Home Hi-Rez Highway

New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Hi-Rez Highway ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Thanks for your reponses. Two observations.

First, in my original post I was not claiming to have conducted a rigorously controlled, double blind, highly structured listening test. Given my own curiousity regarding the reproduced sonic of the same performances derived from the same masters in different formats, my purpose was simply to report on what one of you called my "experience". And it remains clear to me that, on my system, the SACD versions sounded markedly better than the SKM-CD and RBCD version for the reasons I enumerated -- accuracy of tonality, instrumental differentiation, life-like presence with the music, etc.

Second, the point has been raised questioning whether certain players are more optimized for SACD while others are designed more for RBCD reproduction. On this subject, I think my comparison has something to say.

My player is the APL NWO 3.0 SE, which we in the San Diego Music and Audio Guild have rated very highly for both RBCD and SACD reproduction. In one blind listening test a year ago, with several members present, the NWO was evaluated as equal or superior to a first class vinyl rig on identical performances. It is important to recognize one key design characteristics of the NWO. The NWO does not have a discrete DSD decoder. Rather, after trying many options, Alex determined that he could obtain the best sonics by converting the DSD stream into a 176KHz/24bit data stream and then upsamling it to 195KHz/32bits. This is important not only because it achieved optimum SACD reproduction, but because the NWO also upsamples the PCM date stream identically to the same 195KHz/32bit stream. In short, PCM and DSD are processed in an identical manner, utilizing the same conversion, clocking, tube output, etc. Therefore, I think we can conclude that the NWO is not only optimized for RBCD and SACD, but that the processing is identical.

Once we remove the consideration of alternate hardware processing from the equation, we are left with the obvious conclusion: the biggest difference between RBCDs and SACDs, assuming proper engineering and mastering, is that DSD simply contains more information on the disc than PCM. And to me, that explains advantage of SACD, assuming that all other factors of recording and processing are equivalent.

Therefore, I stand by the results of my original comparison.

Pete

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Kimber Kable  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]