Sound/Music better than CD

[OCNewbie]

Forget if it was in off-topic, but I remember reading in a thread a while back someone linked a file that had a sample of some music I guess that was "better than CD". I guess because the source was something superior?

Anyway, if anybody has a clue what I'm talking about, please give me a link to the old thread (not sure how to search for it, which keywords, etc.), or a link to something similar, I'd appreciate it, thanks =)

 

[knyghtbyte]

SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

EDIT: http://forums.anandtech.com/me...8&threadid=1405519
certainly a laugh to read, dunno if its much use to you though.
Btw, in regards to my comments above, being honest you need good quality full size hifi speakers to get the best out of the DVD-A or SACD discs, especially look to get speakers with super tweeters (they go up to 30khz and in some cases up to 100khz, regular tweeters dont normally hit over 12khz, even tho human hearing limits at around the 20khz point at best for most people, the higher sounds still affect the lower sounds and how they are percieved so you hear them more naturally.). You can use these formats on cheaper speakers to get surround sound music, but there isnt all that much released in comparison to CD, however what is released is very good, REM Automatic for the People on DVD-Audio is amazing

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

I know the technical specs for DVD-A and SACD are higher than normal CDs but how do they sound? Is it something that only an audiophile with golden ears can appreciate?

 

[Tiamat]

Its something that a person with surround sound system can appreciate.

 

[Goosemaster]

BTW, unless you have one hell of a soundcard, and simply ridiculous speakers, you will not notice the difference.

DVDA improves the soundstage, assume that your speakers can effectively reproduce it

 

[knyghtbyte]

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

I know the technical specs for DVD-A and SACD are higher than normal CDs but how do they sound? Is it something that only an audiophile with golden ears can appreciate?

It depends on the recording etc etc the same as CD does, if its a good high quality master recording thats been treated well and put on to the disc decently then yes, you can tell the difference quite easily, you dont need to be an audiophile with golden ears. The REM Automatic for the People sounds a little bit better, but then its only 48khz so not that much more improved, but the surround steering they used is fantastic, so from a surround POV u get a far superior album in my mind, takes a few listens to get used to tho..lol. For a high level recording, hmm, most of the classical/orchestral stuff is done well, usually at 96khz and yes you can tell the difference in recordings between the CD and the DVD-Audio version (examples i have are Korngolds Adventures of Robin Hood score, Holsts Planets, some Rachmaninov, all those sound far better on DVD-A).
I guess some people might not be able to, my father claims he cant tell the difference between our bathroom radio (admittedly a very good 20 year old Sony, when they made products for quality not for the name badge) and my £3,000 hifi, but then my mother heard a difference in her hifi (which i gave most of the parts to her as i upgraded) when i swapped out the older speaker cable for some newer more expensive stuff, and i hadnt even told her i did! she just said to me had i done something to it as it sounds clearer in the midrange........*shrugs*

My advice, go to a decent hifi shop that has a demo room, beforehand ask them to set up a system within your price range capable of playing DVD-A/SACD and ask if they can provide some discs for you to listen to, and also have the same system set up to play some CD's as well, preferably of the same music as the DVD-A/SACD discs, then you can compare them happily yourself. This is what i did, and im glad i did

 

[FoBoT]

don't you need better ears too?
the human ear can only hear certain things, especially if you have any hearing loss

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
don't you need better ears too?
the human ear can only hear certain things, especially if you have any hearing loss

To assume that it can indeed hear so little would be cheating yourself out of a perhaps attaining a more enjoyable lsitening experience

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

I know the technical specs for DVD-A and SACD are higher than normal CDs but how do they sound? Is it something that only an audiophile with golden ears can appreciate?

