (Ironically in this case, it was Sony’s own PS3.)
If it can be played legitimately, it can be played illegitimately. The only people that are inconvenienced by foolish protection measures on the output stream are would-be customers.
Now, there are plenty of DACs that can technically play DSD, but nearly all of them do so by reconstituting it as a high res PCM stream - which is probably what the format should have been to begin with, but I digress. However, since Sony shackled all the potential licensed hardware, the format cost too much, licensing made it unattractive to partners, and various other poor management decisions led to the complete ambivalence to the format, *nobody* won EXCEPT the pirates - who are able to enjoy hassle-free rips of the entire catalog for the cost of a month’s Internet.
Way to go, Sony. If physical media had any life left in it at all, I would bet a fortune that you would do the same thing all over again.
They never learn.
Could you Please make a sacd headphone DAC/amp
Poor Sony and Phillips they are so innovative and most of their hard formats are dead or dieing. Cassette , mini disk , CD , SACD.
room-ten-oh-nine ! Hahahaha I remember betamax. We had a player back in the 80's. It was massive 😄😄😄
room-ten-oh-nine ! I didn't know it was good for audio quality. I was only about 8 years old
You probably didn't get the email about cassettes. I don't believe that you can count them out yet.
I've heard some really rather good results in the cassette format. Metal tapes, Dolby HX and a good transport can change minds about the format.
I've got a pair of Sony PCM-7010F DAT Recorders connected to a Sony RM-D7200 Digital Edit Controller, cost me about $17,000 back in 1995. By 1997 it was obsolete, since a computer with a sound card running MP3 could be configured to do the work of a DAT Recorder with a simple, cheap software program from Cakewalk. My DAT Recorders are now just novelties, which I still use to transfer DAT field recordings to CD and hard disk.
You can download dsd music no need for sacds. Most receivers will have dsd capability.
And most high end DACS as well.
that Scottish company, he was thinking about was probably Linn.
Bluray audio sounds the best by far. No compression. IMO
Don't forget DAT which sounded great to me but never took off.
Thx for the info on SACDs, I've wondered for years about this since I got the Rolling Stones cds reissues on SACD, I can't even find an SACD player. I thought everything was going to be DVDA. Which seems to be the norm now.
Sony makes a 4K DVD ($200) Blu-ray player that can decode SACD, but your amp may only output it as PCM (like my Marantz NR 1605).
Have an old 2001 SONY STR-DE875 avr going to my Advent heritage towers & that sony just doesnt sound right unless i use 2 ch direct mode with my own DAC & laptop.
SACD was before streams. It just don't give a sense to buy them in these days - especially for those crazy prices some sellers asking. That's evolution and formats changing all the time, which is not easy for users. I know what I'm taking about coz my stereo over past 25 year included pieces like turntable, CD player, DAT recorder, tape deck, MD deck and past few years streamer. Saying that the easy and fast access to "virtual" collection is way more convenient than other formats and sounds great too if you are using WAV rather than MP3.
There is still a BIG reason for SACD, since components which take streams may not do gapless. That is a deal breaker for anyone into classical. The only way I can get my OPPO 205 to do gapless multi-channel is to create a file of the stream and place it on a flash drive for connection to OPPOs front panel usb port.
Problem with streams being that artists generally get paid crap, unfortunately, Might not be that much of a problem with established mega artists, but for young performers, it's a killer.
Great explanation, thanks
DSD failed because of Sony, is that what you are saying?
Why does no one talk about Surround sound SACD's That's what i remember about the best buy demo lol. Think they used bose cubes (GAG)
I mentioned it :)
See my column: www.stereophile.com/category/music-round I talk about SACD/DSD incessantly.
Better Order Something Else
TheeJoeyLee
L😂L
Yup that's the only reason I just invested in this format - i want to hear the 5.1 mixes of some of these albums. I can't confidently say I can hear the difference in quality beyond CD's which sound great to my ear - but 5 distinct channels vs stereo is like night and day.
