I recently tried to discover exactly why I don't like SACD so much. Apart from the fact that it just doesn't sound right to me, that is. Well, for the test I took Depeche Mode's "Ultra" SACD/DTS-DVD edition, and ran in the first track from the SACD and then the first track from the DTS-DVD. On examination of the files, the SACD has around 70dB of dynamic range. The DTS-DVD has over 100dB of dynamic range. The SACD has a stack of noise from 23KHz upwards. The DTS-DVD does not. Same results from all SACD>PCM recordings - limited dynamics, massive amounts of Ultrasonic noise. The best way I can describe the difference in sound quality is that the DTS-DVD sounds less edgy & harsh by comparison too. We've done tests on people and not told them what is what, just played 2 versions of the same tracks & let them make their own minds up. Conclusion is that SACD just is not all it is cracked up to be. One more odd thing. Our cats will sit in the room with DTS-DVD and DVD-A. Play an SACD, and they leave in about a minute. Happens every time.
funny that- to me its the other way round..dts is compressed like ac3 ..so basically you are not getting the whole thing whereas sacd is uncompressed..so hardly a fair comparison..time to get a new amp eh?
On my player I have an option for turning on a low-pass filter to reduce those upper frequencies. Maybe your player has this option?
Might have guessed. Nothing wrong with the amp - try reading the post again. With SACD there are massive amounts of ultrasonic noise that pervade right down into the audible bands reducing dynamic range & adding irritation. DTS 96/24 - albeit lossy - sounds better & has more dynamic range. Fact.
yeah but it's still compressed...bit like mp3 eh? after all if it's lossy you are not getting your moneys worth..bit like buying a car and having the wheels taken off...
wilkes, your a talented individual but I disagree! I think it is more interesting that your cats leave the room during an SACD than stay in the room with other formats. To me it that proves not only does SACD reproduces what other formats can't (for better or worse) but also that SACD is so real its scary -Ced
nice one diablos - we win ! nyah nyah! (1) ok is there a open source dts 96/26 encoder - apart from the expensive dts master suite..which needs hardware dongle as protection (2) btw heard of late theres been 'crack' of sacd thats 'been know about for years' its to do with DSD to PCM transfer -maybe to so with certain decks eh onkyo etc (3)the only way ive found to rip dts cd's is to re record them using creative media source app (damn clever - how do they do that multichannel record ? and with no cables?) i notice there was no comparison between sacd and dvd audio /mlp of which seems to be taking off at long last eg mlp in latest vlc player (shame playback only in stereo - btw why mlp load in eac app but er what do you do with it after that?..it wont convert in that app to anythng else...then again dvd explorer does that ok..er anyone know where to get extract/convert DSD material?? to/from i thnk we should be told...
wilkes are you sure that SACD only has a 70dB dynamic range? that sounds awfully low to me...I thought it was much higher.
if you look at5 the litarature that come with SACD's eg TELARC to name but a few I'm sure you will see such things like ''in excess of 100db'' mentioned now either these established companies are telling the truth...thus asking for anyone to put it to the test...then why make these claims on their inlays?...there is some literature on DSD format btw...its a interchange file format