It depends on the recording etc etc the same as CD does, if its a good high quality master recording thats been treated well and put on to the disc decently then yes, you can tell the difference quite easily, you dont need to be an audiophile with golden ears. The REM Automatic for the People sounds a little bit better, but then its only 48khz so not that much more improved, but the surround steering they used is fantastic, so from a surround POV u get a far superior album in my mind, takes a few listens to get used to tho..lol. For a high level recording, hmm, most of the classical/orchestral stuff is done well, usually at 96khz and yes you can tell the difference in recordings between the CD and the DVD-Audio version (examples i have are Korngolds Adventures of Robin Hood score, Holsts Planets, some Rachmaninov, all those sound far better on DVD-A).
I guess some people might not be able to, my father claims he cant tell the difference between our bathroom radio (admittedly a very good 20 year old Sony, when they made products for quality not for the name badge) and my £3,000 hifi, but then my mother heard a difference in her hifi (which i gave most of the parts to her as i upgraded) when i swapped out the older speaker cable for some newer more expensive stuff, and i hadnt even told her i did! she just said to me had i done something to it as it sounds clearer in the midrange........*shrugs*

My advice, go to a decent hifi shop that has a demo room, beforehand ask them to set up a system within your price range capable of playing DVD-A/SACD and ask if they can provide some discs for you to listen to, and also have the same system set up to play some CD's as well, preferably of the same music as the DVD-A/SACD discs, then you can compare them happily yourself. This is what i did, and im glad i did

I plan on buying a new reciever and speakers either this week or the next. Do you have any suggestions on what I should look for? I listen to all genres of music and I'd also like to use the new setup for movies as well.


Also are you familiar with Fluance speakers?

 

[knyghtbyte]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
BTW, unless you have one hell of a soundcard, and simply ridiculous speakers, you will not notice the difference.

DVDA improves the soundstage, assume that your speakers can effectively reproduce it

You dont need 'one hell of a soundcard' goosemaster, the Audigy 6.1 or 7.1's handle the signal reasonably well, you can get DVD-Audio Hifi players that only cost three times what a Audigy does (remembering that the player has the actual drawer/laser assembly, LED display etc to account for cost wise). Granted tho if you have a higher end £800 DVD-Audio player you will get an even better sound.
And you dont need simply ridiculous speakers either, mid range budget will be good enough (around £400 a pair) although again the more you spend the better it does get i admit. My £600 Monitor Audio speakers sound fantastic being fed a DVD-A signal....definitely noticable over CD, mainly in the higher end and the lower end, the midrange doesnt generally have all that much of an improvement, but there is still some.

the soundstage part varies from disc to disc, alas the one i was looking forward to the most, Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots turned out to be too mucked around with and just didnt work at all, yet the REM A.F.T.P, a relatively simple album compared to Yoshimi, was mixed into 5.1 spanktastically

Oh Tiamat, the surround side is a brilliant bonus, but if your hifi is hifi rather than computer speakers, stereo listeners still benefit.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

I know the technical specs for DVD-A and SACD are higher than normal CDs but how do they sound? Is it something that only an audiophile with golden ears can appreciate?

It depends on the recording etc etc the same as CD does, if its a good high quality master recording thats been treated well and put on to the disc decently then yes, you can tell the difference quite easily, you dont need to be an audiophile with golden ears. The REM Automatic for the People sounds a little bit better, but then its only 48khz so not that much more improved, but the surround steering they used is fantastic, so from a surround POV u get a far superior album in my mind, takes a few listens to get used to tho..lol. For a high level recording, hmm, most of the classical/orchestral stuff is done well, usually at 96khz and yes you can tell the difference in recordings between the CD and the DVD-Audio version (examples i have are Korngolds Adventures of Robin Hood score, Holsts Planets, some Rachmaninov, all those sound far better on DVD-A).
I guess some people might not be able to, my father claims he cant tell the difference between our bathroom radio (admittedly a very good 20 year old Sony, when they made products for quality not for the name badge) and my £3,000 hifi, but then my mother heard a difference in her hifi (which i gave most of the parts to her as i upgraded) when i swapped out the older speaker cable for some newer more expensive stuff, and i hadnt even told her i did! she just said to me had i done something to it as it sounds clearer in the midrange........*shrugs*

My advice, go to a decent hifi shop that has a demo room, beforehand ask them to set up a system within your price range capable of playing DVD-A/SACD and ask if they can provide some discs for you to listen to, and also have the same system set up to play some CD's as well, preferably of the same music as the DVD-A/SACD discs, then you can compare them happily yourself. This is what i did, and im glad i did

I plan on buying a new reciever and speakers either this week or the next. Do you have any suggestions on what I should look for? I listen to all genres of music and I'd also like to use the new setup for movies as well.


