SACD? Who needs it

pf · 15 May 2002, 16:35 Wednesday

Yeah Lex but any idea how much those XRCD's cost. ~$25 a pop I believe. Of course there should be a bigger selection than the current SACD but with the multi-channel...

In fact I recently chose the SACD/HDCD 'Jazz @ Pawnshop' over the XRCD version for a measely $5 difference.

PF

**Andrew Pratt** · 15 May 2002, 16:40 Wednesday

While doing that thing we don't like to talk about in the "library"

Sure enough, the old noodle didn't fail me

but I did get our attention, huh?

Umm just what were you doing Doug :LOL:

**Lex** · 15 May 2002, 17:13 Wednesday

Point taken Po-ming. However, for those of us without SACD, and SACD not in the forseable future, it's nice to know they are working on ways to improve redbook!

Andrew, if that was what I was up to, it would be a different magazine, ROFLMAO :rf

Lex

**JonMarsh** · 15 May 2002, 18:20 Wednesday

Originally posted by Lex

Point taken Po-ming. However, for those of us without SACD, and SACD not in the forseable future, it's nice to know they are working on ways to improve redbook!

I know I'm sounding more and more like a broken record, but let's go round the May pole one more time.

Most folks don't know how good CD can sound, not just because of the encoding limitations in a lot of conventional mass produced CD's, but because of significant performance limitations in most CD players or DAC's.

SACD *is* a more transparent digitial format, but IMO, no one knows how good it is, because no one has built an SACD player as good as the best CD playback systems. This is not just a matter of cost, but a matter of design concepts and execution. I believe I can safely say this, because players like the Sony SCD777ES, which uses the same DAC's and output signal path for CD as SACD, *does* sound better on good SACD recordings than the down converted CD version, but it's CD reproduction *doesn't* match the better and best CD playback available- not really surprising, considering all the opamps in the signal path, and other design issues. It's a great player for a relative mass mass market device; and the transport build quality is marvelous- if they'd only approached a few other things differently.

XRCD is as much about fastidious attention to quality control as it is anything else; something missing with a lot of early and even recent CD releases. I have quite a few XRCD disks, and they do sound very good- better than standard releases, hands down.

But, I've found that when you have a really good DAC and transport, even older not so great releases sound a lot better than on any equipment previously, and all disks bring a considerably greater part of the musical experience to bear, in a much more "analog" sense of playback than I would have thought possible two years ago. That is something I'm really enjoying- getting away from the HiFi demo disk focus, and finding a much more musical experience on all my CD's.

Regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**Lex** · 16 May 2002, 08:15 Thursday

Perhaps so John. Nice writeup, and good points made. I do have respect for the format, and someday, it may be right for me. That day has not come.

I won't buy a Sony player though, which doesn't leave me a whole lot of options at this stage of the game for SACD. Also, we've covered this before as well. SACD will never replace redbook. Simply, it's a supplement to it.

I would however someday like to hear Kind of Blue in SACD, on my system for comparison purposes.

As to SACD doing normal CD better than a good redbook player, I would have to be convinced of that as well. I am not sure it could beat my Jupiter, that performs very VERY well.

Lex

**David Meek** · 16 May 2002, 08:24 Thursday

Originally posted by Jon

significant performance limitations in most CD players or DAC's

Jon, didn't you recently get a Musical Fidelity AC-3 external DAC?

David - HTGuide flunky
Our "Theater"
Our DVDs on DVD Tracker

**Kevin P** · 16 May 2002, 09:10 Thursday

Sounds cool, I'll have to check out XRCD for meeself. Maybe down the road we'll have the ultimate in audio nirvana--XRSACD? 8O

Lex, Sony's not the only maker of SACD players. Philips makes them, as does Pioneer and (I think) Marantz. The Sony ES gear is very nice too, much better built than the regular Sony stuff.

Official Computer Geek and Techno-Wiz Guru of HTGuide - Visit Tower of Power
My HT Site

**Lex** · 16 May 2002, 10:36 Thursday

Yes Kevin, I am aware there are other brands, and while I don't have anything personally against the Sony's, for me it's a personal decision regarding Sony reliability. I have not had reliable service with Sony for a long time. Pioneer Elite might be good for me, but the day I look for is when Rega, and some others get into SACD.

I also look for library expansion, as I won't make the move for 10 great discs to me. Out of current selection, not sure how many I would buy, but odds are, it's not to many.

