Cheap DVD-Audio/SACD player?

[shokhead]

I have a older cd and the olny recording info on it is DDD Digital which means?

[westcott]

You will never get 96/24 from SACD or DVD Audio no matter how you hook it up, analog or digital.

It really is a limitation of recording equipment, not the format.

Here are a couple of links I think you will find interesting. I think that what you discovered is that it really depends more on the quality of the recording than the format.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...udioSACD12.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...AudioSACD2.php

I would at least be careful if running a 5.1 system using these "better" formats.

Hope this helps.

[Mike Anderson]

Try the display function on your DVD player. It should tell you which audio track is playing. Some DVD players will also tell you the resolution of the PCM signal.

Oh I see, it's on the TV - I press Display and in the audio section of the window It says LPCM 1 * 96k24b, so I guess I'm good to go!

I've ordered the Gershwin, Muddy Waters, and Hank Mobley discs, I'll let you know how I like them.

Thanks again for all your advice, you've been extremely helpful.

[noddin0ff]

I have a older cd and the olny recording info on it is DDD Digital which means?

I think the DDD you see refers to 1) recording 2) master 3) media. On CDs the last letter is always D because CDs are digital. If the material was recorded analog and the master was made digital the CD will be ADD. If everything was done analog and then turned into CD it will be AAD. You tend to see the DDD's more prominently positioned on the label of older CD's because at the time 'all digital recording' was sexy.

[Woochifer]

You will never get 96/24 from SACD or DVD Audio no matter how you hook it up, analog or digital.

That would depend on the original recording. If it was done using that resolution (or a whole number multiple such as 48/24 or 192/24), then a 96/24 playback format will allow for transfer of the master without downsampling, dithering, or dynamic range compression, which is not currently the case with CDs.

You won't get 96/24 out of SACD because it is a one-bit format that uses a 2.822 MHz sampling rate. Not the same thing.

Here are a couple of links I think you will find interesting. I think that what you discovered is that it really depends more on the quality of the recording than the format.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...udioSACD12.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...AudioSACD2.php

Good links with good information, but as mentioned in the header, those articles are old and I think that they resort to some hyperbole to make their points, as evidenced by the "royal scam" implication in the title.

IMO, the primary benefit to DVD-A and SACD is that they afford a new opportunity to revisit albums that might have been poorly transferred to CD the first time around, to transfer newer recordings with minimal alteration to the signal (the downsampling process to 44.1/16 can purge a lot of data that was in the original source), and to finally let multichannel music see the light of day without resorting to the heavy compression that you see with lossy DD. The theoretical arguments IMO are moot if the bottom line impact of using high res is improved sound quality, irregardless of the primary causal factor.

I would at least be careful if running a 5.1 system using these "better" formats.

Careful? Agreed, but no different than with any other multichannel format. If you have a properly aligned and calibrated 5.1 setup, then DVD-A and SACD only need to be level matched to the default settings using the six-channel analog input. Getting to the proper alignment and calibration is a similar process that you would use to optimize DD and DTS playback.

[emorphien]

I've been happy with my Pioneer Elite DV-45A for SACD/DVD-A usage (primary reason I got it). I paid $240 shipped for a new one sealed in box off audiogon mid last year.

[Mike Anderson]

I've ordered the Gershwin, Muddy Waters, and Hank Mobley discs, I'll let you know how I like them.

Got the discs; I can indeed tell the difference between these and 16/44 CDs. The Mobley is incredible -- the brass is so realistic and in-your-face it's uncanny. You close your eyes and you'd swear there's a sax or trumpet player smack dab in front of you.

The Muddy Waters recording is also sweet; you can hear his fingers moving across the fretboard. Too bad they drowned it all in so much reverb, but that was the style of recording back then...

[Celtic Bob]

I just got the Yammy DVDS1500 player and hooked it up to my reciever via optical cable. It will only play the dvd side of a disc (Dual Disc) in PCM and not the 5.1 Will I have to hook it up via RCA cables to get the 5.1 mix to work?

[shokhead]

Should play as long as your sure its 5.1 the same as a movie DVD. Recheck the menu's.

[Celtic Bob]

The "Menu" has 2 options

Dolby Surround
Dolby Stereo

Both of these are PCM Stereo according to my reciever.

[shokhead]

What about your player?

[Celtic Bob]

player has both optical and 5.1 outs.
that what you meant?

[shokhead]

player menu setup right?

[Celtic Bob]

Player set up seems OK.
DVD's will allow me to choose 2.0 or 5.1 and it will play that way. When I choose it for a SACD or DVD-A it will only play 2ch

EDIT: the Joe Perry dual disc will play the 5.1 mix through the optical cable BUT the BonJovi dual disc will only play the 5.1 mix through the analog cables. This makes no sense to me.