Thread: SACD on PC

Posts: 24
Page: prev 1 2 3 next

Post by DrOctodivx March 21, 2005 (11 of 24)
mdt said:

Positiv thinking there ! I hope you are right, but it does'nt make much sense to me wanting to listen to high resolution sound on a PC, not exactly a high end reproduction chain, is it?

That's silly. A lot of people use their computers as their entertainment centers - which makes perfect sense in this digital age. I use a computer to play back all of my DVDs since it does a better job of upscaling resolutions than most dedicated units.
As far as audio goes, in the age of MP3 many computers are attached directly to the hifi systems and are thus in a perfect position to be used to play back just about anything. The audio quality also cannot be snubbed so easily as you seem to suggest - there are plenty of audio cards with excellent sound capabilities, though of course PCM based.
I personally do not use my computer for music playback, since I am not a big MP3 fan - I prefer to get the sound from the purest source possible be that SACD or CD, but I perfectly understand people who do use their computers that way.

Post by mdt March 21, 2005 (12 of 24)
DrOctodivx said:

The audio quality also cannot be snubbed so easily as you seem to suggest - there are plenty of audio cards with excellent sound capabilities, though of course PCM based.

Even when forgeting about the audio cards being PCM based, audio reproduction does'nt end after D/A conversion. SA-CDs contain very high resolution audio content, in order to realize this potential, the entire audio chain has to be of at least equally high resolution, this means analog output stages amplification, speakers and even the cables. If this is'nt the case the entire idea of high resolution audio is wasted.

Post by DrOctodivx March 21, 2005 (13 of 24)
mdt said:

Even when forgeting about the audio cards being PCM based, audio reproduction does'nt end after D/A conversion. SA-CDs contain very high resolution audio content, in order to realize this potential, the entire audio chain has to be of at least equally high resolution, this means analog output stages amplification, speakers and even the cables. If this is'nt the case the entire idea of high resolution audio is wasted.

Well, this can be accomplished using a computer the same way that Creative accomplishes this with DVD-Audio. The Audigy II card series takes the DVD-A data stream direcly any converts them to analog at 24/192 right on the card - the same as would be done in any outboard player.

In fact, a similar theoretical SACD audio card could read in the DSD stream and convert it directly to Analog without going through PCM at all (it is necessary with DVD-Audio since it is PCM).

There is not necessarily any additional stages going from digital to analog on the card as there would be in any player.

Post by mdt March 22, 2005 (14 of 24)
DrOctodivx said:


There is not necessarily any additional stages going from digital to analog on the card as there would be in any player.

I meant what happens once you have the analog. Since this is of high quality, practically identical to the quality of the master that was encoded, the following stages it goes through have to be of utmost quality as well. And this means (analog-) output stages following D/A conversion, pre- amplifier, power-amplifier and finally speakers and even listening room acoustics.
It makes no sense to employ state of the art technology like DSD in order not to loose or alter any information in the storage process, just to loose most of it in the analog path all (also when stored digitally) audio goes through until it finally reaches the listeners ear. It is only theire, where the reproduction chain ends, and everything that happens with the signal in between is of importance.

Post by DrOctodivx March 22, 2005 (15 of 24)
mdt said:

I meant what happens once you have the analog. Since this is of high quality, practically identical to the quality of the master that was encoded, the following stages it goes through have to be of utmost quality as well. And this means (analog-) output stages following D/A conversion, pre- amplifier, power-amplifier and finally speakers and even listening room acoustics.
It makes no sense to employ state of the art technology like DSD in order not to loose or alter any information in the storage process, just to loose most of it in the analog path all (also when stored digitally) audio goes through until it finally reaches the listeners ear. It is only theire, where the reproduction chain ends, and everything that happens with the signal in between is of importance.

Once you have the analog. you can pass it through the same high quality stages as you would from the multi-channel outputs of a dedicated SACD (or DVD-Audio) player.

In fact, I used to have my system set up that way where the output from my card went directly to the amplifier, bypassing the pre-amplification since I was able to control gain on the computer (for DVD-A this was done on the card digitally prior to D/A conversion). The sound was very good, surpassing my previous players quality.

I have since moved on to dedicated units again, since the components that I now have surpass the computer again, but that does not mean that quality of what I had before was anything to sneeze at (I am always striving to incrementally improve my audio experience).

Post by Claude March 23, 2005 (16 of 24)
mdt said:

Positiv thinking there ! I hope you are right, but it does'nt make much sense to me wanting to listen to high resolution sound on a PC, not exactly a high end reproduction chain, is it?

I agree as far as hi-rez is concerned. But multichannel playback on a PC would make sense.

Post by Moontoad May 29, 2005 (17 of 24)
mdt said:

Positiv thinking there ! I hope you are right, but it does'nt make much sense to me wanting to listen to high resolution sound on a PC, not exactly a high end reproduction chain, is it?

I think it's perfectly reasonable. Plenty of studio level PC systems out there, not everyone uses onboard audio chips and tinny little free speakers in conjunction with them.

Frankly, it's ridiculous that as a legitimate customer I cannot use a product I've bought as I wish, due to the tired old "copyright" excuse. If a copyright protection mechanism negates the functionality of the product for the customer, it's a failure in my eyes.

Looks as if SA-CD is going to die in favour of more customer-friendly formats - can't say I'd be surprised if it does.

Post by mandel May 29, 2005 (18 of 24)
I have to agree. Not everyone cares about hi-res to the extent some people do. Give them a 5.25" SACD drive that converts DSD to PCM internally and most people will be happy to play that out of their midrange consumer soundcard. Ok, this would give people the scope to produce a DVD-A or DTS bootleg but that is already possible with the right equipment (do a search for "SACD" on a peer2peer client). The audiophile market, which is pretty much all SACD is managing to sell to at the moment, in any quantity, will still continue to buy the original disc.

" If a copyright protection mechanism negates the functionality of the product for the customer, it's a failure in my eyes."
I totally agree.

Post by Daland May 29, 2005 (19 of 24)
" If a copyright protection mechanism negates the functionality of the product for the customer, it's a failure in my eyes."
I totally agree.

But if the lack of a copyright protection mechanism negates the profitability of the product for the manufacturers, it's a failure in their eyes.

Post by mandel May 29, 2005 (20 of 24)
Which makes me wonder exactly why the music industry is pushing Dulldisc not SACD *sigh*

Page: prev 1 2 3 next

Closed