sacd can be copyed or extracted as .wav?

[raquete]

hi all.
i never hear,saw and don't know sacds players.
one friend call me and ask how he can extract .waves from sacd.as i don't know,the better option for the answer is ask you here.

if is possible to be copyed or extracted as .wav,please show me how it can be done.

thanks so much.

[Mug Funky]

SACD is a very jealously protected format...

if the player has a digital out, you could probably record through that (at the risk of dropping samples, but should be fine) as that'll output PCM instead of the cockamame DSD crap sony are trying to push on us.

otherwise, find a good sound card and exploit the "analog hole" :) pretend it's vinyl.

[raquete]

otherwise, find a good sound card and exploit the "analog hole"...lol
i think it's worse or impossible because sacds can't be read or play in pcs hardwares...it's really a "digital bit..ch" hole(from black sabbath-born again) :p

thanks so much,very clear.

[Mug Funky]

yeah. clearly sony hasn't learnt from betamax, MD or memory stick.

locked-down formats, not matter how good (or bad in the case of MD) they are, will not be adopted no matter how hard you push them...

SACD is similar to getting a high quality B&W image, taking it into photoshop, resizing it to a stupidly large size, converting it to 1-bit with error diffusion, then zooming out really far until something resembling the original image is visible. it works, and can even sound good, but the amount of HF quantization noise is enormous and must be tackled with analog filters. in spite of what is said of the format, this HF noise cuts in well in the audible range (around about 10khz), but is probably quiet enough to not be annoying (or even audible... jury's out).

just doesn't seem elegant though - recordings must be mastered in PCM and converted to DSD, so what's the point in adding all that distortion instead of just paying a little more for a good LPCM D/A converter in your equipment and going for 24/48?

[raquete]

clearly sony hasn't learnt from betamaxi had hard time working with betamax and i don't learn anything too. lol
locked-down formats, not matter how good (or bad in the case of MD) they are, will not be adopted no matter how hard you push them... and you forgot the "el-cassete" or some like this,i don't remember the right name but i'm sure that is better forget.
SACD is similar to getting a high quality B&W image, taking it into photoshop, resizing it to a stupidly large size, converting it to 1-bit with error diffusion, then zooming out really far until something resembling the original image is visible. :p wow...lol,it's a complete list of "features inside the manual". lol (too much)
it works,.. ah..yes,sony did something but only...seems something. :p
just doesn't seem elegant though but they have proud of it. :rolleyes:
what's the point in adding all that distortion instead of just paying a little more .. it's simple: first break ,later try to recover...
a good LPCM D/A converter in your equipment and going for 24/48? take care,they can use idea and in the label will have " developed by sony" lol

Mug Funky, :cool:
you make my day(i'm very happy).
i never read so clever explantions of what really never worked...lol

regards!

[dnewhous]

SACD is similar to getting a high quality B&W image, taking it into photoshop, resizing it to a stupidly large size, converting it to 1-bit with error diffusion, then zooming out really far until something resembling the original image is visible. it works, and can even sound good, but the amount of HF quantization noise is enormous and must be tackled with analog filters. in spite of what is said of the format, this HF noise cuts in well in the audible range (around about 10khz), but is probably quiet enough to not be annoying (or even audible... jury's out).


I've read that the resolution of SACD is lower than redbook CD for frequencies over 10 kHz (but the people who originally made the claim I read aren't English speakers). You wouldn't by any chance know how to calculate that limitation would you?

A naive calculation on my part:

First, a PCM equivalent. SACD is 120 db dynamic range (20 bit depth) and has a range up to 25 kHz (I'll say 48 kHz sampling rate, since it is very standard). The total bit rate is 2.8 MHz or thereabouts. SACD is always converted from a PCM source, so let's say SACD is a 60 X oversampling DSD conversion of 20 bit, 48 kHz PCM.

So, there will be 60 DSD data points for every 1 PCM data point. From my perspective, the 60 DSD data points mean that by the time you get to the DSD data point corresponding to the next PCM data point, you have only 120 possible discrete values that data point can take. To me this implies that SACD has an effective bit depth of 6.9 bits at 24 kHz.

