Ripping SACD as WAV file = same sound quality?

To those more experienced with digital music, here's a question:

If I rip a SACD as a WAV file, will it still contain the high-rez info at 24/96? If so, can I still get the same sound quality by playing that WAV file through a DAC that samples at 24/96?

Put another way, can you obtain the sound quality offered by a SACD if you rip it as a WAV file, then play that file through a high-end DAC that upsamples at 24/96?

Forgive me if my question isn't clear enough, my knowledge of playing music through DACs is rather limited.

Thanks!

 

There's no way to "rip" a SACD in the digital domain.

 

fathom is correct, no ripping.

But I've recorded many single layer SACD's in Audition, downsample and save as wav's.

 

yes but 'we' need to ask...

how to rip?
we all have limitations and is needed to ask because you can know one good way to do that.

cheers!

 

What if was ripped like a needledrop? SACS to analog and then reencoded as a high res digital file?

 

Yes, you can do that, but it wouldn't be "bit-identical" after all those signal conversions through the various paths (digital to analog to digital), so in response to the original question ("same sound quality?" - emphasis mine), the answer is NO.

If the question were "satisfactory sound quality?" or "pleasing sound quality?" then the answer would be "it depends; try it and see." Depending on the equipment used and the person's ears and notions about what is "pleasing" or "satisfactory" sound quality, a "needledrop" of an SACD via analog outs that is saved as 192/24 WAV files and then burned as a DVD-Audio disc might possibly sound even better (subjectively, to the listener's ears) than the original disc, because something in the processing might add some pleasant EQ or warmth (such as if you do the SACD "needledrop" via some tube equipment, for example).

Craig.

 

That would work, but there would be a loss through the digital to analog then back to digital conversion.

Frank R.

 

The quality still suffers.

 

If you're simply talking about taking a HYBRID SACD disc's standard (44.1/16) CD layer and ripping it to WAV file (staying in the digital domain), then no, the high-resolution data won't be preserved on the resulting WAV file. You'll just get the 44.1/16 CD layer's data.

Some people hear auditory benefits to upsampling lower-resolution sound files (such as 44.1/16 or even lossy formats such as MP3s) to higher sample/frequency rates such as 24bit/96kHz, but that depends on the quality of the DAC, and whether whatever the DAC is doing to change the sound of the files is considered better or worse to the listener's ears.

Anyway, such a discussion has nothing to do with SACD; only a standard CD is needed to try that out.

In addition, if theoretically it were even possible to "rip" an SACD to 24/96 WAV entirely in the digital domain, at the least you'd have to contend with software designed to convert the DSD data stream to 24 bit, which is apples and oranges as far as I am aware. (So even then, "same sound quality" might not be technically possible.)

Craig.

 

There is an interesting thread on the Slim Devices forum where the possibility is discussed of using a modified Oppo that converts DSD to PCM, and then recording the PCM.

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71841

If I understand correctly, the DSD to PCM conversion is in the digital domain, so maybe this would provide the desired fidelity?

 

Yes, you can rip SACD data, but not easily and you do have to convert to PCM at some level in order for the data to be useful, and that involves resampling. There are add-on boards out there which convert DSD to PCM in the digital domain. You could therefore take that and write out PCM data, stick a header on it and call it a wav file. However, no off-the-shelf solution exists.

You will likely never be able to use EAC or whatever to "rip" SACD but if you were determined enough you could get hirez PCM data out of SACD without falling into the analog hole.

 

"Desired fidelity" is a good way to put it. "Equivalent sound quality" or "comparable sound quality" might be another good way to describe it.

"Same sound quality" would not be achieved, though (in my opinion), due to the alterations in the sound (no matter how tiny) resulting from the DSD to PCM conversion. A converter is programmed to make decisions about how to convert one digital format into another.

Craig.

 

I've done this before with the Oppo player an HDMI to DVI + SPDIF breakout box.

 

oh boy, i like of golden unquestionables and definitives afirmatives!