Also are you familiar with Fluance speakers?

how much do you want to spend?
what are the limits of its use in the near future?
what type of room will be in? (carpeted etc)
how much do you want to spend?
what type of inputs are you going to use?
do you prefer components to all-in ones?
how much do you want to spend?
what ype of music will you lsiten to the most?
how much do you want to spend?
how much do you want to spend?

 

[biostud]

Personally I'm waiting for NAD to make a DVD player that can handle these new formats.

 

[FoBoT]

i have bad hearing from exposure to industrial noise, i have started having trouble listening to people speak to me

 

[knyghtbyte]

I plan on buying a new reciever and speakers either this week or the next. Do you have any suggestions on what I should look for? I listen to all genres of music and I'd also like to use the new setup for movies as well.


Also are you familiar with Fluance speakers?

[/quote]

I live in the UK, so i doubt i can recommend all that much to you, i've never heard of Fluance speakers so i couldnt comment. I can tell you this tho, worldwide the best budget to mid range receives available easily are the Denon family, good sound quality, good build quality, plenty of features but not many unnecessary ones. Denon are very good if you like a wide range of music, most other companies tend to make equipment suitable to certain styles and target that audience. Yamaha are very good too, but after much listening in demo rooms i found Denon more to my liking. Now depending on your budget, if you can afford it go for the newer Denons with the Denon Link facility (basically firewire) on both the receiver and the DVD player, that way you only need one cable between the two for your DVD-A/SACD, also it frees up the External Inputs for multi channel sound from your computer for gaming

Avoid Sony at lower price levels, same with JVC and Pioneer, both Sony and Pioneer have some good very expensive receivers tho so check those out. There are some english companies that produce astounding surround gear, at midrange budget level and above, but i doubt you will get those abroad very easily, but look out for ArCam, Cyrus and Musical Fidelity.

Speaker wise, again i dunno much on the US side of things (are u from US?) but avoid the sat/sub packages, never worthwhile for getting good sound quality, simply convenient. Go for reliable well made bookshelf monitors, or floorstanders, but dont forget your sub, its always worth getting a decent sub, REL are one of the best for music sound quality with M&K heading up as rather good movie thumpers.
B&W are good for hifi speakers, Monitor Audio, KEF, Mission, again tho im naming ones easily found in england, dunno about the US.

but i repeat, the best thing you can do is not to rush in and buy, demo the stuff and try as many as you can, make notes while you listen about what you liked, then retry the ones you preferred the most, if possible in the same shop so you can swap them over quickly, then pick the ones that sound the best to your own ears, and also ones that you can happily live with, sometimes people really like a speaker in the shop, but find at home they are too overblown or too high pitched in their lounge/bedroom to listen to all the time.

 

[BigJ]

I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh everytime I read DVD-A.

 

[knyghtbyte]

Originally posted by: BigJ
I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh everytime I read DVD-A.

why?

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
SACD & DVD-Audio discs are superior to CD....they can play in ultra high res in stereo or very high res in surround sound, and benefit from extended freq range....i did post in a thread at one point that had a lot of info on the mp3 versus CD debate and i think there was a few mentions of DVD-Audio and SACD but i didnt read all the posts, just skimmed....will see if i can find it....

just to give u an idea while im looking...