You need fewer data points for lower frequencies, but if you solve for the frequency

f = 120*24000/2^16
f ~= 45 Hz

This tells me that SACD is inferior to redbook CD for frequencies over 45 Hz. Can it be true? Am I oversimplifying?

Maybe you can direct me to a good reference?

[Biggiesized]

SACD's SNR drops incredibly beyond 20 kHz. The format is completely unnecessary as DVD-Audio would have sufficed not only audibly, but also in terms of mixing/mastering ease.

[dnewhous]

I think HDAD should be the standard because of its ease as a consumer deliverable and its rippability.

[raquete]

i had forgot this thread.

i have a Digital SACD Ripping Guide done by my friend but need a modified version of the Oppo DV-980H player.
you can find some details here: http://www.switch-box.com/

i never did but my friend did some for me and sounds great.
interesteds can pm me as i don't know if break any rule posting it here.

[dnewhous]

I wouldn't care even if I could rip them on my computer. It's a lousy technology. The only benefit is that the redbook layer somtimes has a superior mastering job to alternatives. If the redbook layers sounds like garbage (see "Dark Side of the Moon") there are always collectible Japanese issues to pursue.

[raquete]

digital rip is not lossy.
you can have the japanese(black triangle), or from US, or UK ...or MFSL but are stereo.
the hybrid SACD is 5.1 and DVD-A(Alan Parsons mix from master tape) is 4.1!
better is have good options than garbage. :)
i have all possibilities.

[dnewhous]

digital rip is not lossy.


The conversion of PCM into crappy DSD is lossy.

MFSL? Nobody likes the MFSL version of DSOTM.

The Harvest blackface or black triangle without TO (very obscure) are the ones considered best.

I had the MFSL version of The Wall and it sucked giant C. The version you can buy at Best Buy will sound better.

Also, without a good way to virtualize surround sound on headphones, I don't give a flip about surround sound.

[raquete]

The conversion of PCM into crappy DSD is lossy.

MFSL? Nobody likes the MFSL version of DSOTM.

The Harvest blackface or black triangle without TO (very obscure) are the ones considered best.

I had the MFSL version of The Wall and it sucked giant C. The version you can buy at Best Buy will sound better.

Also, without a good way to virtualize surround sound on headphones, I don't give a flip about surround sound.
as i don't know how you do the convertion of pcm into DSD...can be crappy or not.
tell us how you do that, then we can measure as here is one advanced audio forum.

the wall?
we was talking about DSOTMoon, i don't know if have any the wall black triangle.

nobody likes MFSL?
well, is your oppinion and is against lots of people like me that buy MFSL.(Vinyls and cds)

headphones?? ...no, i prefer 10 speakers around me and is how i hear musics all day long and will be 14 speakers in next days.
you can be sure that sounds better than any headphone, have more air around to be moved than in few centimeters inside headphones. sound need air for propagation, vacum don't sound anything or just a few.
using speakers i have stomach effects, windows twisting and shacking .... and mad neighborwood around. :p
you can hear and feel, is like live show.

[dnewhous]

as i don't know how you do the convertion of pcm into DSD...yes, can be crappy.
tell us how you do that, then we can measure as here is one advanced audio forum.

Instead of a number indicating an absolute value each bit represents an increase or decrease in amplitude.

"Oversampling" is the number of DSD data points you have for each PCM data point. Since you go up or down by a fixed amount with each DSD data point you need to oversample (have multiple DSD data points for each PCM data point) to be able to get to the same value as the next PCM data point. Obviously, this system has a lot of imperfections. DSD was the only way to implement mass producable DACs for a long time. Even my Pioneer LD-S9 has DSD DACs in them.

I haven't studied device modeling, though. So I'm sure I'm missing something.


nobody likes MFSL?
well, is your oppinion and is against lots of people like me that buy MFSL.(Vinyl and cds)


MFSL is very hit or miss. I owned MFSL The Wall on CD and it sucked, the 2CD I bought at Best Buy blew it away, which I have replaced with the 1994 UK issue so I could have something manufactured to the redbook spec. A lot of people have told me MFSL DSOTM sucks too.
The DSOTM I bought at Best Buy sounded terrible, though. The black triangle (with or without TO) is much better than that.