 

You've got to tell us more:
Which model of Oppo were you using?
What breakout box did you use?
What sampling rate and bit depth did you capture?
What did you use to capture the SPDIF signal?
How did it sound?

Thank you in advance!

 

I did this a couple years ago so it's a little hazy. I wrote about it some on this forum though so it's out there somewhere. After I ripped all the SACDs I owned I never really had much use for it again.

It was a Oppo 980H, I don't own it anymore.
It was a Gefen breakout box.
24/88.2 sampling rate into a sound card where I captured the PCM stream and converted it into a WAV file.
The files sounded nice and still sound nice actually.

 

You could also try this box to "de-embed" the PCM bitstream from HDMI:

http://www.atlona.com/Atlona-HDMI-1.3-Audio-De-Embedder-p-17801.html

a "review" here:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/cables/atlona-tech-at-hd570

DanG

 

You could run the SACD analogue out put into a 2496 capable sound card and save them as 2496 Wav files for computer playback. I am not sure why you would do this, but it is a free country...still. I would just enjoy then through your SACD player use your times on other things.

 

The reason why is obvious. Music servers are here and people want all their music at their fingertips in the full quality that they paid for.

 

Well you can't have it then. No "consumer" SACD "rippers" and no "consumer" facility to store and play the SACD's DSD data verbatim at this time. Gotta play the disc in an SACD capable player. Anything else at this time is a process which involves distortion to and/or loss of data.

fwiw I like SACD, just sayin'.

 

No. The (typical) SACD has multiple layers on it. SACD involves a different kind of digital data from CDs and what most computers are using (which is called PCM). It's not just a different rate like 24/96 vs 16/44.1, it's very different. Our computers don't use DSD and there are no SACD players for computers. When you put the SACD in a non-SACD player - which your computer's drive is - a regular old 16/44.1 CD standard layer is read. This is what would be "ripped" to your computer, therefore a regular 16/44.1 wav would do. Does that explanation make sense?

 

Well, you would want to do this if you have music on SACDs (no CD layer) and want to put it on you music server (ie. Squeezbox etc). Of course you could just go and buy the CD version.

I've debated trying this mostly because I have a very nice sounding SACD player (Modwright Sony 9000). It would be interesting to compare the sound of a recorded SACD (at 24/96) to the ripped CD on a Transporter.

 

I would think that if you took the analog signal from a SACD and converted it to 24/96 files, you could (if your gear was of a reasonable level of quality) get a result that sounded better than a CD of the same mastering. I haven't tried it, but I have ripped LPs to digital at that resolution and found the result to be indistinguishable from the original.

So I would reckon there's probably good reason to give the SACD to analog to digital path a try if you want a nice sounding digital version.

 

SACD converted to 24/96 does sound better than RBCDs. "If" the same mastering is used on the hybrids I own, then when the high res FLACs always sound better than the RBCD FLACs this is because of the higher res and not because of a different mastering for the SACD layer.

As already discussed, it is as of yet, not consumerwise easy to rip an SACD but it is possible yet it is tedious and time consuming (one reason I was all for DVD-A).

This exact question had me thinking a few days ago. I HATE the idea of downloads. I think the current pricing schemes are horrible and the value outlandishly low. Yet, the idea of true 24/96 or 24/192 without the futzing is really REALLY nice. Perhaps what places like HDTracks could do is sell a DVD-R with the high res tracks on them, album art etc., with the understanding that in most circumstances, folks need to drag and drop the stored FLAC files onto a hard drive and queue up in one's favourite player.

I'd pay the premium prices for this. Automatic backup with artwork like I now get with SACD single or dual layers and my trusty RBCDs. I want the high res, I even have a portable digital audio player that plays 24/96 FLAC files! (Hifiman HM-801). I have computers galore, DACs etc. I need the software but I want tangible items for my money, not bits and bytes that I can't ever "redownload" without repaying. For the cost, I want a true archival backup in hand before I start dropping to my servers.

 

DVD-A is more friendly to ripping, but there are still some strange copy protections. I tried many programs to rip my In Absentia DVD-A with no success and finally gave up.