Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Why SACD Disc playback sounds better than its equivalent ripped DSF file playbac (Read 1553 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why SACD Disc playback sounds better than its equivalent ripped DSF file playbac

Over the weekend, we had a chance to rip a few of our own SACD discs into DSF file.
We then compare the playback of SACD Disc vs the Ripped DSF File on the same audio system.

Player: Oppo 105 SACD player (has USB input to playback the DSF file from original SACD Disc) - using XLR output
Pre-Amp: Denafrips Athena
Amplifier: Two Mark Levinson 333 Bi-Amp
Speakers: A Pair of B&W N801
Room: Acoustically treated
Playback is level match with pink noise track so both SACD Disc and DSF file playback are the same volume SPL.

The ripped DSF file sounds good, but when compare to SACD Disc playback of the same album/song, the Disc playback has slightly better dynamic and transparency.
We could tell with our eyes closed when one of us switches between Disc Playback vs DSF file playback from the same Oppo 105.

Why is that?

Is it true that SACD Disc digital signal is clocked while USB DSF file interface playback signal is not clocked?

Re: Why SACD Disc playback sounds better than its equivalent ripped DSF file playbac

Reply #1 –
If you recorded the output of the two playback methods it would be possible to answer why playback may sound different. Or if there is any actual difference at all. Oppo seems to have digital outputs, recording that would make the comparison easy.