[raquete]

thanks for the infos about DSD data, i confess that i don't knew. :)

about The Wall MFSL...yes, some people say that is crappy, i have the MFSL and the standard, no big deal in both, old vinyl sounds good.

DSOTM hybrid SACD, B.Triangle and 180g Heavy Vinyl 30th Anniversary Edition are highly recommended.

[Midzuki]

raquete wrote:

headphones?? ...no, i prefer 10 speakers around me and is how i hear musics all day long and will be 14 speakers in next days.

With the Ambisonics technology, nobody ever needs more than 8 speakers. :cool:

using speakers i have stomach effects, windows twisting and shacking .... and mad neighborwood around. :p
you can hear and feel, is like live show.

No, it's not. :( The current commercial implementations of multichannel audio have been designed NOT to be realistic, but to "look cool". :mad:

[raquete]

yes Midzuki,
no need more than 8 speakers but as i have more some are in serial and/or paralel and in some cases together as only one speaker.
2 speakers together for R, 2 speakers together for L...etc.
maybe i can draw in paint for ilustrations showing where and how each speaker are in the room...i will try.

and it's not commercial implementations only here, is my own way to plug the speakers in 6.1 system...don't "look cool", look like a mess(lol) but sounds good as i do my own 5.1(AC3, Wave) or 6.1(DTS) and some others commercials that was not done by myself.
you know, some people are getting Beatles mono box, my preference is stereo. some people only hear mono and others only stereo and can't understand why others like suround as "we have 2 ears". i know one guy that got a turntable for 35.000U$ :eek: and a technics cartridge for 4.000U$. for me he is totaly crazy as my system is cheap and the turntable seems a "locomotive", is very strange, have vacum to adjust the weight of the needle and some more madness....(i post a photo later if he agree)
in the same way i prefer lots of speakers but not hear high volume and my position inside the room to hear it all is in my personal focus. some friends when are hearing with me chose a different place.
cheers.

[Midzuki]

@ raquete: Apologies for not expressing myself "clearly enough" :o When I said that the widely-known implementatons of multichannel audio are not realistic, I was thinking about the Section 12 of the Ambisonics F.A.Q.
{
http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/Ambisonic/faq_latest.html#SECTION12
}

12. What is the pair-wise mixing style?

To produce a sound from the direction of a speaker requires only channel separation. To produce phantom sound images between speakers requires a mixing style. In stereo, the most popular mixing style is "pair-wise" mixing.

Pair-wise mixing is also called "pan-potting", "amplitude mixing" and "intensity stereophony". It mixes signals into the feeds for a pair of speakers to create the illusion that a sound is coming from a point somewhere between the speakers. During mixing, the apparent location of each sound is determined only by the relative amplitude of that sound in the two speakers. Almost all stereo recordings are mixed using the pair-wise mixing style.

The ear/brain localises sounds using phase differences between the ears as well as amplitude differences. (Phase is used to localise sounds with frequencies between 150 Hz and 1.5 kHz, amplitude for frequencies between 300 Hz and 5 kHz, and other cues for frequencies above 2.5 kHz. Note that the three frequency ranges overlap.) Fortunately, when a pair of speakers are in front of the listener and separated by 60 degrees or less, because each ear hears both speakers, low-frequency amplitude differences between the speakers are converted to phase differences between the ears. For most people the pair-wise mixing style works well in stereo.

Unfortunately, pair-wise mixing works poorly when the speakers are to the rear of the listener and not-at-all when they are to one side. (See the Gerzon 1985 or the Fellgett 1981 references. Better still, try it yourself!) This means that any surround sound system that relies on pair-wise mixing between adjacent speakers must fail. This is as true for the 5.1 discrete channel systems of today as it was true for the quadraphonic systems of yesterday. Such absolute statements can be made because the way that the ear/brain localises sound has not changed.

