SACD (DSD) DAC

[thewinelake.]

So if I've ripped an SACD to my PC, what are there options for ways to play it?

Is it important to try to find a DAC that doesn't convert to PCM as an interim step, or is that unlikely to be audible?

Is the Loki dead?

 

[Al ears]

So if I've ripped an SACD to my PC, what are there options for ways to play it?

Is it important to try to find a DAC that doesn't convert to PCM as an interim step, or is that unlikely to be audible?

Is the Loki dead?

Yes. Just how did you rip an SACD? And more importantly why?

If this is just another hi-res is useless thread it's already boring.

 

[thewinelake.]

It's theoretical at the moment!

Rupping SACD is done with an old PS3.

The reason is to take advantage of SACD recordings - largely just to see what the fuss is about. I know people who seem to think they're worth spending the extra on, and I'd be curious to experience this 3D effect they're on about!

But although I would generally be happy with going to the effort of putting the disc into the PlayStation, I'd like to understand how the delivery mechanism might work from a streamer/Mac. Seems that JRiver is a very popular option, even if it inevitably compromises the DSD potential - probably inaudibly so.

 

[ID.]

It's theoretical at the moment!

Rupping SACD is done with an old PS3.

The reason is to take advantage of SACD recordings - largely just to see what the fuss is about. I know people who seem to think they're worth spending the extra on, and I'd be curious to experience this 3D effect they're on about!

But although I would generally be happy with going to the effort of putting the disc into the PlayStation, I'd like to understand how the delivery mechanism might work from a streamer/Mac. Seems that JRiver is a very popular option, even if it inevitably compromises the DSD potential - probably inaudibly so.

I remember reading that it could theoretically be done, but generally the format was created so that users couldn't rip it, so I guess the first question is whether you have actually captured a DSD rip.

Easier to just buy the DSD file online as they're becoming more available. More and more DACs will play DSD files. I think you need to connect by USB and have software that can play it back. SO the next questions is, what do you compare it to? Do you have a Redbook quality PCM file that you are sure if from the same master to make sure you are comparing apples with apples?

The next thing to address is your mention of the 3D effect. Yes, some SACDs have a surround sound mix of the album, but unless you are referring to that, then I'm not sure what you are expecting. Most SACDs are just stereo, and from my understanding, the DSD capable DACs on the market only do stereo.

 

[thewinelake.]

I presume that a hybrid SACD offers a very easy way to compare red and scarlet book options.

We shall see. I don't even have my stereo system set up yet as I've not quite finished making the "box" for it all to go in.

 

[davedotco]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

 

[Al ears]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I think that very much depends on which website you access your downloads from.

 

[andyjm]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

 

[spiny norman]

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

That's where DXD comes in.

 

[expat_mike]

I presume that a hybrid SACD offers a very easy way to compare red and scarlet book options.

We shall see. I don't even have my stereo system set up yet as I've not quite finished making the "box" for it all to go in.

This site offers all these free test tracks, to enable you to compare the different formats.

http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html

 

[BigH]

I presume that a hybrid SACD offers a very easy way to compare red and scarlet book options.

We shall see. I don't even have my stereo system set up yet as I've not quite finished making the "box" for it all to go in.

Not always, apparently some use different masters.

 

[davedotco]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

The specific demonstration I alluded to was mixed live to DSD using a Sony recorder. it was also some years ago.

If commercial recordings are to be converted from PCM, I am strugling to see what the advantages, if any, actually are. Why not simply release the one 24/96 master and allow the conversion to DSD take place in the playback dac?

The real comparison is to compare the DSD retail product with the regular CD standard product, but as always we would need to know the provenance of the master and whether the the two processes were completed with the same degree of care and the same production values.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

The specific demonstration I alluded to was mixed live to DSD using a Sony recorder. it was also some years ago.

If commercial recordings are to be converted from PCM, I am strugling to see what the advantages, if any, actually are. Why not simply release the one 24/96 master and allow the conversion to DSD take place in the playback dac?

