SACD recommendation

[Ed Presson[_2_]]

My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and balks
on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). It looks like I can ship
it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up if there is
abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a replacement.

The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good reviews.
Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD player in a
standard stereo system? Is the user-interface clumsy without a video
screen? Are there more attractive options?

I'd appreciate your comments and advice.

Ed Presson

[Audio Empire]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:07:23 -0800, Ed Presson wrote
(in article >):

> My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and balks
> on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). It looks like I can ship
> it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up if there is
> abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a replacement.
>
> The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good reviews.
> Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD player in a
> standard stereo system? Is the user-interface clumsy without a video
> screen? Are there more attractive options?
>
> I'd appreciate your comments and advice.
>
> Ed Presson
>
>
>

I don't know if this is important to you or not, Ed, but for what it's worth,
the ESS "SabreDAC" (the best sounding IC-based DAC on the market, BTW) used
in the BDP-95 doesn't actually "decode" SACD. What it does is take SACD data
in from the disc transport and CONVERT it to Linear Pulse Code Modulation
(PCM). I do not know what the bit rate of the converted PCM is but if it's
16-bit, 44.1 KHz as some writers have suggested, then there's no sense in
playing the SACD layer at all, you might as well just listen to the CD layer
on all of your SACDs and by extension, there's no reason to buy new SACDs
since the player converts the SACD data into regular CD data anyway.

Your Sony has a real single-bit DSD (SACD) processor in it and it actually
processes the SACD data directly and correctly, rather than down-converting
it the way some players do. In fact, Sony players actually convert regular
CDs to DSD (SACD) data before converting them to audio - probably a better
solution. Now, I don't know if all non-Sony SACD players such as those from
Marantz do what the OPPO/SabreDAC combo do, but if real SACD playback is your
goal, then be careful what you buy.

[Andrew Haley]

Audio Empire > wrote:
> I don't know if this is important to you or not, Ed, but for what
> it's worth, the ESS "SabreDAC" (the best sounding IC-based DAC on
> the market, BTW) used in the BDP-95 doesn't actually "decode"
> SACD. What it does is take SACD data in from the disc transport and
> CONVERT it to Linear Pulse Code Modulation (PCM).

Looking at http://www.esstech.com/PDF/sabrewp.pdf, they feed the DSD
stream into their digital filter, which operates at a very high
frequency. I doubt that there is any better way to do it: you have to
get rid of the very high HF noise levels present in DSD somehow.

> I do not know what the bit rate of the converted PCM is but if it's
> 16-bit, 44.1 KHz as some writers have suggested,

Any why would they do that? It'd easily be detectable in
measurements, if not by ear.

> then there's no sense in playing the SACD layer at all, you might as
> well just listen to the CD layer on all of your SACDs and by
> extension, there's no reason to buy new SACDs since the player
> converts the SACD data into regular CD data anyway.

But the real advantage of SACD is multi-channel recordings, not just
stereo. The difference is readily audible, even in blind tests.

> Your Sony has a real single-bit DSD (SACD) processor in it and it
> actually processes the SACD data directly and correctly, rather than
> down-converting it the way some players do. In fact, Sony players
> actually convert regular CDs to DSD (SACD) data before converting
> them to audio - probably a better solution.

That's what every single-bit sigma-delta converter does. Including
the $1.50 ones in MP3 players.

Andrew.

[Edmund[_2_]]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:07:23 +0000, Ed Presson wrote:

> My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and
> balks on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). It looks like I
> can ship it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up if
> there is abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a
> replacement.

That is Phony all right, I not even buy a battery if I see a Phony logo
on it, I advise everybody to do the same and never ever buy anything from
these crooks again.
>
> The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good reviews.
> Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD player in a
> standard stereo system?

Yes, sounds great and decent file support for dvd-A, flac and I asked
Oppo for new firmware for SACD file support from Hard Drive.
If only more people where asking for that I am sure they will
implement that.


