2. digital
  3. 190798-789

Why a dedicated SACD player more noticeable sound quality difference than HDMI-I2S w/ DACs

Over the weekend, we brought together our gears and run experiment with HDMI-I2S on a few external DACs to hear the comparison among:

  1. Oppo 105 SACD Player XLR output
  2. Oppo 105 HDMI-I2S to S.M.S.L. D400EX - XLR Output
  3. Oppo 105 HDMI-I2S to Denafrips Venus II 12th - XLR Output
  4. Oppo 105 HDMI-I2S to PS Audio DirectStream DAC Mk1 - Output
  5. Technics SL-G700 SACD Player XLR output

Pre-Amp: Denafrips Athena
Amplifier: Two Mark Levinson 333 Bi-Amp
Speakers: A Pair of B&W N801
Room: Acoustically treated
Playback is level match with pink noise track so both SACD Disc and DSF file playback are the same volume SPL.
We took note so the pre-amp volume setting are different for each playback

Observations:
Slight sound characteristic differences among 2/3/4 (HDMI output)
1) the sound is distinctly different
5) the sound is distinctly different

Why we notice more audible difference between 1) and 5) , and very slight among 2/3/4?
Does the un-clocked HDMI-I2S interface introduce more jitter such that a dedicated SACD player will have better jitter control on its clocked SACD disc read signal?

asin

Showing 3 responses by asin

asin OP
33 posts
 

Me and my friends who brings audio gears to run this experiment at friend’s house who has the best acoustically treated room.

asin OP
33 posts
 

Agree Oppo 105 is not the best SACD Player.

My observation is about the lack of sonic differences in External DAC vs a new dedicated player, so was curious why?

asin OP
33 posts
 

My statement is not about A is better than B.

Our observation is that a dedicated new SACD player has more audible sonic differences than simply adding different external DAC (in this case thru HDMI-I2S adapter) to existing SACD player.

So was curious whether anyone has observed the same or have knowledge as to why that is.

More to discover