The real comparison is to compare the DSD retail product with the regular CD standard product, but as always we would need to know the provenance of the master and whether the the two processes were completed with the same degree of care and the same production values.

I read somewhere that mark knopfler him self mixed the 20th anniversary sacd that's the best provenance I can give you

 

[thewinelake.]

DXD sounds like it's the business!

So one can losslessly interconvert DSD->DXD->DSD...

 

[davedotco]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

The specific demonstration I alluded to was mixed live to DSD using a Sony recorder. it was also some years ago.

If commercial recordings are to be converted from PCM, I am strugling to see what the advantages, if any, actually are. Why not simply release the one 24/96 master and allow the conversion to DSD take place in the playback dac?

The real comparison is to compare the DSD retail product with the regular CD standard product, but as always we would need to know the provenance of the master and whether the the two processes were completed with the same degree of care and the same production values.

I read somewhere that mark knopfler him self mixed the 20th anniversary sacd that's the best provenance I can give you

I supose I should have said 'technical' provenance.

Mr Knopfler is known for his preference for vintage, analog equipment including an EMI console that I have actually used (in a limited manner) myself.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

The specific demonstration I alluded to was mixed live to DSD using a Sony recorder. it was also some years ago.

If commercial recordings are to be converted from PCM, I am strugling to see what the advantages, if any, actually are. Why not simply release the one 24/96 master and allow the conversion to DSD take place in the playback dac?

The real comparison is to compare the DSD retail product with the regular CD standard product, but as always we would need to know the provenance of the master and whether the the two processes were completed with the same degree of care and the same production values.

I read somewhere that mark knopfler him self mixed the 20th anniversary sacd that's the best provenance I can give you

I supose I should have said 'technical' provenance.

Mr Knopfler is known for his preference for vintage, analog equipment including an EMI console that I have actually used (in a limited manner) myself.

i find this ..... http://It should be noted that the original transfers were recorded digitally to the then new and pioneering Sony 16-bit 44.1kHz DASH format, which at the time only supported 24-tracks. Ainlay also faced the fact that pre-emphasis had been applied to the recordings on the DASH tapes. In essence, this was intended to help reduce PCM quantisation noise by basically boosting the high-end on record, and then decreasing it again, with the inverse slope to flatten the response back out on playback. Even today, the problem is there is no practical way to strip the emphasis whilst staying in the digital domain. In the end, the solution Ainlay came-up with was to use the machine’s analogue-outs which would output with the frequency response re-corrected on playback. Moreover, to achieve the best possible sound quality, the team used the latest model of Sony DASH machine they could lay their hands on: the 3348HR which used much better converters than those of the original 3324. The next stage was to directly feed the discrete multi-track output, along with the 24-track analogue slaves, into Apogee 16X converters and save everything onto hard disc using Steinberg’s latest Nuendo software running at 96kHz and 24-bit. The digital-audio-workstation (DAW) PC used was supplied by AMD and was equipped with dual Opteron 64-bit processors. While this process was underway, everything was locked to time-code to make sure it was all perfectly synchronised. Subsequently Ainlay A/B compared the captured tracks with the original master to make certain that the tracks he was using corresponded to the ones used on the original production.

 

[andyjm]

DXD sounds like it's the business!

So one can losslessly interconvert DSD->DXD->DSD...

Never heard of it before, but a bit of googling indicates it is high sample rate 24 bit PCM. Which I guess was the point I was making earlier on - you can't mix DSD.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

here is a link http://www.highfidelityreview.com/brothers-in-arms.html this will explan better how they did it *smile*

 

[BigH]

Is, ideally a full digital record playback system that does not, at any time, convert the signal to PCM.

I have heard, some time ago, a non-commercial DSD recording and playback system and it sounded quite superb, one of a handful of the best 'performances' I have ever heard.

