Can you *really* spot the differences between SACD, DVD-A and CD?

I can

But I'm afraid this is in part because of my inferior CD playback system, which consists of an old Luxman CDP.

I'm not sure about this. But I can pretty much tell apart a DVD-A, SACD, or even a DTS music disc from a CD. They sound... different. *Very* different. SACD and DVD-A sound completely analogue to me, while DTS music CD's are... I don't know. More realistic?

If I ever buy a good DAC, do you think I'll stop hearing so many differences between formats?

 

Sometimes I hear a real difference in favor of SACD. Why I don't know.

Richard.

 

Yes, as long as I am fully concentrating on the music. When I type my posts, I'm upstairs away from the stereo and not paying as close attentions.

But when I'm totally focused - yep!

 

I can certainly tell an SACD/DTS/DVD-A disc from a CD. But, I don't think I'd be able to tell an SACD from a DVD-A disc (aside from KNOWING which is which when I put it in the player). The dynamics are most noticable on the higher resolution formats, and it beats a CD quite handily

 

So far I've heard a bit more of a sense of ease about the music with SACD (I haven't heard enough DVD-A - either discs or players - to make any useful comments on that format). On the SACD players I've heard to date, the pace or momentum of the music hasn't been as good as with a good CD player

I need to add that the SACD players I'm talking about are of the Marantz 8260 class and above.

For the cheaper universal players, my (limited) experience is that SACD performance is not as good as CD performance on a Meridian class CD player.

 

I hear differences between SACD or DVD-Audio and CD. The difference can be quite striking. SACD and DVD-Audio often sound more three-dimensional and more natural than CD.

 

I have compared the same recording (from an original 16/44.1 or 48 PCM DAT master) on standard CD, SACD (HDCD encoded redbook layer) and SACD (DSD layer). Differences were next to none to me, what I was hearing was probably only the format conversion process... Of course, with real high resolution recordings this may look quite different... As soon as I have the opportunity to listen to THE SAME RECORDING (DSD or Hi-Rez PCM, downsampled to CD) I will try again...

 

I played Gabriels Security the other day on SACD, and the first few times I never really noticed a BIG difference between the cd and the SACD....but I played it fairly loud this time and what grabbed me was the dynamics....BIG dynamic range....I also notice quite a difference between my Norah redbook cd and SACD...more definition in the vocals and instruments.

I have yet to compare the cd layer of Alison Krauss' New Favorite with the Hi Rez layer...I'm sure it's very noticeable. I've A/B'd Rumours cd vs DVD-A for friends and they notice the difference. Then I play the 5.1 and they freak.

 

With regards to analog master tapes that receive a *good* digital transfer and mastering there should not by any discernable sonic difference between the formats.

For example, I have a/b'd Neil Young's Harvest DVD-A and CD side by side with no discernable difference. Same goes for the SACD/CD of Santana Abraxas. Even the SACD of Stravinsky's Rite Of Spring does not offer any sonic epiphany to Sony's late 80s CD version that should warrant an upgrade.

The the good old 16/44 CD format is still more than adequate for these old analog master tapes.

I have not had a chance to compare true hi-rez digital recordings yet so I cannot comment on that.

Thom

 

It depends on the title. There are some in which I can hear almost no difference between an SACD and a CD. But when I do notice it, it's enough to make me glad I got into the format.

 

Are you kidding??? You have just picked 2 of the discs that I use to show off how much BETTER they sound than their CD counterparts. I have also A-B'd them & I find a HUGE difference, esp. with Harvest. People who don't usually care about sound quality have easily noticed the difference. And both destroy any vinyl copies I have ever heard (and I have 1st pressings of both).

 

When doing comparisons between discs that stem from the same master (and mastering engineer), I definately hear improvements with the higher rez format. However, I couldn't classify them as "night and day" or "revolations" as many people do. What I notice are incremental improvements in detail and not much more. They are subtle, but important to me. I love hi rez.

For the record, my hearing has been tested recently and is essentially perfect and while my equipment isn't the highest of the high end, I think it's safe to say, I'm getting all I can of a given disc.

 

As Dave(d64) mentioned above, and what I've believed for some time, is you really have to turn up the volume to hear everything come together. Dynamics, distortion (or lack of it), etc. The better the system, the louder (usually) you can go, and still sound "clean" and accurate. I personally cannot tell much difference between an SACD layer and a CD layer at low volumes. The dynamics don't fully come out until it's "cranked up" to fill the room. I do all my evaluations at louder volumes - be it cables/electronics or Gold CDs or HiRez, etc.

Oh yeah, all IMHO

 

My point, exactly. If I ever bought a good DAC, an upsampler, or the like, would I approach hi-res performance with common CD's?

I think I could justify buying a really, really good CD player if this is the case.

 

Any good mid-price CD player will do fine.

Thom

 

Since the bulk of most people's listening will still be cds for the foreseeable future, it is still a good idea to invest in the best cd player you can afford - the source is always the most important component in my book. However, don't be taken in by the marketing term "upsampler". They do nothing to increase resolution of cds and while some may sound good, you are arguably doing damage (ie changing) to the signal by changing the sampling rate to anything other than a multiple of the original. While 96k may make good marketing, you are better off oversampling to 88k (twice the sampling of cd).

Take a look here for a start:

http://www.resolutionaudio.com/Up-Oversampling.pdf

 

I recently upgraded my DAC and have noticed startling differences in CD playback. My opinion? If your current CDP has a digital out, keep it as a transport and get a [good] DAC.

 

On what do you base that opinion? Of course "any" player will do fine, but Javier is looking to do better than *that.*

 

A good test of hearing the format difference between redbook and SACD is/are any of Steve's hybrid Discs. The redbook layer of 'Willy & the (m) Poor Boys' is superb and the music shines. Play the SACD layer and you hear a band playing in the living room and a front seat ticket at the gig.

 

Huh? Some tapes are amazing and deserve more than 16/44.1. Who wants adequate? Not me. I want outstanding sound.

Regards,
Geoff

 

Please explain where you're getting (non-digital) master tapes with
greater than 90dB dynamic range.

Thom

 

IMHO, it's unlikely that you'll hear any improvement beyond say the Arcam CD-82T or Sony NS-905V. Or if you want to go all out get the Arcam CD-92T.

Spend your *real* dough where it matters - on speakers.

Thom

 

Plenty of improvement possible beyond those very good Arcam players. Arcam's own FMJ CD33, Meridian 507 and 588, a couple of Naims, and that's before you get into the really expensive CD players.

 

Ah, I forgot about those Meridians. Thanks for reminding me. Excellent players as well.

Thom

 

And if you have great speakers, what then?

You can't speak for others like that. You can say "I can't hear any improvement beyond say the Arcam CD-82T ...", but it's impossible to say how others perceive.

Regards,
Geoff