[03029174]

Is it possible to Rip SACD / high rez music to you PC which yo can then store as flac etc to play on your PC? Im thinking about buying some to test out my new DAC and thought id double check to see what hardware/software was needed

Thanks

Pete

 

[geremy]

No. It is not currently possible to rip SACD. I am unsure about DVD-A. It is possible to rip high-rez PCM streams from DVD/MVI discs.

 

[linuxworks]

I generally won't buy a format (or a work, in a format) unless that format grants me fair-use rights as an end user.

if its not technically rippable, I won't buy. I suggest you do the same.

more people voting with their feet, the better the industry hears how we dislike this (and won't support it with our purchases).

otoh, I wonder if many people could tell the diff of an analog capture via a decent a/d (0404 comes to mind) vs the original. I would bet that an analog capture at even 44.1/16 would be mostly indistinguishable (if not entirely) if the capture is done well enough.

repeated generational loss would be noticeable (the old 'tape trees' on cassettes, for example). but with a single generation a/d of a very good sounding source - nah, I bet no one would reliably be able to a/b the diff and nail which was which.

so, in the end, you can grab your content and have good quality, as well. just a slow 1:1 process at the worst case and an extra a/d step (ok, and extra d/a step that was before that.)

it might take 3, 4 or even 10 copies of going thru the 'analog hole' before you get serious degradation (using modern a/d and dac parts, of course).

 

[03029174]

Ah that explains why i couldnt find anything on it.
Im a big Dire Straits fan and want to get the best versions of their songs and play via my pc, does that mean the best qual i can currently rip is redbook?
How about other formats such as DVD-A?

Thanks

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wonder if many people could tell the diff of an analog capture via a decent a/d (0404 comes to mind) vs the original.

I wouldn't call the 5532-equivalent op-amps of the 0404USB anywhere near "transparent"....they will definitely color the sound.

you can capture DSD losslessly w/ some Lynx soundcard and convert losslessly to LPCM...it's gonna cost ya, though

 

[linuxworks]

the 0404usb is used a TEST GEAR by quite a few people. apparently they think its good enough as-is to test their amps, dacs and preamps.

so, take that fwiw.

anytime I see something 'good enough for test gear' I think its good enough for my ears.

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 03029174 /img/forum/go_quote.gif does that mean the best qual i can currently rip is redbook?

No, you can rip HDCD discs with dBpoweramp Reference.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaska /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, you can rip HDCD discs with dBpoweramp Reference.

But that only decodes part of the HDCD spec. The decoder used by dBpoweramp only does the dynamic range expansion part of the spec. It ignores the filters and upsampling parts of the spec. So you aren't getting a true (full) HDCD experience by ripping that way.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif otoh, I wonder if many people could tell the diff of an analog capture via a decent a/d (0404 comes to mind) vs the original. I would bet that an analog capture at even 44.1/16 would be mostly indistinguishable (if not entirely) if the capture is done well enough.

This is basically what Meyer and Moran did to test the extent to which folks could distinguish between High res and redbook. Their conclusion (over 500 trials) was that the extra A/D D/A steps were not audibly detectable until you cranked the volume up to absurd levels at which point the extra noise became apparent...unpleasantly and painfully loud were the expressions they used.

 

[joe_cool]

1) In my experience you can get some additional dynamic range by decoding the HDCD format using Windows Media Player.
2) The benefits of XRCD (JVC) are best enjoyed in a noisy environment, like automobile, etc. The XRCD2 remaster of "Brothers In Arms" lacks dynamic range (again IMO).
3) The benefits of some SACD releases (viz. Dark Side Of The Moon) are based on a different mastering version. Many re-releases (viz. Blood On The Tracks) provide no increase in fidelity over the CD version (again IMO).
4) The benefits of ripping DVD-A to 24-bit 96kHz WAV files is rather elusive. If CD-Audio is done properly there is little difference in my playback system (again IMO).
5) We are not supposed to discuss "unauthorized" methods on this forum so please send personal mail if you have questions of this sort.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is basically what Meyer and Moran did to test the extent to which folks could distinguish between High res and redbook. Their conclusion (over 500 trials) was that the extra A/D D/A steps were not audibly detectable until you cranked the volume up to absurd levels at which point the extra noise became apparent...unpleasantly and painfully loud were the expressions they used.

I would believe it.

this question (about digital vs analog copying) came up a lot when I was active in 'dat-heads' many years ago (live taping forum). the concensus from those very technical folks was that you needed several successive generations to notice the analog hole being a real problem.

we did tape trees (receive a tape in the mail, make 3 copies and get 3 copies of other shows from your child-nodes) and so we did want to keep things all digital; but if you were making a single serial copy, analog was not a problem. just don't clip - watch the levels, as usual. watching the levels is one thing you can FORGET when you copy digitally (sometimes we forget those simple things)

 

[Uncle Erik]

Why does everything have to be ripped to the computer?

I used to rip everything, now I don't. I'll put onone recording at a time and listen all the way through.

For me, it's much more satisfying to listen to an entire disc. With digital, I'll keep hunting for the next track I want to hear, usually with an emphasis on the hunting. I don't enjoy music as much if I'm doing something else.

It's a lot more immersive to put on a disc, sit down, and listen for an hour.

YMMV, but I think one of the rewards of hi-rez is being able to relax long enough to enjoy it.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why does everything have to be ripped to the computer?

couple of reasons.

- backup reasons. no excuse to ruin the main if you can make backups. otoh, if you CANNOT make a backup, its a loser of a format and I want no part of it. I'm serious.

- media server reasons. I NEVER feed discs more than once. that's not negotiable and I'm not about to go backwards for some 'big music' rationalized reason. I want my raid system to contain my media and if it's not possible to net-serve my content then I can't get AT it from any playback station.

- philosophical reasons; its mean to lock down content to a dongle or phys media. I vote with my dollars.

Quote:

I used to rip everything, now I don't. I'll put onone recording at a time and listen all the way through.

you mix issues. the freedom to listen all the way thru does not infringe (lol) on my desire to do that AND/OR do it some other way. net storage has nothing at all to do with your chosen playback style. orthogonal

 

[geremy]

Yeah, I rip everything but almost always listen to complete albums.

 

[shamu144]

Actually, it is extremely easy to rip DVD-A (I have done that for 5 DVD-A so far) and it can be done for SACD (though mor expensive, as it will require some modifications to your player). I will start to rip my SACD in high rez PCM this august.

And yes, the difference with high rez music is extremely audible, indeed making for an even more relaxing experience, but only worth if you have a transparent enough system.