CD = 16bit / 44khz
DVD-Audio = 24bit / 192khz in stereo, or 24bit / 96khz 5.1 surround sound.
SACD = from what i remember its the same as DVD-Audio, but i think uses different way of accessing the data.

DVD-Audio can be played in normal DVD players usually, but only accessing PCM/Dolby Digital quality sound, some are DTS 5.1 or DTS 96/24. There are Universal machines and single use DVD-Audio players that allow you to access the high res DVD-Audio. Not many discs exist tho that use over 96khz, in fact almost none that im aware of use 192khz yet...lol

SACD usually can be played in SACD players for the high res, or CD players for normal CD quality PCM, or Universal players that do SACD, DVD-Audio, DVD-video and CD.

I know the technical specs for DVD-A and SACD are higher than normal CDs but how do they sound? Is it something that only an audiophile with golden ears can appreciate?

It depends on the recording etc etc the same as CD does, if its a good high quality master recording thats been treated well and put on to the disc decently then yes, you can tell the difference quite easily, you dont need to be an audiophile with golden ears. The REM Automatic for the People sounds a little bit better, but then its only 48khz so not that much more improved, but the surround steering they used is fantastic, so from a surround POV u get a far superior album in my mind, takes a few listens to get used to tho..lol. For a high level recording, hmm, most of the classical/orchestral stuff is done well, usually at 96khz and yes you can tell the difference in recordings between the CD and the DVD-Audio version (examples i have are Korngolds Adventures of Robin Hood score, Holsts Planets, some Rachmaninov, all those sound far better on DVD-A).
I guess some people might not be able to, my father claims he cant tell the difference between our bathroom radio (admittedly a very good 20 year old Sony, when they made products for quality not for the name badge) and my £3,000 hifi, but then my mother heard a difference in her hifi (which i gave most of the parts to her as i upgraded) when i swapped out the older speaker cable for some newer more expensive stuff, and i hadnt even told her i did! she just said to me had i done something to it as it sounds clearer in the midrange........*shrugs*

My advice, go to a decent hifi shop that has a demo room, beforehand ask them to set up a system within your price range capable of playing DVD-A/SACD and ask if they can provide some discs for you to listen to, and also have the same system set up to play some CD's as well, preferably of the same music as the DVD-A/SACD discs, then you can compare them happily yourself. This is what i did, and im glad i did

I plan on buying a new reciever and speakers either this week or the next. Do you have any suggestions on what I should look for? I listen to all genres of music and I'd also like to use the new setup for movies as well.


Also are you familiar with Fluance speakers?

how much do you want to spend?

For speakers I'd like to keep it around 1500-2000

what are the limits of its use in the near future?

Surround sound theatre and music listening

what type of room will be in? (carpeted etc)

The room I have in mind is a large family room (approx 25x30) with carpeting. The ceiling is about 10-11 feet high

how much do you want to spend?

haha, 1500-2000

what type of inputs are you going to use?

bannana plugs would be nice, but my current reciever only takes the bare wire

do you prefer components to all-in ones?

I currently have seperate components and I plan to upgrade the same way (with seperate components)

how much do you want to spend?

see above

what type of music will you lsiten to the most?

Its hard to say as I don't have a favorite genre. I literally listen to everything (jazz, rock, soul, country, electronica, hiphop, classical, etc..)

how much do you want to spend?
how much do you want to spend?

 

[knyghtbyte]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
i have bad hearing from exposure to industrial noise, i have started having trouble listening to people speak to me

that sucks, loss of any sense is never a nice thing.