Hey, I am all for the format, I hope it plays out over DVD-A. If it does, then someday, it likely will be in my system.

Lex

**JonMarsh** · 16 May 2002, 10:56 Thursday

Originally posted by David Meek

Originally posted by Jon

significant performance limitations in most CD players or DAC's

Jon, didn't you recently get a Musical Fidelity AC-3 external DAC?

Hi David,

No, though I've heard a lot of good things about the new Music fidelity DAC, I built a kit DAC from a company in Netherlands, APN Hawk Audio, because in perusing their site and details about the design and audio circuits, (inlcuding a basic schematic for their analog output stage), I saw they were doing things very similar to some stuff I'd been working on for power amp and preamp designs (non-loop feedback discrete circuits).

I detailed my initial experiences with building and listening to the MP-DAC II in this thread, and a follow up with their very modified Philips CD player as a transport in this thread.

My "standard of reference" for CD playback is the Ayre D1, which I've listened to at length on a number of occasions in systems I'm familiar with, with electronics pretty much identical to what I use- that you can find out about it here , as well as download a recent review from Widescreen magazaine in PDF format.

I"ve built ThomasW one of these DAC's (it's only available in kit form, with or without a chasis), and another should arrive in the next day or two, for another friend of Tom's. (getting to be too much of a cottage industry, I'm afraid!

Regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

pf · 16 May 2002, 10:58 Thursday

Lex, I agree we need some kinda shootout b/w a good (~$1000) CD player vs mediocra (~$500) SACD player each with their respective software to see which sounds better.

As you know I have the Pioneer ELITE 47A all purpose player & so far am quite happy with it's overall performance. I've also signed up with Dan Wright for his upcoming mod and will see how close that'll bring the Pioneer up to the Sonys' level.

PF

**David Meek** · 16 May 2002, 12:14 Thursday

Jon, that's right. Now I remember your post about it. Apologies.

David - HTGuide flunky
Our "Theater"
Our DVDs on DVD Tracker

**LarryB** · 16 May 2002, 12:43 Thursday

Jon:

I agree with you completely and have voiced the same arguments in the past, in other forums. However, whenever I say that my CD playback is superior to virtually any existing SAACD playback, everyone pretends like I'm not even there.

Nice to know I'm not alone.

Larry

**JonMarsh** · 16 May 2002, 15:31 Thursday

Hi Larry,

I do get odd looks when some folks hear that I have an SCD777ES sitting on the bottom of my rack, not normally hooked up.

It's a good CD player for the money, compared to most things, and as I said before, it's clear that judging by how much better SACD sounds on it than CD (considering they're running through the same DAC and analog electronics), it's obvious SACD has great potential, but it hasn't been reached yet.

And while many SACD players are better than quite a few CD players, (because the CD players suffer from some of the same faults- relatively high jitter in transport and/or converter, op-amp I/V converters, Op-amp output drivers, electrolytic signal coupling caps, etc), the one's I've heard so far don't match the best CD playback available at roughly the same price.

I've come around to the same view as my old friend Charles Hansen (the chief designer at Ayre) that I'd rather have really first class CD, and for now, there isn't any first class SACD available.

Of course, this has encourage a big market in mods for SACD players. The problem is, upgrading passive components and opamps doesn't really fix the fact that you've still got an opamp output stage. Not completely. (of course, there never is a "complete" fix, but that's another matter

Adding a precision clock doesn't fix signal degradation in the clock path if each major digital pin isn't individually regulated and bypassed with very low impedance components and layout. It's a partial bandaid, not a real fix.

Lex, I agree we need some kinda shootout b/w a good (~$1000) CD player vs mediocra (~$500) SACD player each with their respective software to see which sounds better.

You know, I see how this could be a fun way to spend an evening, particularly if you have a nice snifter of brandy, and some good tunes available, but really, what's the point? Why not compare a $1000 CD player with a $1000 SACD player, since the SACD player essentially does everything the CD player does, but throws in SACD for free?

The unfortunate trend in the market place is away from quality CD players, to combination DVD/CD/SACD players that are built to a price point- usually low. They offer remarkable mid-fi performance at a relatively low price point, with questionable longevity, considering build quality. Though I know Lex has issues with Sony, I've had genearally quite good experiences with them. The 333 and 555 offer better than average buld quality at their price points. Denon and Onkyo, as well as Toshiba, offer more "premium" models, but they're still not really breaking out of the pack in sound quality (IMO- YMMV

.

