SACD is VERY confusing

There are thousands of people out there buying SACDs

I think you mean hundreds. 

Never really understood why Sony/Philips did this.

Isn't the point to sell SACD's? Making it difficult for people to hear them at their best by putting up roadblocks doesn't seem like much of a business plan.

@tony1954   A good question. Possibly because the old factor of....greed, got the better of them. Cut off their nose to spite their face! Not the first time a large company( ies) have done this...and won't be the last.

The whole SACD thing was developed mostly for 5.1 and 7.1 surround sound with HDMI equipped multi channel AV receivers. The designers never even thought about 2 channel HiFi....The audiophile community realized that there was huge potential for more "bits" than a standard Red Book CD....But unless you are willing to spend thousands, there is no way to really appreciate SACD....An Oppo CD player with an OppoMod board installed to extract i2s data and then a $5000 DAC to use the i2s stream......Easy Peasy!

I have the following device that takes the SACD DSD signal from my cheap OPPO player and decodes the DSD.

GeerFab Audio D.BOB Digital BreakOut Box – Upscale Audio

This DSD is them sent to my Schitt Yggi+ Less is More DAC via SPDIF. I think that part is DSD over PCM (or something similar). 

The sound is pretty spectacular. My frame of reference for SACD is my recently departed modded Sony SCD-1. In some ways the D.BOB setup is better (more detail) and in others the SCD-1 was better. I was considering adding a SACD/CD option for a DAC I am about to get ($6k option) but after the D.BOB I have no interest.

Isn't this the problem that DoP solves?

Isn't the point to sell SACD's? Making it difficult for people to hear them at their best by putting up roadblocks doesn't seem like much of a business plan.
 

A good question. Possibly because the old factor of....greed, got the better of them. Cut off their nose to spite their face!

+1 @daveyf  and @tony1954 It’s really like a Betamax redux.  What’s the definition of insanity?

@OP The point of the restriction was to stop people making bit perfect copies of recordings from SACD that could subsequently be pirated.

We have to remember that SACD was around at the time that the controversy over illegal file sharing was at its height and before legal streaming was in existence.

You may or may not like him, but Paul from PS Audio sums it all up beatifully, in under 6 minutes!...

I output DSD from my Oppo 105 into my Bryston DAC 3 over HDMI.  The Bryston cost me $3K at the time and has gone up..  There were other DACs that had HDMI inputs at the time.  I remember an NAD DAC that was cheaper than the Bryston getting a thumbs up from Stereophile

  Before I got the Bryston I just used the internal DAC on the Oppo and outputted over the analog output.  I seem to be missing something here, as the OP considers using the analog output as unacceptable . Not sure how that violates copyright as any recording made from analog output is an analog, not digital, recording 

  Of course one an output the HDMI into a AVR, but that is a separate can of worms

OP, others

When seeking a ’new to me’ SACD/CD Player, I found out about this DSD to PCM issue.

I started a similar discussion, some people mentioned specific models that output DSD there. It was mentioned somewhere, that using DSD in the production process was beneficial to the content even if converted to PCM output.

the quote below matched my experience listening to SACD: Quieter Noise Floor is about it

"

"Comparison with CD

In September 2007, the Audio Engineering Society published the results of a year-long trial, in which a range of subjects including professional recording engineers were asked to discern the difference between high-resolution audio sources (including SACD and DVD-Audio) and a compact disc audio (44.1 kHz/16 bit) conversion of the same source material under double-blind test conditions. Out of 554 trials, there were 276 correct answers, a 49.8% success rate corresponding almost exactly to the 50% that would have been expected by chance guessing alone.^[38] When the level of the signal was elevated by 14 dB or more, the test subjects were able to detect the higher noise floor of the CD-quality loop easily."

.....................

articles I found back then

as any recording made from analog output is an analog, not digital, recording 

Exactly!...My point is lots of fo9lks think they are listening to pure DSD files.....But they are really listening to a cheap DAC chip in most cases if they are using RCA analog outputs. Some have suggested that the sound actually improves if using Coax output playing Red Book CD into a good DAC.....At 44.1

Roy,
Some SACD players’ analog outputs were not cheap.  Sony as usual launched the format with a no holds barred implementation at a hefty price, and over a few years brought it down to Earth, with attendant compromises.  HDMI 1.2a introduced DSD playback.  I can play an SACD into my Sony AVR in full digital to digital, or use the LDAC of my UBPX1000, but in my “better” 2 channel system….Tidal is the best choice!

Interesting conversation here. But other than a few manufacturers still producing SACD players and selling them at considerable expense over regular Redbook players or transports, is there any reason today, here in 2023, to buy one?

