# SACD Sampling Rate confusion



## ndurantz (Aug 10, 2008)

So was listening to my Living Stereo SACD of Rachmaninoff Concerto #3 tonight and comparing my new(er) Sony BDP-S370 to my Yamaha DVD-C961 and was surprised to see the Yamaha sampling @ 88.2 kHz Sony playing back @ 176 kHz. Any idea why my Yamaha wouldn't sample at the same rate as the Sony?

Strangely enough, the Yamaha sounds more articulate to my ears. My receiver is a Denon AVR-1909 and am using HDMI on both playback units.

Thoughts & insights appreciated!


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

A sampling rate of 88.2 (or 2 x 88.2 = 176) theoretically _shouldn't_ have much difference on the sound.
Personally I think any difference between the two would be in the analog filtering stage. 
The only real way to test this is to do a double blind test, where you score the sound without knowing which unit is playing. Or simply play the discs on the unit you prefer........

Cheers,
Bill


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

ndurantz said:


> So was listening to my Living Stereo SACD of Rachmaninoff Concerto #3 tonight and comparing my new(er) Sony BDP-S370 to my Yamaha DVD-C961 and was surprised to see the Yamaha sampling @ 88.2 kHz Sony playing back @ 176 kHz. Any idea why my Yamaha wouldn't sample at the same rate as the Sony?


Designer's choice. All the Oppos, for example, will output only 88.2 from SACD while the Yamaha BD-A1000 will do 176.4 as will the Sonys. 



> Strangely enough, the Yamaha sounds more articulate to my ears.


I doubt it is the sampling rate. The Yahamas tend to have a brighter, more detailed treble, generically.


----------



## ndurantz (Aug 10, 2008)

robbo266317 said:


> A sampling rate of 88.2 (or 2 x 88.2 = 176) theoretically shouldn't have much difference on the sound.
> Personally I think any difference between the two would be in the analog filtering


Just to make sure this nub understands, there is an actually a difference between 88.2 and 176.4 sampling rates, but when all is said and done, we are splitting hairs as the audible difference is minimal.


----------



## ndurantz (Aug 10, 2008)

Kal Rubinson said:


> I doubt it is the sampling rate. The Yahamas tend to have a brighter, more detailed treble, generically.


That makes sense, as what I was hearing in the upper range.


----------



## RTS100x5 (Sep 12, 2009)

My MARANTZ DV6001 has an upsampling option, maybe the SONY too ??


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

RTS100x5 said:


> My MARANTZ DV6001 has an upsampling option, maybe the SONY too ??


AFAIK, no consumer product up-samples SACD.


----------



## RTS100x5 (Sep 12, 2009)

true yes, I was a bit misleading, I forgot he was listening to SACD. As far as playback of my SACD and DVD-A I always use the analog 7.1 output vs HDMI. Is there any technical difference ?? My reason for this is my analog stage has been modded w BURSON discreet opamps and wouldnt be part of the HDMI signal path... Also the recorded sampling rate of 96khz / 24bit is preserved and not resampled by a DVD player or otherwise..that I know of .......


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

RTS100x5 said:


> true yes, I was a bit misleading, I forgot he was listening to SACD. As far as playback of my SACD and DVD-A I always use the analog 7.1 output vs HDMI. Is there any technical difference ??


OK. I prefer using the HDMI but it depends on what you connect it to.



> My reason for this is my analog stage has been modded w BURSON discreet opamps and wouldnt be part of the HDMI signal path... Also the recorded sampling rate of 96khz / 24bit is preserved and not resampled by a DVD player or otherwise..that I know of .......


The recorded sampling rate of SACD is not *96khz / 24bit* but, rather, "_The SACD sampling rate is 2.8224 MHz and the resolution is one bit_." Arithmetic tells us that this is somewhat more than 24bit/176.4kHz.


----------



## ndurantz (Aug 10, 2008)

Kal Rubinson said:


> The recorded sampling rate of SACD is not 96khz / 24bit but, rather, "The SACD sampling rate is 2.8224 MHz and the resolution is one bit." Arithmetic tells us that this is somewhat more than 24bit/176.4kHz.


I didn't realize that (never have been the best at math). So those 24/96 downloads from places like HD Tracks are lower fidelity than most SACD? Sorry if I am off in my understanding.


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

ndurantz said:


> I didn't realize that (never have been the best at math). So those 24/96 downloads from places like HD Tracks are lower fidelity than most SACD? Sorry if I am off in my understanding.


Yes, they are lower but the difference may not be audible to you. If you want to try your ear, download some of the test tracks as DSD or other PCM resolutions from 2L: http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html


----------

