Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Listening Multichannel Hybrid SACD- DSD on laptop / PC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Listening Multichannel Hybrid SACD- DSD on laptop / PC - Page 2

post #16 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

Most USB DAC's aren't going to have this. You'd need a mixamp or a dolby surround sound processor. These are unfortunately kind of expensive for whatever reason, like $80+.

 

This tech is really mostly used for gaming though(which is why all the mixamps/dss processors are made by gaming headset companies), I don't think it works all that great for music in comparison to just using stereo mixes. Especially if you're looking for original clarity, as it messes with the sound signature.

I am thinking to buy this to be used with my laptop in the office: http://www.asus.com.au/Multimedia/Audio_Cards/Xonar_Essence_One/ that is why I'm asking the experts opinion about what type of gear should I buy in.

post #17 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jupitreas View Post


It is possible to get Dolby Headphone to work with fb2k for free (since the dll file is bundled with demo versions of some DVD player software). I am not aware of any better headphone surround sound processor?
Honestly, i don't know. I don't even think there are any PC CD drives that are capable of reading the DSD layer on an SACD disc anyway... As far as I know, people have been using their PS3s to rip SACDs. I've never done it myself since I consider it a waste of time (as there is no audible benefit).

wow, that's an eye opener, I guess if you only just own IEM with entry level amp then the SACD experience cannot be enjoy as full compared with owning Marantz or Cowon head unit with $100k + rig setup for perfect sounding.

post #18 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnSantana View Post

wow, that's an eye opener, I guess if you only just own IEM with entry level amp then the SACD experience cannot be enjoy as full compared with owning Marantz or Cowon head unit with $100k + rig setup for perfect sounding.

No, actually there is a study that shows that Redbook spec files converted on the fly from high resolution files are not distinguishable from one another... SACD is basically just a marketing hoax as it does not sound any better than an ordinary CD.
post #19 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jupitreas View Post


No, actually there is a study that shows that Redbook spec files converted on the fly from high resolution files are not distinguishable from one another... SACD is basically just a marketing hoax as it does not sound any better than an ordinary CD.

ah.. :-o

that is what I have thought before, because somehow the price different is sometime significant enough between normal Audio CD and SACD, so in this case I'll stick with normal redbook CD as I just use it on my laptop mostly/

post #20 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by jupitreas View Post


No, actually there is a study that shows that Redbook spec files converted on the fly from high resolution files are not distinguishable from one another... SACD is basically just a marketing hoax as it does not sound any better than an ordinary CD.

I always thought SACD players were capable of reproducing superb audio quality. I can't testify to that statement alone myself since I don't own a plethora of SACD albums to have the need to purchase a SACD player.  Still interesting, nonetheless.

 

destroysall.

post #21 of 27

The audio quality differences between SACD and regular CD are not audible at human listening levels. The only advantage that SACD might have is better mastering.

post #22 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

The audio quality differences between SACD and regular CD are not audible at human listening levels. The only advantage that SACD might have is better mastering.

mastering.... ? then it is something that can be noted or heard by human ears right ?

post #23 of 27

Yes, but it doesn't have anything to do with the format of the disk. CDs and SACDs as a format sound identical.

post #24 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnSantana View Post

mastering.... ? then it is something that can be noted or heard by human ears right ?

Mastering is something a human does at the end of the production process of music. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_mastering.
SACDs are often mastered with more care and this is why they sound better; however, if you were to convert the SACD stream to Redbook audio, you would not be able to hear the difference. Basically, the format is not important, the master is.
post #25 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jupitreas View Post


Mastering is something a human does at the end of the production process of music. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_mastering.
SACDs are often mastered with more care and this is why they sound better; however, if you were to convert the SACD stream to Redbook audio, you would not be able to hear the difference. Basically, the format is not important, the master is.

Ah now I understand,

 

so suppose an artist X album released in two version:

 

Normal Audio CD remastered carefully

SACD - DSD remastered normally

 

then the first one will be sound better than the later due to the mastering end result / tweak. This is why there are some album out there which has got "Original Album Remastered".

Audio Mastering always amazed me in the process, the source is the same old 1/2" tape but then remastered by many production house to sounds differently and sometimes the result is better from the previous remaster record :-)

post #26 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnSantana View Post

Ah now I understand,

so suppose an artist X album released in two version:

Normal Audio CD remastered carefully
SACD - DSD remastered normally

then the first one will be sound better than the later due to the mastering end result / tweak. This is why there are some album out there which has got "Original Album Remastered".
Audio Mastering always amazed me in the process, the source is the same old 1/2" tape but then remastered by many production house to sounds differently and sometimes the result is better from the previous remaster record :-)

Exactly, although SACDs are typically mastered better because they are aimed at the audiophile crowd. CDs are aimed at the mainstream crowd and therefore these days often suffer from the loudness war.
post #27 of 27
It depends on what kind of music you listen to. Crappy rock music is poorly mastered, but classical and jazz usually sound great.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Listening Multichannel Hybrid SACD- DSD on laptop / PC