> Is the user-interface clumsy without a video screen?

Yes. :-)


> Are there more attractive options?

Hardly
>
> I'd appreciate your comments and advice.
>
> Ed Presson

Edmund

[Edmund[_2_]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 03:30:51 +0000, Audio Empire wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:07:23 -0800, Ed Presson wrote (in article
> >):
>
>> My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and
>> balks on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). It looks like
>> I can ship it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up
>> if there is abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a
>> replacement.
>>
>> The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good
>> reviews. Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD
>> player in a standard stereo system? Is the user-interface clumsy
>> without a video screen? Are there more attractive options?
>>
>> I'd appreciate your comments and advice.
>>
>> Ed Presson
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I don't know if this is important to you or not, Ed, but for what it's
> worth, the ESS "SabreDAC" (the best sounding IC-based DAC on the market,
> BTW) used in the BDP-95 doesn't actually "decode" SACD. What it does is
> take SACD data in from the disc transport and CONVERT it to Linear Pulse
> Code Modulation (PCM).

According to the manual that is only an option, one can select to
convert it or play the native DSD stream.

> I do not know what the bit rate of the converted
> PCM is but if it's 16-bit, 44.1 KHz as some writers have suggested,

Could that maybe be Phony writers who suggested that?


then
> there's no sense in playing the SACD layer at all, you might as well
> just listen to the CD layer on all of your SACDs and by extension,
> there's no reason to buy new SACDs since the player converts the SACD
> data into regular CD data anyway.

The specs from the BDP95 in CD format and SACD format differ from
20kHz in CD format and 50 kHz in SACD format.
How do they do that?
>
> Your Sony has a real single-bit DSD (SACD) processor in it and it
> actually processes the SACD data directly and correctly, rather than
> down-converting it the way some players do. In fact, Sony players
> actually convert regular CDs to DSD (SACD) data before converting them
> to audio - probably a better solution. Now, I don't know if all
> non-Sony SACD players such as those from Marantz do what the
> OPPO/SabreDAC combo do, but if real SACD playback is your goal, then be
> careful what you buy.

And make sure it isn't phony again, because it will break down shortly
after the warranty expires

Edmund

[Ed Presson[_2_]]

[ Some reformatting was done on this message in order to
ensure proper quoting. Please use the standard quoting
technique consistently. -- dsr ]


"Edmund" wrote in message ...
>
>On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 03:30:51 +0000, Audio Empire wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:07:23 -0800, Ed Presson wrote (in article
>> >):
>>
>>> My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and
>>> balks on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). It looks like
>>> I can ship it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up
>>> if there is abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a
>>> replacement.
>>>
>>> The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good
>>> reviews. Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD
>>> player in a standard stereo system? Is the user-interface clumsy
>>> without a video screen? Are there more attractive options?
>>>
>>> I'd appreciate your comments and advice.
>>>
>>> Ed Presson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I don't know if this is important to you or not, Ed, but for what it's
>> worth, the ESS "SabreDAC" (the best sounding IC-based DAC on the market,
>> BTW) used in the BDP-95 doesn't actually "decode" SACD. What it does is
>> take SACD data in from the disc transport and CONVERT it to Linear Pulse
>> Code Modulation (PCM).
>
>According to the manual that is only an option, one can select to
>convert it or play the native DSD stream.
>
>> I do not know what the bit rate of the converted
>> PCM is but if it's 16-bit, 44.1 KHz as some writers have suggested,
>
>Could that maybe be Phony writers who suggested that?
>
>
>then
>> there's no sense in playing the SACD layer at all, you might as well
>> just listen to the CD layer on all of your SACDs and by extension,
>> there's no reason to buy new SACDs since the player converts the SACD
>> data into regular CD data anyway.
>
>The specs from the BDP95 in CD format and SACD format differ from
>20kHz in CD format and 50 kHz in SACD format.
>How do they do that?
>>
>> Your Sony has a real single-bit DSD (SACD) processor in it and it
>> actually processes the SACD data directly and correctly, rather than
>> down-converting it the way some players do. In fact, Sony players
>> actually convert regular CDs to DSD (SACD) data before converting them
>> to audio - probably a better solution. Now, I don't know if all
>> non-Sony SACD players such as those from Marantz do what the
>> OPPO/SabreDAC combo do, but if real SACD playback is your goal, then be
>> careful what you buy.
>
>And make sure it isn't phony again, because it will break down shortly
>after the warranty expires
>
>Edmund
________________________________

