Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

[Tom Swaman]

Assuming I most often listen to FLAC 44.1kbps, 16 bit files, what are the pros and cons of ripping an SACD or a Hybrid SACD versus a plain CD made from similarly mastered sound?

For straight listening to audio using FLAC files at 44.1 kbps and 16 bit, are there any advantages to acauiring the sound from a CD bersus a SACD or a Hybrid SACD?

Many thanks,
Tom

[garym]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Assuming I most often listen to FLAC 44.1kbps, 16 bit files, what are the pros and cons of ripping an SACD or a Hybrid SACD versus a plain CD made from similarly mastered sound?

For straight listening to audio using FLAC files at 44.1 kbps and 16 bit, are there any advantages to acauiring the sound from a CD bersus a SACD or a Hybrid SACD?

Many thanks,
Tom

If the actual underlying masters are the same, you would have to have superhuman hearing to be able to tell the difference in a blind listening test (and even then it would be virtually impossible). Hi res and sacd are primarily a way to make people buy the music again, and they prey on the paranoid audiophiles to extract the profits. This said, if these files are from better, more carefully done remasters then they could be better. But it is the master that makes the difference rather than format.

[Tom Swaman]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Gary,

What you wrote is what I have experienced. The only time I purchase an SACD or Hybrid SACS is when I cannot get the music I want in a good quality CD. I have also done some testing with high resolution downloads. This is a near total rip-off. If you carefully look at the price of the high resolution downloads, you will find the costs go up with the apparent resolution and many of the albums offered are only a portion of the original album. Furthermore, many of today's commercial streaming devices cannot handle the higher sampling rate or bit depth and the extra memory required to handle the music you cannot hear is a near total waste. Frankly, I have found the extra money is better spent having the original hard drives stress tested so you know you have a good quality hard drive from the start.

Have a wonderful week,
Tom

[garym]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Gary,

What you wrote is what I have experienced. The only time I purchase an SACD or Hybrid SACS is when I cannot get the music I want in a good quality CD. I have also done some testing with high resolution downloads. This is a near total rip-off. If you carefully look at the price of the high resolution downloads, you will find the costs go up with the apparent resolution and many of the albums offered are only a portion of the original album. Furthermore, many of today's commercial streaming devices cannot handle the higher sampling rate or bit depth and the extra memory required to handle the music you cannot hear is a near total waste. Frankly, I have found the extra money is better spent having the original hard drives stress tested so you know you have a good quality hard drive from the start.

Have a wonderful week,
Tom

and there are even people selling 24/192 or 24/96 downloads and these are actually 16/44.1 files that have simply been converted to 24/192. Major ripoff!

[Tom Swaman]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Gary,

I am all yoo aware of the correctness of what you wrote. I do know that if someone wants a 192 kbps/24 bit file for whatever reason and they have the hardware to process/handle this, the trick is to ensure that the original was mastered at a higher sampling and bit rate such as 330 kbps/32 bit. There are some recording companies who have done this on some recordings.

Have a good day,
Tom

[soundhd]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

I can tell you what I have experienced with my play back system using vinyl, "redbook" CD's and SACD's.
First of all I do agree that one does need a very good high quality play back system to be able to tell the differences between the different audio sources. My system is currently basically a Bryston based system (pre-amp, crossover and amps). Speakers are a pair of JBL 4350's (bi-amped...thus the need for the two amps and the crossover).
Music sources are a Phillips SACD1 (modified by Eric) can play both CD's and SACD's. HHB 850 Pro CD burner (that can also play the CD's), a NAD 515 multi disc player , and a VPI Scoutmaster turntable sitting on a Cloud 9 vibration platform teamed up with a VPI SDS Motor Drive and a Simko Blackbird cartridge and a Pure i20 I-Pod dock (for use with my I-Pod)....please do not get me wrong here I am not bragging just trying to let you see where I am coming from with what I am about to say.....
I disagree with the statement that one cannot tell the difference between CD's and SACD's and vinyl..... one can BUT....it takes a very good system to do that. I can sit you down in my listening room and compare the difference between a vinyl record, a redbook CD and and a SACD.
A SACD does sound better then a redbook CD.....deeper, wider sound field...better stereo separation, etc...
A good vinyl record (that is scratch free, been cleaned on a vacume based record cleaner) sounds better then a CD, with again broader, deeper sound field, smoother over all audio, etc....
A vinyl record vs a SACD is very very close......
Now after that has been said I doubt if one could tell the difference ripping a SACD vs a CD using current mid-level to lower priced audio gear. The point that I want to make here is that one has to be very serious about music playback to get the gear needed to reproduce the sound level quality of SACD's and other high end audio........If one is not at that point audio gear wise do not bother sending your money on those high end sources.
But I do suggest if you are giving any thought to high end audio, take a couple of your favorite CD's or SACD's and stop by your local high end audio shop and spend some time listening to some of the gear there........but I will warn you.....you can get "hooked" very quickly on high end audio.......

Just my opinion
An "old school" audiophile and retired Pro Audio concert FOH/Foldback sound mixer/engineer

Gary,

What you wrote is what I have experienced. The only time I purchase an SACD or Hybrid SACS is when I cannot get the music I want in a good quality CD. I have also done some testing with high resolution downloads. This is a near total rip-off. If you carefully look at the price of the high resolution downloads, you will find the costs go up with the apparent resolution and many of the albums offered are only a portion of the original album. Furthermore, many of today's commercial streaming devices cannot handle the higher sampling rate or bit depth and the extra memory required to handle the music you cannot hear is a near total waste. Frankly, I have found the extra money is better spent having the original hard drives stress tested so you know you have a good quality hard drive from the start.

Have a wonderful week,
Tom

[mediavan]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Had to sign up to concur with soundhd - you can tell the difference (particularly on low frequencies), and yes...once heard very easy to be smitten. My mistake for looking for some new speakers for my caravan - just cost me a new AV system and new caravan to put them in!

[pw0p0]

Re: Audio Quality from Ripping CD versus SACD/Hybrid SACD

Hi,

I guess I better toss my 2 cents in as well ...

There is no perceivable difference in an album from Redbook CD vs. SACD if the two are built from the same master. Now usually, an album gets remastered for vinyl (hence the superior sound quality from them that audiophiles so often laud, which they think is intrinsic in the medium, when it is in fact not). This happens less often for SACDs, but if and when it does, then SACDs do contain a higher-quality version of the album as compared to regular Redbook CDs.

Moral of the story: the devil is in the mastering, not the medium.