Ambisonics is completely unconnected with pair-wise mixing and does not suffer from its surround sound limitations. With the Ambisonic mixing style, sounds can originate from any direction, either 360-degree horizontal or periphonic (full-sphere).

[raquete]

first, no need excuses, you're welcome.

i used ambisonics a long time ago but no more.
Ambisonics explanations are respectables but they not have the final word, for example:
..and other cues for frequencies above 2.5 kHz
seems very very...unclear for who write absolutes conditions.
and
For most people the pair-wise mixing style works well in stereo.then it's individual and vary from person to person.
and
With the Ambisonic mixing style, sounds can originate from any direction, either 360-degree horizontal or periphonic (full-sphere). lol, i only want that they send a single sample that was done using ambisonic prooving it.
i don't want copy from master tapes but a true extraction from stereo where each channel have independent sound and not panoramic sound around(full-sphere, is easy).

Keith Richard once said...talk is cheap!

cheers Midzuki.

[Ghitulescu]

i had forgot this thread.

i have a Digital SACD Ripping Guide done by my friend but need a modified version of the Oppo DV-980H player.
you can find some details here: http://www.switch-box.com/

i never did but my friend did some for me and sounds great.
interesteds can pm me as i don't know if break any rule posting it here.

As long as no player outputs the SACD in the digital form (the Denons do but they are allowed by Sony since they have some protection, I don't know details) and no SACD drive for PC/Mac/SGI exists, the question becomes rethoric.
Having modified players that output 4x S/P-DIF is not really a solution either, as no sound card I know has 4 S/P-DIF inputs (but I know a lot having ADAT inputs ;), ie 1 optical in having 8 separate channels), well, it comes the issue of synchronizing the 4 pairs of digital stereo.

[raquete]

as you don't know the guide, the modified Oppo and how to do...you're right in what you can think and we have limitations when thinking because it run in the direction of our desire and the logic sometimes is far away from our vague imagination.

is not my guide as i wrote before but here is part, short details:

"The Oppo offers pure DSD output over HDMI 1.2 but it also gives the option for PCM output. The Oppo internally converts the DSD to PCM at 24-bit/88.2kHz and the "mod" captures this PCM signal and outputs it through three stereo S/PDIF (coaxial) jacks.
To capture this glorious digital signal, I am using three M-Audio Delta 1010LT sound cards simultaneously.
They each have a single stereo coaxial input, so in order to record all six channels simultanesously, three cards must be used."

you knew something like this before? seems bad?

[Ghitulescu]

That was exactly what I said, you need 3 bzw. 4 cards as no card I know has more than 1 S/P-DIF input (I don't even dare to think 3 or 4) and these cards need to be professional.

If you use 3-4 consumer grade cards you'll get into one or both problems:
1. run out of IRQs (imagine that Creative cards need at least 2 IRQs, I think the media is 3 IRQs per card) since they don't share the IRQs
2. the consumer grade cards usually hinder each other (they are not designed to work in parallel).

On the other hand, [semi]pro cards use only one IRQ per card, some brands (like Hammerhead, but there are many others) can share the same IRQ up to 4 cards at a time. Also they don't resample the sound to 48kHz (ASIO) like the consumer ones (kmixer).

So 4 Hammerheads need 1 IRQ, 4 Creative Live! need 12 IRQs (should they work together).

On top comes the modification of the SACD player, which is by no means cheap (the Swiss cards cost about 200-400€ apiece), plus the installation.

Why do not they manufacture an add-on card that outputs the SACD as USB2.0 or iLink (like Denons)? It's no use to have 3-4 S/P-DIFs, unless you have 3 or 4 stereo power amplifiers. You can't use the 3-4 digital outputs for anything ... you can't capture the signal, you can't hear the music...

You pay 2000-2500€ for nothing (player + card + montage + 4x sound cards + 4 cables + profi audio software + eventual shippings). You have to work the signals back into a recognisable format. And you're breaking the law.

Nice trap ........