I mean, why not just buy the DSD files online and put them on external storage plugged into a DAC that can handle DSD *natively* all the way through to the output stage without any conversion to PCM or DoP?

I was always under the impression, perhaps wrongly, that SACD is pretty much a dead format as far as any mainstream music goes.

Sony killed it by all the DRM restrictions it had. And we can blame the RIAA for part of it too. The idea of putting out such high-quality files of their master tapes in a digital format that might be copied scared the crap out of them. Hence it was crippled.

Yes, there are "special" labels putting them out such as Octave Records and some small classical outfits, but those old copyright issues caused by Sony that are still in place seem to be too much trouble, requiring you to jump through hoops to get a marginal increase in sound quality. SACD is what, DSD64? But you can get files that are even higher bit rates in DSD if you want today that at least in theory on a really good system and assuming you have great ears, that can sound better.

You are not far from the truth. But the convenience of a CD is pretty strong. And you can find new SACDs here and there pretty cheap. DSD downloads are expensive. And its a hobby….there is some fun in yhe HUNT for SACDs

@rbertalotto OK, I could see that...the thrill of the chase to find something, just as many do with trying to find 1st pressings of vinyl albums in VG+ condition. 

The SACD multi channel layer of a SACD disc can be played

- if the SACD player has a full set of 5.1 channel RCA analog outputs

- and the AV Receiver has a full set of 5.1 channel RCA analog inputs

AFAIK, multi channel doesn't work with a HDMI connection.

Yes, I was aware of this from very beginning of using my SACD player. All you need to do is just read manual before using, however my player (Cambridge CXU) won’t even let me play SACD through any other connection except HDMI. The signal won’t even pass through. 

My above comment refers to DSD output. Output trough HDMI is of course possible, but DSD will be converted to PCM.

+1 on the PS Audio explanation.

I use the hdmi from a Sony BluRay player (x1000es)  into a Moon 390 and it decodes at DSD (when available) and sounds pretty swell. (You have to fiddle a bit with the x1000)

But... how many DACs, let alone preamps, have an hdmi board capable of DSD?

So, yes, it is confusing. I think the reason SACD players are so pricey is that you MUST use the internal dac to hear the SACD layer.

I’m not using the models discussed but I do have and play SACDs on a McIntosh MCD85 SACD/CD player. It was high priced considering other SACD/CD models available. I have it connected to a McIntosh MA352 IA via balanced cables (2 channel only).

• The MCD85 has an disc layer selection button, but auto detects an SACD and displays an SACD indicator light on the display. 
• There’s a noticeable difference audio between CD and SACD; a "good" SACD is equal to a premium vinyl recording in depth and details.
• But like vinyl, not all SACDs are equal in recording and quality; some just sound like CDs. Good SACDs are outstanding.
• SACD availability is very limited; mostly found online at stores like Music+, local record stores don’t carry them.
• Given the costs of equipment, cables and SACDs its a luxury option for great sound.

Well, after following this thread thus far I have to agree that SACD is very confusing. 

Denon SACD players only play the SACD layer through the Sony S400 output which was inputted on the surround receiver 

There are several older SACD players (Oppo, Marantz, Denon, among others) that, when used with third-party Sonore freeware, can easily rip the SACD layer from the player to your computer over a network connection.  Once the SACD layer is ripped, you can use your streaming solution of choice to stream a bit-perfect DSD stream to your hi-fi system.  I've ripped hundreds of SACDs to my NAS using this method.

I recently added a stand alone DAC to my Esoteric DV60 Universal player. Before, I could play back SACD’s...through the DV-60. Now I cannot play these discs as SACD's. BUT, and here’s the thing, the improvement that the DAC made to the whole SQ is far superior than what the sound of SACD’s was through just the player alone. Surprisingly, even true with the CD layer of SACD played through the combo. ( and the DV-60 is no slouch on playback!) OTOH, the combo can play back DVD-A’s as this digital stream is passed through to the DAC. I looked at Paul’s very interesting video, and of course it made perfect sense. BUT, I do wonder if DVD-A’s could be ok from a copyright and artist royalty scenario, why SACD’s could not? Seems odd.

Also, I think that the idea of SACD is good, except I also think it was hyped too much. IME, the quality of the sound one is going to get is far more dependent on the quality of the original master recording, and a lot less on the the fact that is is a CD at 44.1 vs a SACD at DSD.

Not sure what the confusion is about SACD.

You buy SACD players to play SACD discs and connect the RCA/XLR out to preamp or integrated amp. The only way to get DSD out is through HDMI/I2S cables of some blu-ray players and get the output to the DAC.

