[woodytone]

what is sacd?

 

[blessingx]

SACD at Wikipedia.

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

SuperAudioCompactDisc if ur too lazy to click on the link

 

[woodytone]

can you play a sacd on a normall cd player and vise versa?

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

nope, must have a SACD player
which are usually above $500 for a bugget model

 

[woodytone]

cool. do they really sound that much better and a normal cd?

 

[Musicfan123]

NO

Quote:

Originally posted by woodytone cool. do they really sound that much better and a normal cd?

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

NO?

lol

 

[Geek]

SACDs are generally 1-bit at 2.8 MHz or so.

Redbook (normal CDs) are a 16-bit, 44.1 khz sampling rate format.

You can judge for yourself what format sounds the best. Use your ears.

My personal opinion is SACD sounds much better at a much lower price than CD, assuming you are comparing the same recording on CD and SACD. SACD really only makes a difference with good recordings or well-remastered ones.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[Harrath]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek SACDs are generally 1-bit at 2.8 MHz or so.

1-bit? Wouldn't that kill the dynamic range? Or am I not understanding that corrently (i.e. 1-bit resolution/2.8 MHz sampling)?

 

[Music Fanatic]

Quote:

Originally posted by woodytone cool. do they really sound that much better and a normal cd?

It depends on your player and system. I find that some SACDs sound much better than the original CD (but some are poorly mastered, so they actually sound worse.)

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally posted by Harrath 1-bit? Wouldn't that kill the dynamic range? Or am I not understanding that corrently (i.e. 1-bit resolution/2.8 MHz sampling)?

Sampling is how much data something takes at a time. If you take data at such a greater number of times per second (2.8 million times), it doesn't matter so much that only 1 bit is taken at a time.

Think of it this way. Think of a chart of data that shows you points on a wave. If you were to plot on a chart the numbers 1, 3, 5, 3, 1 over five seconds representing one measurement per second, you would get a curve that goes up then down. But sample the same data twice as many times (once every half second), you might have 1, 5, 3, 5, 5, 5, 3, 5, 1, 3 instead. This curve would be a lot more complex, and closer to the original shape of the wave.

--Chris

 

[Guild]

Thanks Hempcamp; that clears up a lot of confusion about sampling. But I still don't understand the the bit part. Is a bit somehow the amount of information given at any given time? In other words, would 2 bits give both 1 and 3 in the same sample?

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally posted by Guild Thanks Hempcamp; that clears up a lot of confusion about sampling. But I still don't understand the the bit part. Is a bit somehow the amount of information given at any given time? In other words, would 2 bits give both 1 and 3 in the same sample?

Well, sample size is less important when you have such a high sample rate, but...

Think of it like the number of bits in a color image. A 2-bit image can only represent black & white, while a 24-bit image can represent millions of colors. In audio, this bit rate relates to the accuracy of the voltage taken during the sample. A 1-bit size means either 100% voltage or 0 voltage, whereas 16 bits means anywhere from 0 to 2^16 different voltage percentages. Does that make sense?

--Chris

 

[Guild]

I'll have to digest that a bit (no pun intended.) But seems like a good analogy. Thanks.