went to a demo for SACD today...

[Kingdaddy]

Here is a good way to test and revel why SACD has superior sound to Redbook.

IMO comparing SACD to a Redbook CD of the same title isn’t at all fair and doesn’t revel anything of merit. Anytime there is a SACD made there is a certain amount of remixing and re-mastering done (no way around it) and everybody has probably heard re-mastered versions of familiar recordings that sound dramatically different than the original, I know I have. I’ve heard it said many times that the best upgrade to any system is a good recording and I believe this to be true, nothing makes a bigger difference than the recording.

Here is a good test that will revel some truth about the SACD format. Every thing I’ve read about SACD talks about the dramatic difference DSD 1 bit mastering / re-mastering makes “More like Analog” and they all say you must have a unprocessed direct analog signal from the SACD player to the preamp via 6-Analog IC’s so that the signal is not down converted to a lo-rez PCM that a standard HT Preamp AD to DA conversion will do.

The comparison I’ve done is as follows.

Equipment List

Sony TA-E9000ES Preamp
Sony TA-P9000ES Analog Preamp
Sony DVP-NC650V DVD/SACD player
Multiple Sony TA-N9000ES amps
DIY Sub Satellite combo (Actively Bi-Amped)

Simply connect as per instructions in the TA-P9000ES manual and volume match the two Sony Preamps. Now listen to a 2-Channel SACD (not Multi-channel) and use the “bypass” button on the TA-P9000ES Remote for a comparison of the Pure DSD signal vs. the Down Converted PCM signal of the same recording, you can switch back and forth very quickly without interruption, and if you do this without looking at the remote you will find it easy to forget what mode you are in (Bypass or not) and you can do this right in the middle of a vocal, strings, percussion, horn passage etc and see if you can hear the difference in timbre, depth, air, soundstage (insert any audiophile lingo here) bla bla bla.

Now you are comparing the same recording with and without the advertised glory of what SACD is all about.

I spent many hours over 5 weeks and many different 2-channel SACD recordings and the results were remarkably identical in every way.

Before I make my conclusion known I’ll allow anyone a chance to critique the test and tell me if/why it’s fatally flawed.

 

[Thatch_Ear]

I have my BOTL Sony DVD/CD/SACD player hooked up with interconnects using some very good ones (made them myself) going to the 300B and I noticed a better sound out of the 20 and 24 bit mapping CDs than I had with a Toshiba DVD/HDCD/CD player, which was much better than a regular Sony 5 disc player. I was under the impression that Redbook was better than just plain CDs but I guess I was wrong.
The new Redbooks certainly are of much higher quality than the ones from the 80s if they were done in a real studio.
By the way I have noticed that many of the 20 bit made from analog (Sinatra,etc) are going for low prices as Sony is trying to sell off the inventory. I have picked up some very nice stuff over the last few months for $7 to $9 at Tower Records.

 

[michael w]

Hi Kingdaddy,

You the Kingdaddy from the Sony TA-E9000Es user forum ?
Funny seeing you here..small world !

Ok, as I see it your comparison is "fatally flawed" because you are not really comparing SACD with Redbook CD at all.

Rather you are comparing the effect of using the onboard DAC of the Sony.

* For those unfamiliar with the Sony TA-E9000ES, this is Sony's TOTL 5.1 channel AV processor which converts all incoming analog signals into digital for processing.


Hence you are really hearing how much damage the Sony does to an analog signal not how much better SACD is.

Using your test I would be surprised if SACD through the direct analog outputs didn't sound better.

A better test would have to been to use a recording that was made concurrently with DSD and PCM.

Not very likely on a commercial release, given that most SACD's have been releases of earlier stuff remastered for SACD, though a true DSD/PCM comparison might be found on demo or promo disks.

So for all practical purposes the only way to do a comparison is to use what has been released, remastered or not.



cheerio

 

[Kingdaddy]

"Ok, as I see it your comparison is "fatally flawed" because you are not really comparing SACD with Redbook CD at all."

Correct, my whole point is that a Redbook CD is not a fair comparison to a Re-Mastered version (DSD) of the same recording


"Rather you are comparing the effect of using the onboard DAC of the Sony."

No, actually I comparing the down Converted PCM version of a SACD to the Pure DSD version


"Using your test I would be surprised if SACD through the direct analog outputs didn't sound better."

I was surprised as well to find absolutely No Difference at all


"A better test would have to been to use a recording that was made concurrently with DSD and PCM."


Again the DSD mastered recording is on newer equipment and subject to be different according to the taste of the recording engineer.

Conclusion:

SACD Recordings themselves are superior because of better recording or mastering techniques regardless if you have all the proper analog equipment or not, not much different than any newer re mastered version of any music. Better recordings with better recording equipment sound better. IMO DSD 1 bit technology and part about needing a analog bypass is Marketing crap, as far as I can tell the only reason that SACD sounds better is because of the Software not the Hardware.

 

[michael w]

You seem to be one confused dude !

Just where do you think the down conversion from SACD to PCM is occurring ?