YES, it seems bad even if it's not my money

[raquete]

if seems bad for you i agree with you, nothing against your taste and feelings.
ah...the manner that you see how it works is completely wrong(different) comparing with the guide that i have but don't mind, forget it...here what is very important now...
breaking the law? how?
you, me and lots of people can't rip cds, dvds, blu-rays and others medias(or tapes)that we got for personal use(as backup)?
everybody here and in others forums around the world ripping what buy are breaking laws?!?
why not SACD?

if break laws, moderators here will close half(or more) of the threads in the forum.

let the others out of my question, treat as personal, answer only for me:
am i breaking rules ripping my medias for backup and personal use?
(the answer can be in big red)

[Ghitulescu]

if seems bad for you i agree with you, nothing against your taste and feelings.
ah...the manner that you see how it works is completely wrong(different) comparing with the guide that i have but don't mind, forget it...here what is very important now...
breaking the law? how?
you, me and lots of people can't rip cds, dvds, blu-rays and others medias(or tapes)that we got for personal use(as backup)?
everybody here and in others forums around the world ripping what buy are breaking laws?!?
why not SACD?

if break laws, moderators here will close half(or more) of the threads in the forum.

let the others out of my question, treat as personal, answer only for me:
am i breaking rules ripping my medias for backup and personal use?
(the answer can be in big red)

Sure, within the US (including territories) and EU (including various dominions and oversea territories) circumventing a copy protection is illegal. Except for most CDs, almost any DVD-Video (there are exceptions), DVD-Audio and SACD are copy protected. And of course the BDs.

Try to understand this well: it doesn't matter if the protection is effective or not (it can be a nag screen saying please enter password), if it's there, then you're circumventing technical means so you're an outlaw ;) For SACD the copy protection resides in the fact that you can't have by design any digital bit outside - that's why, with the notable exception of selected Denons, absolutely no SACD player has digital outputs (if it's a multi player then Sony requires that all digital outputs be mute so you can have only the analog outputs).
I think that would be extremely difficult to explain what is a copy protection and what is not if you're in front of a judge (and/or jury) that has/have no technical understanding and facing a sneaky attorney that wants your skin (or he looses his!).
The chances are that nobody comes after you if you ripped your own CDs/DVDs/SACDs and kept them home, you're thus an honest thief, so Doom9 is also relatively safe allowing such threads, even under DMCA.

So why the Swiss producers are allowed to sell these kits? Don't know, maybe because they sell them as an alternative (so the honest consumer can use a D/A of his/her own choice = interconnectivity) and probably they are forced to provide a copy protection on that S/P-DIF connection (like SCMS). Which is ignored by your friend's Deltas. Or simply because they're outside both EU and US.

Just the last bit:
Until the owner of this forum indicates the jurisdiction under which this forum activates, any decision to close/censor ones actions or any detrimental action commited by moderators is theoretically an abuse and can be sued before any court. So the matter of deciding what is legal and what is not is left to the moderators.
There is a nice post in the German twin forum (forum.gleitz.info), someone asked about ripping a DVD, a mod explained that guy that the forum is located in Germany and thus it is illegal to rip DVDs that are copy protected, therefore they can't help him further.

[raquete]

Ghitulescu,
i'm not a lawyer but afraid to break any rule in my country or in others countries, i don't will send or post the guide to rip SACD.
is a closed possibility now.

thanks so much for magnifics clarifications.

[Ghitulescu]

Ghitulescu,
i'm not a lawyer but afraid to break any rule in my country or in others countries, i don't will send or post the guide to rip SACD.
is a closed possibility now.

thanks so much for magnifics clarifications.

No, it's not what I wanted ... I explained you some details.

You are safe, your posts reflects your opinions and it's the duty of a mod to guard that the posts respects the law. In the worst situation you'll get 1 strike under Rule 6 ;).