Oppo replied to a query from me with the following information:

"SACD is either sent direct as DSD or as a PCM conversion (24-bit/88.2KHz)
depending on the SACD setting under Audio Format Setup. If SACD is set to
DSD, then the player will not do any decoding and will simply convert DSD
into analog.

If SACD is set to PCM, then the player will convert DSD into 24-bit/88.2KHz
PCM."

The Oppo BDP-95 Users Manual also suggests (about the SACD to PCM option):
"You may also want to select this option if you prefer the sound quality of
the DSD-to-PCM conversion."

I don't know a lot about the conversion techniques, but I would have thought
that the straight DSD to analog would have provided the most accurate analog
signal. What advantage might the DSD-to-PCM conversion provide this
listener?

I have not yet done any A/B comparisons. I doubt that I'd hear the
differences, frankly, with my aging ears.

I would be curious about the possible differences between the two conversion
approaches, if anyone could provide an explanation.

Thanks,

Ed

I

Ed Presson

[Audio Empire]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:09:50 -0800, Ed Presson wrote
(in article >):
>
> Oppo replied to a query from me with the following information:
>
> "SACD is either sent direct as DSD or as a PCM conversion
> (24-bit/88.2KHz) depending on the SACD setting under Audio Format
> Setup. If SACD is set to DSD, then the player will not do any
> decoding and will simply convert DSD into analog.

But doesn't it do direct SACD decoding ONLY through HDMI? I seem to
recall something like that in the manual, but it isn't clear.

> If SACD is set to PCM, then the player will convert DSD into
> 24-bit/88.2KHz PCM."
>
> The Oppo BDP-95 Users Manual also suggests (about the SACD to PCM
> option): "You may also want to select this option if you prefer the
> sound quality of the DSD-to-PCM conversion."
>
> I don't know a lot about the conversion techniques, but I would have
> thought that the straight DSD to analog would have provided the
> most accurate analog signal. What advantage might the DSD-to-PCM
> conversion provide this listener?

None. It's another step, though. I have software that converts my DSD
(SACD format) recordings into LPCM for distribution to my clients.
Direct comparison shows the PCM to sound a little rougher on top and
little lighter in the bottom. If you didn't do a direct comparison,
you wouldn't even notice it.

> I have not yet done any A/B comparisons. I doubt that I'd hear
> the differences, frankly, with my aging ears.

My ears are pretty old as well. You can hear it unless your hearing
has been damaged somehow.

[Edmund[_2_]]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:09:50 +0000, Ed Presson wrote:

[quoted text deleted -- deb]

> Oppo replied to a query from me with the following information:
>
> "SACD is either sent direct as DSD or as a PCM conversion
> (24-bit/88.2KHz) depending on the SACD setting under Audio Format Setup.
> If SACD is set to DSD, then the player will not do any decoding and will
> simply convert DSD into analog.
>
> If SACD is set to PCM, then the player will convert DSD into
> 24-bit/88.2KHz PCM."
>
> The Oppo BDP-95 Users Manual also suggests (about the SACD to PCM
> option): "You may also want to select this option if you prefer the
> sound quality of the DSD-to-PCM conversion."
>
> I don't know a lot about the conversion techniques, but I would have
> thought that the straight DSD to analog would have provided the most
> accurate analog signal. What advantage might the DSD-to-PCM conversion
> provide this listener?