 

[knyghtbyte]

oh btw, a lot of people might say dont worry about 6.1, thats its a gimmick and doesnt add anything..
dont believe them! i have my system setup for 6.1 sources with 7.1 speakers (the 6th rear center channel is split over 2 speakers to help give the sound more width) and it gives you a much better field behind you and to the sides, altho get bipolar/dipolar switchable side surround speakers, when watching a THX film put them in dipolar mode for the best atmosphere.
However if you do this you will also need an additional pair of normal bookshelf speakers for your surround music on DVD-A as bi/dipolar speakers dont handle it so well. Denons £800 amps will handle attching 9 normal speakers to the amp, altho you can usually only use 7 at max at any one time. (due to the way the power amp segment is split up)
nicely confused?..lol..i am!...hehe

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: knyghtbyte
oh btw, a lot of people might say dont worry about 6.1, thats its a gimmick and doesnt add anything..
dont believe them! i have my system setup for 6.1 sources with 7.1 speakers (the 6th rear center channel is split over 2 speakers to help give the sound more width) and it gives you a much better field behind you and to the sides, altho get bipolar/dipolar switchable side surround speakers, when watching a THX film put them in dipolar mode for the best atmosphere.
However if you do this you will also need an additional pair of normal bookshelf speakers for your surround music on DVD-A as bi/dipolar speakers dont handle it so well. Denons £800 amps will handle attching 9 normal speakers to the amp, altho you can usually only use 7 at max at any one time. (due to the way the power amp segment is split up)
nicely confused?..lol..i am!...hehe

I've read a few articles about that and I'm really interested in that kind of setup

 

[knyghtbyte]

right, heres my system, check out the links so you can see what i have....

Receiver: Denon 3803 (out of production, new 3805 is apparently very good)
http://www.denon.co.uk/startpage.htm go here and click on products, then discontinued, then look for 3803 and check the specs, also check the 3805's specs, you might be able to get these in USA as well)

DVD player: currently cheapo one i won at work, will be upgrading to Denon 3910 for firewire, then upgrade my receiver to 3805 for said firewire i future, check same link but search normal current products.

Speakers: Monitor Audio Silver S6 floorstanders as main stereo Left/Right, Silver SLCR centre speaker, SFX rear effects speakers, will be getting another pair of those for side surround duties (currently been using some older Mission 700's while im broke..lol). Also i will get some Silver S2's to go in the corners for surround sound DVD-Audio music eventually.
http://www.monitoraudio.co.uk/ and hunt for the Silver range.

Subwoofer: REL Q100E Quake, the baby in their range, but certainly no shrinking violet, slightly overawed by my main stereo speakers, but i bought it as i couldnt afford any more at the time and it still provides that nice extra low end extension to music, it goes down to 20hz, believe me, you want this depth, forget those subs that only hit 35hz, no point, decent floorstanders can hit that! my S6's do 38hz not bad for such slim profile speakers.
http://www.rel.net check the Q range, but if you want good hifi performance as well best to go with the REL Strata model, for the price its pretty much impossible to beat.

edit: btw, as my system stands atm (3803, cheapo DVD player, S6 fronts, SFX rears SLCR centre, Quake sub) the cost to me was £2,550 (i've assumed the DVD player was around £100). Then add on the £300 of cabling (i went with Monitor Audios own Silver cable, very nice, decent open sound from it, better than the price equivelant Qudos that i tried) plus some stands for the rear speakers its around £3,000.

In US$ thats around £5,000 give or take, BUT you guys seem to get stuff cheaper than us generally, so i would imagine if you could get all i just listed in the USA, then it would probably be closer to £3,500. I could be wrong tho so dont take that as gospel.

 

[iotone]

vinyl?

 

[knyghtbyte]

Originally posted by: iotone
vinyl?

vinyl is the best

it doesnt however come in surround sound...lol

 

[darkswordsman17]

I wish more bands did DVD-Audio versions of their albums.

The differences I can tell is more richer bass and then the surround mix is just cool. Things sound clearer, like voices and things just don't jumble together as much (you can more easily pick up on a subtle guitar riff for instance).

Its kinda good that DVD-Audio isn't as popular as schlock like Ashlee Simpson just doesn't belong on it, but then again there's not much other than jazz and classical music to listen to on it (not that either of those are bad, but I just wish there was more rock).

 

[Howard]

SACD is a 1-bit stream, sampled at 2.822MHz, IIRC.