I am really curious ("academic purposes") how can one rip SACD if no PC drives exist that read SACD and no digital out available. Such setups are expensive and probably it's not worth to invest such money for ripping a couple of SACDs. The absence of cheap copying methods was the main reason why I haven't seen any SACD for sale in the last year. And being a pure Sony invention ... like elcaset, MD, micromv and the like

[raquete]

ah ah Sony...Sony build good products but do lots of madness sometimes. i remember el K7 and betamax.

the SACD is not ripped in pc, you don't saw the hint in post #9 of first page. is one modified Oppo DV-980H player.have a link there for more hints but the guide...
as some nervous people here write sometimes: "why don't you read the thread?" blah,blah... lol, just kiddin :) read as a joke, not serious.
help came and go with good will, with strike is not help, agree?

the guide now is past, i don't will send links, post or discuss because i got initial barrier, have possibility of strike under Rule 6 summed with international rules breaking and for me it means....end of the road!

:)

[Ghitulescu]

I remember reading long time ago that someone proposed to take out a drive from the very first PS3 series (that that can play SACDs) and to adapt it to PC, meanwhile nothing happened ... :(

[raquete]

i never heard about that.

what i know is that first PS3 series can play uncompressed waves, don't know about newers....maybe using HDMI.

[G_M_C]

I remember reading long time ago that someone proposed to take out a drive from the very first PS3 series (that that can play SACDs) and to adapt it to PC, meanwhile nothing happened ... :(

I'm not shure that would work. Besides the multi-layer configuration the SACD-layer would be technically similay to a DVD-layer, having pits and lands.

Adapting a DVD or BD-drive would be almost the same thing, changing focus or what not (that this is possible is proven by the multi-format players Denon and Oppo have come up with for instance). It would be all in the controller and/or controlling of the laser etc. where the first challenge lies. After that it's in the decoding-stage where where the difference in the audio-stream (compared to the standard CD) will come from.

So even if you could port a drive, still you'd need the software to decode !

[Ghitulescu]

The drive should be prima facie compatible, I don't think that Sony radically changed the design of PS3. The rest is similar to reading eg X-Box disks on a PC, or the old PS1 disks, or any other format that is not FAT/NTFS/etc.
The lack of SACDs and their price when found is probably the reason why this project died (the initiator gave up spending time, money and energy), and probably why the 3 S/P-DIF output card would also be a commercial failure (they get the maximum possible from the early adopters).
The only feasible way of getting multichannel HiDef audio would be the ripping of DVD-Audios. You can also use a DVDR to listen them on HiEnd gear.

[jolson]

Why do not they manufacture an add-on card that outputs the SACD as USB2.0 or iLink (like Denons)? It's no use to have 3-4 S/P-DIFs, unless you have 3 or 4 stereo power amplifiers. You can't use the 3-4 digital outputs for anything ... you can't capture the signal, you can't hear the music...
The card is manufactured for people who have good, expensive sound systems that are becoming a bit outdated when it comes to connections.

Before DenonLink and Pioneer's iLink, the only way to transfer DVD-Audio digitally was between a Meridian DVD-Audio player and a Meridian processor. Over 3* SPDIF. This is allowed, since Meridian uses an encryption OK'd by DVD-Audio manufacturers.

However, since Meridian pushed for DVD-Audio - and invented MLP - they refuse to do SACD. So there is a market for modifying SACD players with 3*SPDIF outs, since the Meridian processor also accepts unencrypted input. BTW, TACT also has the same inputs, I believe.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Does anybody know if the use of Dolby TrueHD and/or DTS-HD Master Audio has been considered for future multi-channel surround sound album releases?

[jolson]

"The Future" - short term - is BDAudio and they use TrueHD/Master Audio.

[Midzuki]

"The Future" - short term - is BDAudio and they use TrueHD/Master Audio.

Are you sure of that? So far, neither SACD nor DVD-Audio,
which certainly "were the future" some years ago,
have managed to replace the "outdated" Red Book Audio CDs.

[jolson]

Are you sure of that? So far, neither SACD nor DVD-Audio,
which certainly "were the future" some years ago,
have managed to replace the "outdated" Red Book Audio CDs.
Red-book sure is of no interest for "future multi-channel surround sound album releases", as was specified in the question...