Not much I can think of. But I have to admit I did not ( Yet! ) looked into
detail about that strange noise shaping stuff in SACD, which I not fully
understand.
As far as my info goes, it is the impulse that is better with SACD vs PCM
but unfortunately, there are not many recordings available that are
truly HD and even less HD recordings that are DSD recorded.
Of course it is of no value to convert a PCM recording to SACD format,
I don't expect anything better than the original recording. :-)

In a few months my new speakers arrive and I will do a lot of listening
and comparing. What I like to see is a "simple" test SACD with complex
wave forms, I don't know how one can accurately measure such signals but
I am very interested in the analog output of SACD players using such signals.
I am sure it will help a lot in the discussion which IS actually better
rather then one like the sound of a certain brand/model.
Since there is some progress in Ripping and burning SACD's I guess
it wont take that long before someone makes an SACD with such signals.
To come back to your question, I don't know any good reason why one would
prefer an additional conversion to PCM unless the DSD too analog filter is
very bad.

>
> I have not yet done any A/B comparisons. I doubt that I'd hear the
> differences, frankly, with my aging ears.
>
> I would be curious about the possible differences between the two
> conversion approaches, if anyone could provide an explanation.

IMHO there is no way an additional conversion can make a recording sound
better. With better I mean realistic.

BTW
If you do own an Oppo, please ask Oppo for DSDIFF support so that we can play
DSD formats from Hard Drive.

Edmund

[Edmund[_2_]]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 03:00:45 +0000, Audio Empire wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:09:50 -0800, Ed Presson wrote (in article
> >):
>>
>> Oppo replied to a query from me with the following information:
>>
>> "SACD is either sent direct as DSD or as a PCM conversion
>> (24-bit/88.2KHz) depending on the SACD setting under Audio Format
>> Setup. If SACD is set to DSD, then the player will not do any decoding
>> and will simply convert DSD into analog.
>
> But doesn't it do direct SACD decoding ONLY through HDMI?

No also to the cinch connection.

> I seem to
> recall something like that in the manual, but it isn't clear.

The manual isn't clear about that, nor there web site that is why
I specifically asked Oppo about this.
The DAC they use is also sold elswhere as part of a DAC-kit which accepts
and correctly decode both SACD and PCM.

BTW, decoding to analog over HDMI, is there an analog signal in HDMI???
>
>> If SACD is set to PCM, then the player will convert DSD into
>> 24-bit/88.2KHz PCM."
>>
>> The Oppo BDP-95 Users Manual also suggests (about the SACD to PCM
>> option): "You may also want to select this option if you prefer the
>> sound quality of the DSD-to-PCM conversion."
>>
>> I don't know a lot about the conversion techniques, but I would have
>> thought that the straight DSD to analog would have provided the most
>> accurate analog signal. What advantage might the DSD-to-PCM conversion
>> provide this listener?
>
> None. It's another step, though. I have software that converts my DSD
> (SACD format) recordings into LPCM for distribution to my clients.
> Direct comparison shows the PCM to sound a little rougher on top and
> little lighter in the bottom. If you didn't do a direct comparison, you
> wouldn't even notice it.

I believe you but that is subjective, is there any way you can construct
and play a complex signal and measure the analog output in both DVD-A 192kHz
and SACD format?
I very much like to see such an output and see how PCM and DSD behave in a
real word.
>
>> I have not yet done any A/B comparisons. I doubt that I'd hear the
>> differences, frankly, with my aging ears.
>
> My ears are pretty old as well. You can hear it unless your hearing has
> been damaged somehow.