It certainly isn't in the Sony player.
NO SACD players down convert from SACD to PCM.

The only possible place for conversion is within the TAE where it converts the incoming analog signal into digital, in which case you are hearing the effects of a double conversion from A to D and back to A again.

When playing an SACD disc the only output is analog.

The TAP takes this analog signal and passes it on to your amps bypassing any ADA conversion done by the TAE.

All the bypass switch on the TAP does is put the TAP's electronics (master volume control, individual channel adjustments etc.) in or out of circuit.

But for this to work you have to plug your source into either the bypass 5.1 or bypass 2 channel inputs.

Normally the TAE's 5.1 outputs would be plugged into the TAP 5.1 bypass inputs so that you can watch movies etc. in surround sound.

I trust you have the TAP setup properly ?
As you say you hear no difference at all I suspect you may have a system setup error.

For SACD your DVP650's analog outs should go to one of the *normal* 5.1 or 2 ch inputs on the TAP.

The TAP is then put in *between* your TAEpre (TAE 5.1 out to TAP 5.1 bypass in) and TAN power amps (TAP 5.1 out to TAN inputs).

For DVDs the digital audio output goes to the TAE so that the DD/DTS streams can be processed.

When you want to listen to SACD, on goes the TAP and off goes the TAE.
With movies etc, use the TAE and turn off/bypass the TAP.



cheerio

 

[Kingdaddy]

Read my orignal post again.

I don't understand which part you are confused about, read my post again carefully, I never said that the SACD player was down converting, I was very plain, the down conversion happens when the bypass is selected or de selected I forget which, and then the signal is routed from the in to the out of the TA-P to the TA-E into the DVD (in my case) analog inputs, here it is down-converted automatically as a by product of the AD to DA. You seem to be focusing on the just a few details and not the whole picture. BTW everything was setup properly otherwise this test wouldent work at all, this isn't rocket science, hooking up a Analog preamp is quite simple. The whole point was to compare the direct analog un touched DSD 1 bit sound to the psuto Down converted PCM 44.1/16 that happens when the SACD signal is bypassing the TA-P and routed to the DVD analog inputs of the TA-E.

and there was no difference at all. read my orignal post again I didn't miss anything.

 

[michael w]

Sorry man but your original post was anything but straight forward !

If you had read each of my posts correctly you would have found I said that the TAE converted all analog signals into digital (at a much higher rate than 16/44 btw) and if that is what you were listening to then it was not a true test of SACD vs. PCM.

Which begs the question if you hear no difference in your setup why use the TAP at all ???

For the record just how exactly have you got the TAP setup ?

Like this:

1) DVP > TAE > TAP > TAN ?

Or this :

2) DVP > TAP > TAE > TAN ?


Your last post suggested 2).


cheerio

 

[Kingdaddy]

Correct #2 which is the only proper way to connect as far as I know, I don't understand what your confused about.

 

[michael w]

BINGO !

Everything is crystal now.

The reason you are getting the no difference result is that you have your TAP setup incorrectly !

The proper way to use the TAP is to install it AFTER the TAE as follows:


1) DVP > TAE > TAP > TAN

BUT with:

DVP analog out > TAP normal inputs NOT bypass inputs
DVP digital out > TAE

AND TAE out > TAP 5.1 bypass inputs

This way you hear unadultered SACD thru the TAP
Digital s/tracks etc. go thru the TAE > TAP in bypass > TAN


The way you had it setup with the TAP feeding into the TAE resulted in ALL signals being digitised regardless of whether the TAP was in bypass or not, that's why you heard no difference.

The whole point of the TAP is to avoid using the TAE and keep analog signals analog hence the TAP should NEVER feed into the TAE.

As I said earlier all the bypass switch on the TAP does is switch out the TAP's front panel controls.

It's too bad you're so far away or I would personally come over and set the TAP up for you.

I think correct setup will change your mind over the "SACD is a scam" and "analog bypass is marketing crap " comments you made over at the TAE user forum and in here.



cheerio

 

[Kingdaddy]

One of us is terribly confused, the way I had it hooked up is the way the TA-P manual suggested and the only way as far as I know. You can't go thru the TA-E first or it will down-convert the signal automatically, you must go from the source to TA-P then to TA-E. The "Bypass mode" just loops the signal in and out of the TA-P as if the TA-P wasn't there and on to the TA-E. Read you’re manual again, as I said there is only one way to hook this up and it's very logical. Maybe were just on different pages so to speak.

 

[michael w]

Yes friend you are confused.



Read the setup instructions in my earlier posts CAREFULLY !
Your replies indicate you haven't been payng attention.

I've helped setup up 3 TAP systems now; two using an SACD player, the other using a DVD-A player.
So I have had plenty of experience with the TAP.



In setting up SACD with the TAP:

All the DIGITAL signals go to the TAE.
All the ANALOG signals got to the normal TAP inputs.


The TAE 5.1 out goes to the TAP 5.1 bypass IN

The TAP 5.1 out goes to your TAN.