I guess that's why I've gotten involved with what some would call kind of "tweako" products, in order to get the best performance I can afford.

With Ayre's imminent introduction of the CX-7 with excellent CD playback at a fraction of the price of their D1 DVD/CD unit, I think really excellent CD playback performance will become more affordable for a wider audience. We're still not talking mass market, but pricing that's at the low end of "high end", with excellent build quality and esthetics.

Regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**Lex** · 17 May 2002, 08:21 Friday

Wow Jon, I was a little surprised to read that post. Last I heard, you were singing the praises for SACD all the way around. Good to see your objectively seeing things well enough to make changes in your own views. However, your SACD player on the bottom unplugged? I was more than a little surprised to hear that!

Ayre seems to be building some nice stuff, not saying that's the only "nice stuff" out there. I have no experience with their CD players or as far as that goes, any of their products.

As to the Sony thing, I really think it more of a personal curse than anything, I don't know. I do know it's quite unusual to have 2 RPTVs go out in less than 3 months. Those were Sony XBR. My Sony S7000 freezes on dual layer discs now. Even my clock radio has part of a LED panel burned out. How does that happen? LOL. My MD player was screwed up right out of the box. My portable screwed up within 6 months. A Mavica digital camera that took horrible pictures! That one went back. Anyway suffice it to say, I am not real keen on having that much tear up.

As to SACD, again, I think when Rega, Theta, and some others begin to build true high end pieces, the lure will become stronger for me. That and an improved catalog. I sure am enjoying my Rega Jupiter! The best CD player for the money? Maybe. Then again, maybe the Ayre would beat it in a spin off. I can't say. I can say using it's internal DACs, the sound quality is quite excellent on my system.

Lex

**ThomasW** · 17 May 2002, 09:35 Friday

Lex

Jon's not putting down SACD. In a A/B shootout (identical recordings on Redbook vs SACD), SACD still sounds better. He's stating that the SACD playback machines aren't up to their full potential when compared to the more mature and higher priced Redbook products for Redbook playback. SACD has only been on the market about 3yrs, Redbook machines have existed for around 20yrs.

I have Jon's Hawk Audio MP-DAC III running with my big 'stat's. It does sound sweeter than the stock Sony 777ES Redbook playback. But it better given that an assembled version of the Hawk DAC would cost $1000+. I only paid $1700 for the entire 777ES machine. We're going to go in and mod the transport section of the 777ES's. That should improve both SACD and Redbook playback.

theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

**LarryB** · 17 May 2002, 15:31 Friday

Thomas and Lex:

Here's my take on the situation: SACD is inherently a better format than CD. However, because SACD is so new, and because most of the SACD players are inexpensive, the best sound still derives from CD, though this necessitates the use of top-notch (and expensive) equipment. As SACD players mature, as more high-end companies (like Linn, Ayre, NAIM, etc.) begin to produce machines, and if-and-when a digital output becomes available (thus allowing the use of external processors), SACD (or DVD-A) will become the medium of choice for those seeking the very best in digital sound.

Larry

**JonMarsh** · 17 May 2002, 15:45 Friday

Amen.

-Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**ThomasW** · 17 May 2002, 18:34 Friday

Larry

I thnk you got it right......

I do very much enjoy the SACd's I have. And will continue to build the collection. But since getting the Hawk Dac I'm now listening to more CD's using the SACD transport.

We'll be tweaking the 777ES transport mechanism now that we've seen what's involved. Jon tore apart the Hawk transport he bought and we're going to use some of their ideas to modify the 777's.

theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

**Lex** · 17 May 2002, 22:09 Friday

Thomas, that's sort of what I gathered from what Jon said, however, it is in a direct reverse from the praise sung about the SACD machines at first.

Larry, good synopsis.

I made my own conclusions based upon just good sound reasoning that a great redbook player would still give me more personal enjoyment if buy ing one or the other, and after owning the jupiter, I can safely say I think I made the right decision. Especially considering I paid 1200 bucks for a 1900 player.

Lex

**ThomasW** · 18 May 2002, 02:15 Saturday

Jon's 777ES statements were that they had the best Redbook playback he'd heard to date. It was 2yrs ago when he bought his player. Redbook technology and SACD technology are on the industry fast track. So it doesn't surprise me that he's found a DAC with the newest Crystal chips is superior to a 2 yr old 777ES; that actually contains 3 yr old chip technology, given the industry lead times.