Edmund

[Audio Empire]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:18:12 -0800, Edmund wrote
(in article >):

> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 03:00:45 +0000, Audio Empire wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:09:50 -0800, Ed Presson wrote (in article
>> >):

[quoted text deleted -- deb]

>>> I don't know a lot about the conversion techniques, but I would have
>>> thought that the straight DSD to analog would have provided the most
>>> accurate analog signal. What advantage might the DSD-to-PCM conversion
>>> provide this listener?
>>
>> None. It's another step, though. I have software that converts my DSD
>> (SACD format) recordings into LPCM for distribution to my clients.
>> Direct comparison shows the PCM to sound a little rougher on top and
>> little lighter in the bottom. If you didn't do a direct comparison, you
>> wouldn't even notice it.
>
> I believe you but that is subjective, is there any way you can construct
> and play a complex signal and measure the analog output in both DVD-A 192kHz
> and SACD format?
> I very much like to see such an output and see how PCM and DSD behave in a
> real word.

You could probably measure the top-end roughness as increased
distortion - assuming that you had a distortion analyzer with
sufficient resolution. Dunno about the bass. Like you said, that's
pretty subjective.

[Ed Presson[_2_]]

Thanks for your comments and explanations.

I've been listening to the Oppo BDP-95 quite a bit since I have a seven-day
full return policy from the dealer-I want to explore all the aspects of the
unit. I hooked to an old TV to double check all the audio settings. Most
of the defaults were already set to my preferences, only the HDCD converter
was set to "off."

I cannot tell much difference between the Oppo and the Sony player (which
now only plays SACDs), except for the fundamentals of the deepest bass which
are firmer and more "located in the soundstage" than with the Sony.

The dealer suggested that I not make any final audiophile judgments until
the unit is "broken in." I'm a bit dubious about the need to "break in" a
player, but It is getting a lot of use since I'm home this week and my
stereo is set up in my work space where I spend most of my time.

Thanks again,

Ed Presson

[Audio Empire]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 17:31:21 -0800, Ed Presson wrote
(in article >):

> Thanks for your comments and explanations.
>
> I've been listening to the Oppo BDP-95 quite a bit since I have a seven-day
> full return policy from the dealer-I want to explore all the aspects of the
> unit. I hooked to an old TV to double check all the audio settings. Most
> of the defaults were already set to my preferences, only the HDCD converter
> was set to "off."
>
> I cannot tell much difference between the Oppo and the Sony player (which
> now only plays SACDs), except for the fundamentals of the deepest bass which
> are firmer and more "located in the soundstage" than with the Sony.
>
> The dealer suggested that I not make any final audiophile judgments until
> the unit is "broken in." I'm a bit dubious about the need to "break in" a
> player, but It is getting a lot of use since I'm home this week and my
> stereo is set up in my work space where I spend most of my time.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Ed Presson
>

The idea of "breaking-in" electronic components such as CD players,
amplifiers, preamps, etc. is pure nonsense. Even more nonsensical is the
notion of breaking-in cables. These are audiophile mythology of the highest
order.

Now it is possible that some components might actually require break-in: SOME
speakers, and SOME phonograph cartridges MIGHT benefit from being run-in to
make suspensions around speakers and attached to cantilevers of cartridges
attain their required amount of suppleness, but even that is necessary only
on a model by model basis. IOW, not all cartridges need to be "broken-in" nor
all speakers.

[Jack[_10_]]

On Dec 16, 12:07=A0pm, "Ed Presson" > wrote:
> My Sony SCD-C2000ES SACD changer has decided to read only SACDs, and balk=
s
> on CDs (skips, stops dead, or won't read at all). =A0It looks like I can =
ship
> it off to Sony for repair for a minimum fee of $119 (goes up if there is
> abuse or moisture damage), or I can start looking for a replacement.
>
> The Oppo BDP-95 seems like a well-built option-it's gotten good reviews.
> Does anyone have experience using the BDP-95 as a CD/SACD player in a
> standard stereo system? =A0Is the user-interface clumsy without a video
> screen? =A0Are there more attractive options?
>
> I'd appreciate your comments and advice.
>
> Ed Presson

I have an Oppo BDP83SE, it functions splendidly as a music CD player
and as a photo CD ROM reader and plays DVDs splendidly upscaling them
To HD TV.