The only signal going through the TAE is the digital out from your DVP.

*NOTHING* goes from the TAP to the TAE as you suggested !
To do so completely defeats the purpose of the TAP.

And NOTHING goes into the DVD analog inputs of the TAE.



From the TAP manual:

P5...Control Amplifier Hookups

"Connect the front, center, and woofer pre out jacks on your control preamplifer (Sony TA-E9000ES etc.) to the preamplifiers BYPASS 5.1 ch input jacks. "


P6...Power Amplifier Hookups

"Connect the rear, center, and front input jacks on your five channel power amplifier (Sony TA-N9000es etc.) to the preamplifier's PRE OUT jacks. "


P7...Additional Audio Hookups

"If your DVD player is equipped with 5.1 OUTPUT jacks you can connect them directly to this unit's INPUT1 or INPUT2 to enjoy the sound of the player's multi channel decoder."


The illustration on P8 only shows how to use the Control A1 cord to turn the TAN on and off.

DO NOT TAKE this illustration as a guide to setting up a TAE/TAP/TAN combination.

The correct signal path is definitely TAE > TAP > TAN as shown in this rather messy illustration from the Supplementary manual to the TAP.

http://home.online.no/~espen-b/ta-e9000es/manuals/TA-P9000ESSUP.pdf


Please provide page references that contradicts anything I have posted on this subject.


If you don't believe me check with your local Sony ES agent (assuming they are aware of the TAP, most aren't).


As you said earlier this isn't rocket science but you seem to be labouring under a massive solar flare of miscomprehension.

 

[Kingdaddy]

Yes that is the correct connection, I was confused by your post.

What I meant by "one of us is confused" was about our communication terminology not the difference in our hook-up methods. Your last post concerning the hook-up is correct and in fact the way mine was connected. I do not have my TA-P anymore so I didn't have an immediate reference to the exact details of the connections only the general idea to the signal path as I remember it. I misunderstood you to imply that the SACD signal should pass thru the TA-E first and then to the TA-P, I think our main problem is that I'm focusing on the whole and your concerned with the connection details. IMO the connection details are somewhat a moot point since I could not have performed this test at all if it weren’t hooked-up properly, and this is fairly academic.

SACD to TA-P and since the TA-P outputs give the amps their signals (the only way it can work) then any other miss connections between the TA-E and TA-P would render the whole inoperable as far as I can see, but no matter, too much time wasted on nothing of importance, I assure you it was connected properly as I was able to play the SACD thru either Pre-amp with the other turned "off".

I was hoping for a little latitude and respect on the simple stuff, but you give none and are IMO very rude and condescending, so I'll make this my last post on this subject unless you would like to discuss this with a little more tact , perhaps on a new thread.

Maybe we could discuss the subject of why or how it might be possible or not possible that the sound improvement of most SACD's over Redbook CD's are because of the recording quality and has nothing to do with the DSD 1 bit story I keep reading about. I think you should try this test your self and see what you think.

 

[michael w]

Tact is something for the wishy washy, touchy feely politically correct crowd.



If my straight forward approach renders me "rude and condescending" then tough !

Truth hurts doesn't it ?

Frankly for someone who makes erroneous statements like:

"IMO DSD 1 bit technology and part about needing a analog bypass is Marketing crap, ..."

"SACD is a scam, total bulls**t, ..."

http://pub106.ezboard.com/faussiedv...formationforum.showMessage?topicID=1488.topic


Tact is quite undeserving.


'nuff said, end of story.

 

[Kingdaddy]

Normally I wouldent bother with someone like you, but...

"Tact is something for the wishy washy, touchy feely politically correct crowd."


Its called respect for others, not everybody thinks the same as you, most of the time it's a simple mis-understanding, if you spend less time attacking someone you might have time to understand the meaning of others posts. I sure hope respect for others isn’t being considered “Wishy Washy Touchy Feely Politically Correct”, by this generation.

"If my straight forward approach renders me "rude and condescending" then tough ! "

Hardly straight forward, just aggressive and arrogant, with constant accusations and insinuations of incompetence on my part. BTW this doesn't offend me, it's just frutless and time wasting.


"Truth hurts doesn't it ?"

What Truth? That you can make a big deal out of nothing of merit, that’s the only truth I’ve found since conversing with you.


"Frankly for someone who makes erroneous statements like:

"IMO DSD 1 bit technology and part about needing a analog bypass is Marketing crap, ..."

"SACD is a scam, total bulls**t, ..."

Erroneous statement? You gave no evidence at all to even suggest the possibility that my OPINION of SACD was incorrect, you were to busy trying to childishly nit pick the inconsequential and show off how smart you are. In the end you’ve proven nothing except you are incapable of adult discussion with respect, and patience.

'nuff said, end of story.

This I’ll agree with, no intellectual conversation possible with you.

 

[grumpy]

I was hoping I would not have to do this. There will be no attacks on anyones character on this board. If you two would like to continue this conversation then please do so in private message's or elsewhere. This thread is now closed..

Grumpy