2. digital
  3. 129519-33969

Hi-res digital audio vs sacd

I've got a pretty good setup for vinyl and digital audio files, but I have an opportunity to get a "minty" 10-yr old audiophile-grade CD/SACD player for $350. I am intrigued by it but don't know if it would really give me any better quality for some recordings than what I already have. Also, I know that SACD didn't really catch on, but I see tons of audiophile-quality releases out there from MFSL, etc.

The player I'm looking at seems to be both an amazing, rock solid transport with a Cirrus Logic 32 bit DSD chip.

My digital setup is currently a Bluesound Vault II, pushing out FLAC files of various quality up to 24-bit 192KHz to a Cary DAC-100t tube DAC (which does not have DSD support, so I am guessing that I wouldn't be able to leverage it for the SACD player), using a Creative Cable Green Hornet coax in between the two.

Can anyone chime in with their opinion, both on what I should consider in terms of quality comparing the two as well as music collection availability on SACD vs hi-res files that are sold online through HDtracks and other vendors (like I know some mastering houses have their own releases on SACD but not sure if the same music/mastering is available on digital files).
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xblisshifi
blisshifi's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
blisshifi OP
1,202 posts
 
Thanks guys, for all of this perspective. Yeah, I've decided to pass on the SACD player, simply because I don't listen to that much classical, and it seems not worth the investment just to have a few recordings/masters that might not be available elsewhere. I'm satisfied with the quality and collection of lossless files, but truthfully, I listen 85% through vinyl, so my money is probably best spent elsewhere. :)

@mmeysarosh thank you for the illuminating insight into DSD conversion and the introduction of noise. I always thought it was a native format from the start, either from analog masters or new recordings. I had heard about the amount of converted PCM, but never thought that the conversion would add noise. Nonetheless, I wouldn't ever want to buy SACDs that were just converted, upsampled CDs in the first place.
wcc10
119 posts
 
The actual recording can either be good or not so good no matter the format. It depends on the original. Also, in the case of remastered works, the engineer doing the remastering make a difference also. I my limited opinion. I have SACD, DSD, FLAC playback capabilities. Some are good, some bad, a few great!
randy-11
1,913 posts
 
yes, well put

the problem is how to determine the well mastered, well recorded releases BEFORE you buy
erik_squires
16,176 posts
 
I'd save your money.

There are a number of great DAC's out in the last 5 years. Shiit and Mytek are among them.

Best,

E
dcbingaman
93 posts
 
SACD makes sense for one genre of music - classical.  The SACD catalog is deep and diverse in this genre.  Also, much of it is 5.1 multi-channel (MCH).  

Digital downloads and streaming (Tidal, etc.) are indeed on the upswing, but they still trail CD sales, and there are very few MCH digital downloads.  Digital streaming in stereo may someday include embedded 5.1 via DTS Neural, but that has not happened yet.  

Also digital downloads are still primarily a US phenomena - much of the rest of the world is still wedded to the silver discs which are cheap to make, not vulnerable to power or RAID failures, and not dependent on fast Internet connections.  Considering all of this, if I were a classical fan I would have two "antique" devices in my rig - a vinyl turntable, and an SACD player.  (Since I am, I do !)
More to discover