Also I should add that the differences between the 777ES Redbook and the MP-DAC are fairly subtle. And would only be audible on better high resolution systems.

And I've yet to hear any CD than even with the MP-DAC sounds better than a SACD version of the same recording. There is a benefit to having 10X more data in the recording.

theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

**Lex** · 18 May 2002, 11:50 Saturday

Ok Thomas, Points taken, I bet that is a heckuva dac and yes, technology does change. But that's a good thing.

Lex

**JonMarsh** · 18 May 2002, 19:52 Saturday

Hmmm, better put some things in a little more accurate perspective.

It's not so much the digital chipsets, in my opinion, as it is a variety of details of the overall implementation, including fanatical/heroic supply regulation on a pin by pin basis (for suppression of signal correlated jitter) and the use of a NLFB analog amplifier - no opamps or electrolytic caps in the signal path. On that regard, the SCD7777ES (originally introduced at $3500) and most $2500 and under CD players don't quite cut the mustard.

The MP DAC actually uses a five year old Crystal Semiconductor chip set, the 8412 reciever, and the 4390 48 kHz 24 bit DAC.

It does use an input coupling wide band pulse transformer, unusual at this price point, which eliminates ground loops between the digital source and the DAC, and isolates for noise. Usually this is only done on AES/EBU balanced inputs.

It has individual transformers and individual regulated power supplies for all power voltage, using a comination of series pass and shunt regulators, which makes the power supply operate effectively in "class A", as the signal variations in supply current are only a small percentage of the total supply current.

It uses regulated 25 volt rails for the full complementary discrete analog stage; which is a non-loop feedback type without an output coupling cap; in normal operation, the full output signal currents are true class A, being only about 1/10th the idling bias current.

Now, what would really be interesting would be an MP-DAC like approach, with the Crystal 8420 used as a receiver/de-jitterer, and the CS83122 24 bit 192 kHz DAC doing the main honors; let's follow that with a full balanced analog stage using transformer coupling with Jensen JT-11SSF-8MA transformers betwen the DAC output and the analog buffer/gain stage; for good measure, let's use a complementary cascode input for that stage with Toshiba 2SK389 and 2SJ109, with 2SC3281 and 2SA1306 for the output stage.

That combo could even have a DSD input (the chip supports it), but you'd have to take it off the Sony SCD777ES with some digital differential transceivers and pulse transformers; it's not a plug and play interface.

And I agree completely that it does require a high res system to fully appreciate these improvements; when we have the AragonXmod up and running, then ThomasW's living room sytem will be a much better candidate.

Regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**Chip** · 29 May 2002, 12:11 Wednesday

Lex,

I currently have two pieces from Sony that'll due sacd. The S9000ES which is strictly used for dvd playback and the SCD-C555ES multichannel sacd player which is mostly used as a redbook player. I just finished listening to some two channel sacd in pure direct mode on my 5803 and i'm impressed. Wonderful sound. I'd never buy a Sony reciever but, the 555 is a helluva piece. Don't have many sacd's.... because their just isn't much of a selection for me. If there was, i'd buy more. I guess my point is , is that this Sony sacd player is a great redbook player imo. As i type, i'm listening to a regular cd via Dolby Headphone and Pure Direct... sounds real good! I hope more and more sacd's get released that i'd wanna own. Think i have four right now (but many more cd's).

Chip Engle

"Concrete ain't a spectator sport"

<a href="http://www.htguide.com/bilder/index.cfm?fuseaction=arkivbilder&userid=0&selected userid=336" target="_blank">My HT

**Kevin P** · 29 May 2002, 20:52 Wednesday

Chip, a curious question. How do the 9000ES and the 555ES compare in terms of playback performance for Redbook and 2 channel SACD? I'm wondering if one sounds better, or different, from the other.

KJP

Official Computer Geek and Techno-Wiz Guru of HTGuide - Visit Tower of Power
My HT Site

**Chip** · 30 May 2002, 14:28 Thursday

Kevin,

The 555 sounds cleaner too me however with 2 channel sacd the 9K is quite capable. Redbook, the 555 wins hands down IMO. They both sound like high end Sony too me. I would never have bought anything Sony if it didn't sound so good!

Chip Engle

"Concrete ain't a spectator sport"

<a href="http://www.htguide.com/bilder/index.cfm?fuseaction=arkivbilder&userid=0&selected userid=336" target="_blank">My HT

SACD? Who needs it

SACD? Who needs it

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment