SACD vs DTS-HD Master Audio

M

M. Mulder

Enthusiast
Hello folks,

Which format wil be preciser in the representation of the original 'master tape'?

SACD uses DSD concept, but DTS Master Audio also uses bit-fot-bit recreation of the original sound with a maximum depth of 24bit and frequency of 192 Khz

Which format do they use in a studio, when they record the audio?
 
M

markw

Audioholic Overlord
"Original Sound" is a fairly neblous concept.

DTS-HD, as far as I can tell, is used in the cinema. Since virtually all sounds we hear in movies are artificially created (See "foley operator") and never existed in real life, the term "original sound" loses it's meaning real fast.

SACD, OTOH, can be applied to analog master tapes.. And, like all recordings ever made, a lot of these are dependent on the miking used to begin with. This doesn't even take into account any multi-tracking, mixing, reverb and eq added during the final edits. On top of that, not all recordings take place in real time. They can go back and add additional tracks at any time they choose.

Like all other arguments trying to prove the superiority of one media over the other, I think the limiting factor is in the source moreso than the media. I've heard some stunning redbook CD's and some less than stellar SACDs.
 
Last edited:
M

M. Mulder

Enthusiast
If you have an analog master-tape and you want this recording on to a Blu-Ray disc whith the specifications of a DTS-HD Master Audio 24/192, will it be better than the recording is going onto a SACD?

The sampling frequency of a SACD is 64 times more then a CD, but only uses 1 bit. Does that mean that when a sound suddenly goes from very high to very low, there has to be a lot of bits for representing the downhill frequency?

Why do they call DTS-HD Master Audio 'bit-for-bit' identical to the studio master. Is it because they recorded it in DTS-HD Master Audio.
 
bandphan

bandphan

Banned
IIRC the new "master" codecs are still compressed and are a .wav file before. Taking any recording and changing the format does not improve it unless one manipulates the the original in a way that something is added or taken away. Native is still the best way to recreate. I've done many recordings in digital @ 48 hz and transfered them via analog at the same rate to CD @ 44.1 without an audiable difference
 
mr-ben

mr-ben

Audioholic
Hello folks,

Which format wil be preciser in the representation of the original 'master tape'?

SACD uses DSD concept, but DTS Master Audio also uses bit-fot-bit recreation of the original sound with a maximum depth of 24bit and frequency of 192 Khz

Which format do they use in a studio, when they record the audio?
You're comparing DSD, which is used in SACD, to 24bit/192khz PCM, which is used in DVD-Audio, DTS Master Audio, Dolby TrueHD, and probably other places. Both are high-resolution, and more than accurate enough for any digital audio capturing. I believe most audio today is mastered in PCM format, at lower resolutions than 24bit/192khz. So, for example, if it's recorded and mastered at 24bit/48khz, DTS-MA can store that audio without converting it, and it matches "bit-for-bit". Converting to DSD wouldn't be harmful, but it's a conversion, as is any resampling of the PCM data to a different bit depth or sample rate. Anything recorded directly to analog tape and mastered in the analog domain (older recordings mostly) could be converted to either digital format, and both would sound excellent.
 
M

M. Mulder

Enthusiast
Will there be any difference between DTS-HD Master Audio and DVD-Audio?
 
J

jostenmeat

Audioholic Spartan
I don't know the answer to any of the questions posed in this thread so far, but I do know that among my modest Bluray music titles, they all use uncompressed 5.1 PCM, whether it's the Mozart Orchestra or the New York Phil. They sound very, very good.
 
mr-ben

mr-ben

Audioholic
Will there be any difference between DTS-HD Master Audio and DVD-Audio?
DVD-Audio stores data in PCM format, up to high bitrates. DTS-MA and Dolby TrueHD also store PCM data, at high bitrates. There are some minor differences in the way that PCM is stored, and the latter two have more bandwidth for more channels and higher total combined bitrates, but those are minor details.

The biggest difference is that DVD-Audio can't handle video (other than a slideshow), while the other formats are on BluRay and obviously can. The target audience will be different for the two formats.
 
A

alpharetta

Audioholic Intern
SACD and Audio-DVD will be fade out

Let look into the future picture: 5 years from now, most people will have Bluray DVD player and the player price will go down for about $50. A bluray disc will cost about $5-$12 depends the content. So it's a very good chance for people to enjoy high quality music purely using bluray technology. There is no reason they should buy expensive player which support SACD format and expensive SACD discs...

Bluray is the winner with dolby HD and DTS-HD formats from high quality music listening perspective.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Will there be any difference between DTS-HD Master Audio and DVD-Audio?
According to a recent JAES paper comparing Red Book and SACD/DVD-A the large panel could not differentiate between them. So, in essence, increasing resolution should really not do anything more as it will not be audible.
 
A

allargon

Audioholic General
DVD-Audio stores data in PCM format, up to high bitrates. DTS-MA and Dolby TrueHD also store PCM data, at high bitrates. There are some minor differences in the way that PCM is stored, and the latter two have more bandwidth for more channels and higher total combined bitrates, but those are minor details.

The biggest difference is that DVD-Audio can't handle video (other than a slideshow), while the other formats are on BluRay and obviously can. The target audience will be different for the two formats.
The compression that Dolby TrueHD uses is based on the MLP compression that DVD-Audio uses.

Buy the Trondheim Divertimenti Blu-ray. It comes with a SACD. You can compare Dolby TrueHD, LPCM, DTS-HD MA, 16 bit Redbook CD and DSD SACD against one another. Hook up an optical cable and you can add 1.5 Mbps DTS core as well. I wish they had the 640Kbps DD, too. I bet very few could tell the difference between ANY of these including the lossy formats with a double blind level matched test.
 
john72953

john72953

Full Audioholic
The compression that Dolby TrueHD uses is based on the MLP compression that DVD-Audio uses.

Buy the Trondheim Divertimenti Blu-ray. It comes with a SACD. You can compare Dolby TrueHD, LPCM, DTS-HD MA, 16 bit Redbook CD and DSD SACD against one another. Hook up an optical cable and you can add 1.5 Mbps DTS core as well. I wish they had the 640Kbps DD, too. I bet very few could tell the difference between ANY of these including the lossy formats with a double blind level matched test.
I've been sitting on the fence regarding the purchase of this disc, but now that you mention a SACD is included as well, this is now a definite buy. It would be great to compare the 2 formats, but from my experience so far.....I doubt there will be one.

John
 
M

MasterApex

Audioholic Intern
Is it correct to interpret it as follow:

1) SOURCE content creation (master tape, DSD recording, etc)
2) ENCODING / DECODING transfer (SACD, DTS MA, Dolby Tru-HD, CD, etc)
3) MEDIUM content holder (CD/SACD disc, blu-ray disc, FLAC files, mp3 file...)

1) ---> 2)----> 3)

If the source is a CD content, doing a DSD transfer to SACD, the sound is not better.
If the source is a master tape or DSD recording, transfer to SACD vs CD will make huge difference
If the source is a master tape, transfer to SACD vs DTS MA, they are comparable sound quality
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top