Then I am don’t know what you are talking in regards to it being easier to get DSF tracks. Because, no matter what, you need to get them or an ISO from the SACD. You can do one without the other…so it is just as easy to get an ISO as it is to get DSF tracks from a SACD.
It is a matter of procedure and convenience if you are ripping many SACDs if you can run the two tasks independently. That frees up the dedicated drive to just rip to ISO while general-purpose devices handle the extraction of the DSFs.
In that case it is actually harder to get the DSF files…
I took Kal to mean it is far more difficult to get the ISO off the disc than it is to manipulate it once it is off using the plethora of software options available. It is also more difficult to get it off the disc relative to the ease of getting PCM off a disc.
1 Like
Nonsense. It is the same process but can be accomplished faster in parallel.
If you don’t need the ISO, which I don’t, it’s a heck of a lot slower to rip the ISO and then use another process to extract the DSF tracks. When I rip a SACD, I tell the software that I want the stereo layer DSF files and that is all that it does. It does not have to rip the whole ISO first.
1 Like
Fine for you.
You can also think of ripping as a backup process. If you only rip stereo, it won’t be complete. Then, if you want to get the multichannel layer later for some reason, you have to rip again.
I have the original SACDs most of which have never been played and ripped the one time. I suppose if I were pirating the SACD I would rip the ISO. But I would never do that. I only care about the 2 channel stuff anyway and have multiple backups of my music library. So, I probably will never need to rip the SACDs again.
Other people will have different needs and priorities…
1 Like
I don’t understand this. Ripping in part or whole is still ripping. And how would you pirate a SACD?
Seriously?
Yes Sony released them, I have Miles Davies (blue)and a few others, single SACD layer as you say.
Dsd64 is same as a physical SACD disc
1 Like
Regarding Currency:
The post by @BCBC references the site [HiFi Haven]. It is kept up to date by the moderator on that site. He’s available to help if necessary.
I would recommend going directly to that site because I am very familiar with the tools and players they recommend. I have ~125 SACD’s that I’ve re-ripped using iterations of scripts and the binary, sacd_extract, as a part of a testing team. The tools are very reliable and if you have issues, there is responsive help available. He is also very knowledgeable about audio formats (but not Roon).
My $0.02.
1 Like
A question…How is the multichannel 5.1 layer of an SACD different from that of the 5.1 layer from a Blu Ray audio disc. Are the channels on the SACD of higher bit rate than that of the Blu-Ray audio disc?
It depends upon the disc. Some Blu-rays have 192/24 but the majority in my experience are 96/24, which most audiophiles consider roughly equivalent to DSD64 (the SACD standard). But some Blu-ray multichannel could be at a lower sampling rate, so you need to search around for details on the Blu-ray in question.
A related question. On a 5.1 multichannel SACD, is each layer the same sampling rate as a 2 channel SACD? In other words, is the quality the same as a 2 channel SACD
The CD layer is not. To be compatible with CD players, it has to be 44.1/16.
Both high density layers (stereo and multichannel) are DSD64. The low density CD layer is of course 44.1/16.
1 Like
One high density layer, two areas. Stereo area is inside nearer to the hub, multichannel area outside nearer to the circumference. On CD, the two areas would be equivalent to multiple sessions.
AJ
1 Like