Would be great to explain I2S (over HDMI?) and how external DACS w/ I2S capabilities can or can not work for DSD decoding of SACD layer on SACD transports / players with I2S connections !!!
As you may know, HDMI and i2s may use the same cable but have a different protocol. If you search Aliexpress for a HDMI to i2s converter, you will find a well built little box for around $50. I now play my SACD's on my Oppo bluray through a HDMI cable to this converter and another HDMI cable out to a Holo Audio May dac's i2s input. With this combination, it was plug and play. The Oppo's XLR output was great but over ridding the Oppo's dac and using the i2s on the May, improved the sound quality by light years. The best and cheapest tweak I have ever added to my system. The discs use the decoder built in to the bluray but bypass the built in dac and output just the digital info cleanly to an external dac, reducing the Oppo to just a quality disc transport.
@@wetcat833would I need one of these magic boxes going from my Blue Ray/ SACD to my AVR via HDM ? Both units contain 24/192 DAC. I'm just looking for 2 channel SACD with the best possible sound .
@@troyvan6952 You would only do this if you have an external DAC that is of a much higher quality than the built in DAC of your disc player. If your player and AVR have similar DACs, you will gain no advantage. In fact, you may degrade the sound by adding extra cables and connectors (and the box) unnecessarily to your signal chain. This method is used if you are going from SACD player to an external DAC with a i2s connection to preamp/power amp via XLR or RCA. I hope this helps.
@@wetcat833 thanks, so no box, and straight HDMI hook up...or would you recommend analog hook up?
Eventually I will look at an outboard from PS audio or Bryson until then I'll grin and bear it and play the cd layer.
Much appreciated man!
@@troyvan6952 Unless your Blue ray has an XLR output and your AVR has an XLR input, I would stick to HDMI. It was designed to hook up Blue rays to AVRs. Home cinema systems these days do a very good job playing music. If you get an external DAC you will need to run it into a preamp/power amp. Unless you can get an amp and DAC at the same time, I would recommend getting an amp first as you can get immediate improvement running your Blue ray to your amp via analog cables. Later, when you get a DAC, the little black box HDMI to i2s converter comes into play. Both of your choices for a DAC are good but I recommend that you research some offerings from Holo Audio. They are beautifully made and you get a lot of bang for your bucks. Putting together a system is both fun and a nightmare. Good luck falling down this rabbit hole.
DCM! The kx12 is still fantasic with a technics sa-ax6
so, when you insert an sacd into this guys oppo, connected to a yamahahaha receiver, is he hearing the sacd file or the cd layer?
You can choose which layer you want to play. Therefore you need some dislplay too.
@@milanstastny6799 , its my understanding if the Yamahaaa rcvr does NOT have the Sony licensed dac, you will _only_ hear the cd layer.
@@googoo-gjoob You are right. I think most of the RCVs support DSD decoding nowadays. I have a small ONKYO and it is OK.
The company you were thinking about is dcs. I think they are English, though. Could be wrong.
I guess I have been away from things a while. It seems like I remember back in the '90's that people used to say the letters in "DAC", "dee ay see", but now everyone just says "dak". When did that change? Or maybe what I think I remember isn't a real memory?
Breaking the key is not the right terminology. It is called decryption, which uses the Sony private key to reverse the encryption.
Brian Moore it just like LED and OLED, SCOTUS and POTUS, etc. . People are now too lazy to speak the individual letters.
What about DSD through fire wire that also died over copyright issues
Use one of these.....HDMI/MHL to IIS I2S HDMI IIS I2S Separate Extract Audio I2S/DSD/Optical/Coaxial
I picked up a Sony SACD player. yet I don't have a single SACD.
MeatPopsycle If you don't already know... Check out Acoustic Sounds they have a decent sized library of sacds for purchase.
MeatPopsycle I picked a sand player and now have 1 sald. But the cd/sacd player is tops.
Is it safe for me to assume that "sand" and "sald" are just auto-corrects version of SACD?? lol.
