CD -> Sony CE595 -> Entech 203.2 vs. SACD -> Sony CE595

[lmf22]

I just got a couple of new classical SACDs (recorded in DSD) and was comparing:

(1) CD --> Sony CE595 --> Entech 203.2 --> LDM+ --> K701
(2) SACD --> Sony CE595 --> LDM+ --> K701

...and I found combination (1) sounds more natural. They seem to be equally detailed. (2) sound brighter than (1), which makes me uncomfortable when listening for a long period. (1) seems to have more depth than (2). Overall, (1) is more enjoyable to listen to.

Anyone have similar experiences?

I thought SACD is supposed to sound significantly better than CD. So, how come CD through Entech 203.2 sounds better? Are my ears not sensitive enough? Are my equipments not good enough to reach the full potential of SACD? Or is the Entech 203.2 better than the SACD DAC in the Sony CE595?

(Yes, I know LDM+ doesn't have enough power for the K701, so I'll compare again when the Gilmore Lite comes)

 

[Jose Garcia]

Although my unit is a bit different to yours in some aspects, they are essentially the same internally. I refer to the Sony SCD-C2000ES which uses the same DAC's ( BB DSD-1751).

Using my unit as a transport into the Shigaraki 4715 DAC, the redbook sound was WAY UP SUPERIOR to the SACD on my 2000ES. It was an eye openner and makes me realize that I needed an external DAC. I still looking for one but haven't decided yet. One thing I do know is that the NOS sound was amazing in comparison to the sound of my Sony, even thought the CD sound is good in my system.

I'm considering several units from Mhdt ( Constantine and Dialogue II) , Derek Shek (DAC-1 and DAC-2) Musiland MD-10 and maybe a Channel Island DAC-2 with power supply although this one is not a NOS DAC and it's more expensive than the others.

As far as the sound of the 595/2000 units go, I found that my unit benefits from some isolation like bearing types ( my own DIYUMAS or Roller Blocks) and some internal damping plus some weight over the top lead to get a deathened fill to the top.

Hope this help!

Jose/PR

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmf22 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just got a couple of new classical SACDs (recorded in DSD) and was comparing: (1) CD --> Sony CE595 --> Entech 203.2 --> LDM+ --> K701 (2) SACD --> Sony CE595 --> LDM+ --> K701 ...and I found combination (1) sounds more natural. They seem to be equally detailed. (2) sound brighter than (1), which makes me uncomfortable when listening for a long period. (1) seems to have more depth than (2). Overall, (1) is more enjoyable to listen to. Anyone have similar experiences? I thought SACD is supposed to sound significantly better than CD. So, how come CD through Entech 203.2 sounds better? Are my ears not sensitive enough? Are my equipments not good enough to reach the full potential of SACD? Or is the Entech 203.2 better than the SACD DAC in the Sony CE595? (Yes, I know LDM+ doesn't have enough power for the K701, so I'll compare again when the Gilmore Lite comes)

When using headphones SACD are downmixed to two channel 44k-48K PCM if I'm not mistaken. You really need a 5.1 speaker set up with a reciever that supports 5.1 analog outs to get the most out of your SACD collection..

 

[lmf22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose Garcia /img/forum/go_quote.gif Although my unit is a bit different to yours in some aspects, they are essentially the same internally. I refer to the Sony SCD-C2000ES which uses the same DAC's ( BB DSD-1751). Using my unit as a transport into the Shigaraki 4715 DAC, the redbook sound was WAY UP SUPERIOR to the SACD on my 2000ES. It was an eye openner and makes me realize that I needed an external DAC. I still looking for one but haven't decided yet. One thing I do know is that the NOS sound was amazing in comparison to the sound of my Sony, even thought the CD sound is good in my system. I'm considering several units from Mhdt ( Constantine and Dialogue II) , Derek Shek (DAC-1 and DAC-2) Musiland MD-10 and maybe a Channel Island DAC-2 with power supply although this one is not a NOS DAC and it's more expensive than the others. As far as the sound of the 595/2000 units go, I found that my unit benefits from some isolation like bearing types ( my own DIYUMAS or Roller Blocks) and some internal damping plus some weight over the top lead to get a deathened fill to the top. Hope this help! Jose/PR

Thanks for the info. Right my DAC and receiver is on top of the CE595.

Looks like CD with a good DAC could be better than a low price SACD player. I wonder how good of a DAC is require? Would be CIAudio VDA-2 be good enough?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif When using headphones SACD are downmixed to two channel 44k-48K PCM if I'm not mistaken. You really need a 5.1 speaker set up with a reciever that supports 5.1 analog outs to get the most out of your SACD collection..

That would explain why CD going through the Entech sounds better. But why would they downmix a 2-channel SACD to 44K?

 

[Jose Garcia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmf22 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Looks like CD with a good DAC could be better than a low price SACD player. I wonder how good of a DAC is require? Would be CIAudio VDA-2 be good enough?

Based on its comments, sure would be. The advantage of buying one of these is that they offer a 30 days money back. I have seing only a pair of them for sale on Audiogon. One was a demo used at a show and the other one was from someone who bought an expensive DAC. They are rarely offered on the used market....

Jose.

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif When using headphones SACD are downmixed to two channel 44k-48K PCM if I'm not mistaken. You really need a 5.1 speaker set up with a reciever that supports 5.1 analog outs to get the most out of your SACD collection..

You may be thinking of the issue with bass management. If you're using the 595 in 2 channel stereo mode, you can set the 595 to play the 2 channel DSD section of the disc. There's no downmixing with SACD.