SACD or 24/96 flac

[Shivam]

I am planning to buy Bob Marley - Legends album.
The SACD and 24/96 flac are almost of the same price. Which one has a better mastering or sound quality ? Which one should I buy ?

 

[venkatcr]

If you have an SACD player, obviously that is what you get. You can create a FLAC file for yourself.

Cheers

 

[Audiodoc]

Definitely SACD is a better option if you can play the same. 96/24 is the resolution of DVD.

 

[manoj.p]

doubtful if you can tell the difference between two in a blind test. Both are very high rez formats, at very high sampling frequency. We humans hardly hear anything above 20 Khz.

 

[sound and music]

The one advantage of having Flac files is that you could listen to them through diverse sources: HD media player, tablet, computer, etc - as I do.

 

[2chFreak]

The superiority of DSD truly shines when recordings are both encoded / decoded, i.e. the Original take is done on DSD.

Since we are talking about Bob Marley here, its a re-mastering ...

And here, I would vote for PCM 24/96 rather than SACD. The 24/96 is a DVD-A.

(some of the western classical or the newer recordings done from recording to edit to mastering, using DSD like the ones of 2L, Stockfisch, Telarc are devastatingly good on SACD provided you have a playback chain to truly justify SACD).

 

[manoj.p]

Well, almost all the recordings are tweaked in PCM. The recordings are done and archived in DSD. But for mastering and editing, it has to be converted to PCM because there is not much that can be done with 1 bit audio. The recordings are mastered in PCM and then converted back to DSD. So, the inherent advantage of DSD is gone, unless it made from recording --> DSD --> SACD.

 

[santhosh]

I have the LP and it sounds great, buy that .

Available at Reliance digital and even flipkart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shivam]

I have the LP and it sounds great, buy that .

LP is a good option but my SACD player, Flac player and DAC are far better than my turntable setup and phono preamp.

 

[anm]

If you have an SACD player, obviously that is what you get. You can create a FLAC file for yourself.

Cheers

interesting! How can I create a 24/96 flac file?

 

[Audiodoc]

Technically SACD is better than 24/96. here is an explanation: http://www.avguide.com/forums/sacd-vs-2496

It is possible but involves conversion to PCM plus is not possible in copy protected material.

Here is a brief explanation on another forum,

"Yes, you can rip SACD data, but not easily and you do have to convert to PCM at some level in order for the data to be useful, and that involves resampling. There are add-on boards out there which convert DSD to PCM in the digital domain. You could therefore take that and write out PCM data, stick a header on it and call it a wav file. However, no off-the-shelf solution exists.

You will likely never be able to use EAC or whatever to "rip" SACD but if you were determined enough you could get hirez PCM data out of SACD without falling into the analog hole".

Here is another link differentiating CD, HDCD, DVD, SACD and DVD Audio.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/600913/how-to-rip-24-96-using-dbpoweramp

One more point; The benefits of these high resolution formats will largely depend on your audio set up (esp speakers which usually are the weakest link) and there are some ubercool setups out there which can produce sounds beyond the human range of hearing. Although you may not hear the music you may feel it (you can search for psychological effects of infrasound). Now the age old question arising isn't CD enough.

To me the answer is NO, one does definitely hear a difference between ordinary CD and these formats. The two main reasons for it are the enhanced dynamic range and better mastering.

 

[manoj.p]

Technically SACD is better than 24/96. here is an explanation: SACD vs. 24/96 | AVguide

It is possible but involves conversion to PCM plus is not possible in copy protected material.

I would have a different take on it. That link does not prove anything, its just an opinion of one person, which is countered by another person in the same thread.

Anyway, proponents say DSD is better than PCM. Now, I am not arguing on which is better because its an endless topic. BUT the fact is, all the remastering is done in PCM. So, the studios convert DSD to PCM, do all their mastering and then convert it back to DSD. So, essentially, we are getting the PCM data converted to DSD. If the mastering is done at 96/24 PCM, then thats what you get in DSD in re-sampled format.

Moreover, during the playback, all the filtering happens in PCM mode. So, if the player is doing any of the filtering/bass management etc it has to be done in PCM. Player converts the DSD to PCM, applies all the processing and then convert it to analog. You can potentially avoid this, by not doing any bass management (one does not know whether the player is still doiing PCM conversion anyway). But (its a big BUT) then you wont have bass management. You can still get away with it by only playing through full range stereo only or using all 5 channels with 5 full range speakers. Very rarely people have surround speakers as Full range, so players do the conversion anyway.

Given all that info and which is a fact - Now, decide whether SACD is better or 24/96 PCM.

One more thing - ripping SACD is very complex and is not for faint hearted. Simplest way is to use the original PS3 (which had the SACD capability) and mod it. Again it will be converted to PCM. So, if you are still hell bent on SACD, ripping may not offer any advantage.

 

[grubyhalo]

If you do not have much of an SACD collection, I'd suggest you just buy the tracks in 24/96 format and invest more of your resources on the rest of your system as applicable, like a good DAC for instance. Really no point in starting an SACD collection now, if you ask me...

 

[2chFreak]

If the OP has the facility to get hold of DSD authoring software, then & only then, will he be able to get proper rips for playback from a SACD.

As far as Rez goes between 1-Bit @ 2.2MHz (i.e. 64 times the 44.1) and say PCM of 24-Bits @ 96kHz, honestly I would rate them at par.

I work in an environment where we have an Esoteric K-01 SACD/CDP, ARC Ref-5, ATC SCM-100 Anni.. and I don't see a difference. Unless, it was originally a DSD recording & when that's on SACD, sure it wins !

 

[Shivam]

I have opted for flac download from hdtracks. The reason that won for me is comfort. I can control my flac player from my iPad and change the album if needed without getting out of my chair.

Discussions show a divided opinion and for an old mastering on analogue there seems to be a consensus that not much difference will be heard.