Last option is to rip SACDs as DSF/DFF files and lay them through the DACs using USB or I2S cables. You will never get DSD through coaxial unless you use players like Meitner which state the following:
 

• Up to 24bit/192kHz & DSD support over all inputs: USB Audio, AES, TOSLINK, COAX and Network(RJ45)

soix;

I remember that war well. Sony had the technically superior format but convenience and longer play time won that war.

When SACD prices became reasonable, Content I already had in CD, I bought same content in hybrid SACD/CD to hear the difference. Even if DSD is converted to PCM at the last stage, the 'up front' DSD advantages/differences are there.

My conclusion: Lower Noise Floor, Piano, solos, sometimes un-naturally quiet. I learned not to try to hear the difference, just enjoy the content.

Now, I buy 'new to me' used Hybrid SACD discs, IF decently low price. Because it is my 1st listening of the content, not comparing, SACD layer it is . Certain content, usually long solos, I can decide if the SACD layer is un-naturally quiet, then I listen to the CD layer.

btw, lasers get weak with age, and if buying used, make sure the equipment can readily find the SACD layer, many used units find CD layer, but not SACD layer. And, check on eBay: are replacement laser assemblies available for that unit?

I use my Oppo to rip the SACD layer onto my server. Works fantastic.

lasers get weak with age

This is correct, but it take a few years to reach that stage. Best thing to do it so rip the SACD as DSF files and play it via software player. You can buy a cheap Sony/Pioneer player off eBay and rip the SACD. Then archive the SACD for future.

Wow, some good info on this thread but mostly a lot of confusion and false information.

   For a couple of years now I've been enjoying my small collection, <12 SACDs via: a standalone headphone reference system..

OPPO 83-(with 2channel SACD layer output selected)-small HDMI breakout box ($50 E-bay Chinese order)- I2s (all HDMI cables) into a Pontus 2 DAC-balanced cables-Jot2 amp-Aria headphones.  No problem, the cheap box also sends full HDMI to a small monitor to easily access the player controls via remote.

I realize I'm skirting DRM but I don't record or copy anything.

Most SACD I see for sale are Hybrids with that 2nd or third layer of 2 ch PCM.  I think there Japanese DSD only versions, expensive.  Usually the SACD layers do sound notably better than PCM or regular Red Book cd versions...not always.  It does no good to remix a final PCM file to DSD, then back again for play.

Of course if the OPPO gives up I do have a 105 in my AV system that is going strong but doesn't do HDCD decoding like the 83.

I didn't discover this on my own here's a link to the article that got me started:

Old Ears...Thank you, that is EXACTLY the direction I'm now going....

@milpai +1 I do the same

What is PMC? 

Yeah, ripping anything makes it much easier to play back whole.

I use the Oppo BDP105D player so I use the RCA outputs for SACD playback but everything else is transmitted via the SPDiF into the DAC.

N

My McIntosh transport has a proprietary MCT cable running to the McIntosh DAC. The display on the DAC says SACD when a SACD is played.  I assume it is the same as Paul McGowen is describing with their PS Audio stuff.

I solved my SACD issue. As I stated in the original post, I had bought A Sony x700 with the goal of somehow using it to play SACD. Yup, it got real complicated and more than I wanted to grt into. I returned it and just bought a used Denon 2910 DVD player….highly regarded, still supported with parts and service and has a reasonable built in DAC to play SACD through analog outputs. It will be here in a couple days and Ill report back.

I have that player sitting in my basement, unplayed for about a decade.  There is a problem with the drawer; it opens and shuts but in continuous motion, no stops.  Inserting a disc is like shooting fish in a moving barrel.

  I still don’t know why you had a “problem “.  In the end you purchased a SACD player for its analog outs.  Plenty of more modern players do that, with presumably better DACs.  Are you sure the Denon doesn’t convert DSD to PCM?  It’s been so long since I have given that player a thought that I don’t remember 

I say rip 'em!   DRM has ruined so many an otherwise good product. That's not because I want to pirate anything.

Hunting for SACDs can be fun.  I remember finding 5 Rolling Stones SACDs just sitting in a used CD bin for $5.99 per disc.  Of course they've just sat there on the shelf since I can listen to something about the same quality without moving from my chair. But collector-me likes to have them.  Someday I'll be glad I have them...or the guy will that bought them at my post-funeral garage sale.  

Are you sure the Denon doesn’t convert DSD to PCM?

I'm sure it does.....Not sure how else it could output a SACD. But at Higher resolution than Red Book?

     I just discovered this website (thru a new amp review at currawong)...lots of great info on DSD playback and recording.  They have a DSD studio like PS Audio.  And some tempting downloadable examples.  Specifics on various playback equipment.

Sorry for the redundant link above...I see elliottbnewcombjr already listed it.