At the time much was made of the fact that there was no PCM involved at all and that this was the primary reason for the very existance of the format.

It would be interesting to know if the DSD downloads (or SACDs for that matter) that are becoming more common are actual DSD recordings or if the DSD datastream has been obtained in some other way?

I do not believe it to be possible to mix a DSD stream, so unless the original recording was done using DSD and transferred with no mixing at all (which seems unlikely) then it will have had to be converted to / from PCM to mix.

The specific demonstration I alluded to was mixed live to DSD using a Sony recorder. it was also some years ago.

If commercial recordings are to be converted from PCM, I am strugling to see what the advantages, if any, actually are. Why not simply release the one 24/96 master and allow the conversion to DSD take place in the playback dac?

The real comparison is to compare the DSD retail product with the regular CD standard product, but as always we would need to know the provenance of the master and whether the the two processes were completed with the same degree of care and the same production values.

I read somewhere that mark knopfler him self mixed the 20th anniversary sacd that's the best provenance I can give you

Why is it so compressed, it only has a DR of 8 on the DRdatabase whilst the orinal cd has 16? I thought one of the points of SACD was you could have more dynamic range.

 

[Al ears]

Perhaps this may offer some clarification:-

http://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-can-i-record-mix-and-master-dsd

Some do indeed record directly to DSD, Blue Coast Records for one.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

Why is it so compressed, it only has a DR of 8 on the DRdatabase whilst the orinal cd has 16? I thought one of the points of SACD was you could have more dynamic range.

Fair point, but a dynaic range of 8 as compared to 16 does not make or break an SACD recording. I have it and it sounds amazing. To me, anyway. The mix makes it. Detailed, well thought out, and smooth.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

My Onkyo 805 receiver from 2007 (the first on sale in UK with Dolby and DTS lossless formats), also has DSD capability.

It has direct DSD to analogue capability.

I prefer to switch on (very carefully calibrated) Audyssey, and forego the DSD->Analogue and introduce the PCM stage to allow for Audyssey's excellent room correction software.

If I had, say, planar magnetic headphones, I would switch to pure DSD to analogue. Tried it with cheapo headphones and it was smoooooth stereo experience. But I prefer proper speakers.

 

[thewinelake.]

DXD sounds like it's the business!

So one can losslessly interconvert DSD->DXD->DSD...

Never heard of it before, but a bit of googling indicates it is high sample rate 24 bit PCM. Which I guess was the point I was making earlier on - you can't mix DSD.

indeed - I was just following up Spiny Norman's explanation which is essentially that if you throw enough bits at the problem quickly enough (and it's a lot of bits, very quickly!) the problem becomes tractable....

 

[BigH]

Why is it so compressed, it only has a DR of 8 on the DRdatabase whilst the orinal cd has 16? I thought one of the points of SACD was you could have more dynamic range.

Fair point, but a dynaic range of 8 as compared to 16 does not make or break an SACD recording. I have it and it sounds amazing. To me, anyway. The mix makes it. Detailed, well thought out, and smooth.

Thats true the DR is not everything but others will disagree about the sound quality, you are talking about the 2005 one? There are quite a few different SACDs. So you are talking about the 5.1 mix?

 

[FunkyMonkey]

Why is it so compressed, it only has a DR of 8 on the DRdatabase whilst the orinal cd has 16? I thought one of the points of SACD was you could have more dynamic range.

Fair point, but a dynaic range of 8 as compared to 16 does not make or break an SACD recording. I have it and it sounds amazing. To me, anyway. The mix makes it. Detailed, well thought out, and smooth.

Thats true the DR is not everything but others will disagree about the sound quality, you are talking about the 2005 one? There are quite a few different SACDs. So you are talking about the 5.1 mix?

I am talking about the 5.1 mix, yes. do not remember year, but probably correct. It is not the best SACD out there, but I like the mix, and therefore, I woudl play it over ANY 2 channel version of this album.