Any Rolling Stones cd.
Very interesting. Thanks.
Would a DAC improve the sound of great sounding CD/SACD player like Marantz KI Ruby?
The right DAC would, yes, for CD quality. SACD not so much because there's no digital stream available from this player for SACD.
PS Audio thnx
PS Audio ... aaaaah ... because of copyright issues and it is a SACD player after all the KI Ruby does not have a digital put that handles SACD but only CD. Am I correct to say that?
What about a hybrid sacd that can play on all CD players.Are those not "true" sacd or are they just as good??
Hybrid SACD's have a separate CD layer that will play on any CD player - very few SACD's are not hybrids..
John Deas about half of my SACDs are without the CD layer, but I think they are all on the Columbia label, iirc.
@@doowopper1951 hi Jeff can you recommend a place to get any high res music on cd as I have a few sacd .DVD.a .dsd many thanks peter
Were you thinking of Wolfson? The Scottish DAC chip manufacturer?
Or Linn, maybe.
I think he is referring to Lynn
Erm Linn
Pretty sure he meant dCS, but they're from England
Nja, I think it's Oban.
I have to wonder if anyone has tried to tap into that data trace between the Sony IC and the DAC IC. for nefarious purposes.
Hi res info, thank you.
So Sony developed this innovative SACD technology with all its glorious hi res capability but handcuffs it by fitting the only players capable of playing them with a shitty DAC?
Ironically, the DSD technology is cheaper than PCM. Granted, mass production probably renders than difference null.
In these days of DSP, DSD is pretty much screwed, as signal processing doesn't work with DSD. It has to be converted to PCM first. That gets us DXD, which isn't DSD at all, but PCM.
Also, DACs that take DSD often just convert the DSD to PCM.
DSD seems pretty superfluous these days. I'm not hating on the SACD. The format I hate on is the CD. The market just seem to move in a direction that DSD cannot follow.
I've heard that DSD was a backup file system from CBS Records (what Sony bought and renamed into Sony Music)
OPPO BP 83 fed into a chord Qutest DAC. SACD in DSD or stereo are a no go. :(
There is no SACD level output from the BD83 except via HDMI. If there is no HDMI input to your DAC then there is nothing for it to decode
The bottom line is that musicians have a right to be paid and the recording companies as well. It is a good problem to have because at least we get great sound from the result.
Sony made it virtual impossible to RIP (for DRM Purposes) as far as to make it difficult to decode just to play.
Millions of SACD .iso rips are available on the net. They are "easy" to rip.
this whole copyright bullshit won't stop pirates to crack or copy. It becomes more fun and challenging doing so...
@guy who wrote the letter: what u hear is not SACD, it's the CD layer!!!!
Never jumped on the SACD train … only own a few. But, IMHO, the failure of the SACD format to gain main stream acceptance was forecasting the death knell of hard media.
Or perhaps that the mainstream listener didn't really care about better fidelity and most were ok with mp3 quality. Sadly many cannot tell the difference. In the end convenience usually wins. Car manufacturers elimination of CD players is also another nail in the coffin of the format. Cd has a lot of potential to get better by just going to higher resolution but only audiophiles care. I miss the old days when good stereo shops were common. I am surprised to hear the low quality audio accepted by so many.
Technology is Nothing without Content
well, I guess I can't blame them for trying to protect the master
_"... by Sony"_
I.e. hello, draconian copy control mentality!
Let's stick with liquid dsd files and be happy. No reason to have it on a disc if the Sony dac ruins the sound...
i have the bryston bda-3 !!! does it !!!
I rip SACDs by taking the audio output form my SACD player and run it into a PCM reorder.
The output is either analog or it's HDMI. In either case any digital recording you make will be from a ADC.
Never thought much of CDs, DVDs this & that
Don't like CDs? What about LPs? How about going back to 78s or maybe Edison cylinders?
1- Schick
2- Modric
Ah DRM, it seems to annoy everyone anywhere it goes.