SACD to ISO with Oppo & Pioneer BD players!

[Frogmort]

Never heard a pop or click using Jriver converter mode...

I've tried that along with pretty much every other known method but I always get tiny little clicks. They're not very noticeable, but no matter what I do, I always get clicks. I've listened to some conversions by other people that play flawlessly on my setup, but I just can't seem to do the same.

 

[GOS]

So, tonight, I made big progress. I think I've learned a few things and probably I will post some of these learnings here. I certainly know I often need a set of instructions that dumb it down. I literally need every single step defined. For example, in the iso2dsd program, there is a box that you need to select either "multi" or "dual". No explanation what it means, nor did anyone else as far as I know put that into the instructions. I left it at dual, and what I ended up with was .iso files with both 2 channel and multi-channel. I only want multi-channel, so my best guess going forward is I need to change that box to multi.

I'll try that tomorrow after work.

 

[JerseyEd]

Hi GOS. Hope I didn't confuse matters. Believe me, it took me HOURS to finally get it to work, and that only happened thanks to HomerJAU and Janbakker. Glad you finally got it to work.

 

[GOS]

Well, tonight, I selected the "multi" box and in the end, got the exact same result. Both 2 channel and multi channel show up in the iso. So...not sure about all that. Regardless, I guess I'm on my way to ripping my SACD's. The DSD and or DST files take up a TON of space and like someone else said, when I play them, I get skips and all sorts of weirdness. So, I might end up converting to Flac even though it's a lower resolution. NO chance I can hear the difference.

 

[salsdali]

if you own an oppo 93 you can burn those ripped iso's to a blank 4GB DVD disc using the free imgburn program and the disc will then play in the oppo 93 just like the original sacd. Basically you have made an exact 1:1 disc copy of the original sacd

BTW, all my ripped multichannel sacd's are 4GB or under in size because that's basically what an sacd is, a 4GB dvd disc with just a particular structure on it. It was actually confusing to me for many years why they choose the name SACD when in reality they had nothing in common with cd's but were actually very similar to DVD's

 

[GOS]

OK - I'm up and running again. So, I've ripped several SACD's now. What I don't like, is I can't just rip the multi-track layer. Each time, no matter what I try, I'm getting both stereo & multi-channel layers. So, when I play the .iso file in Foobar, it shows both layers. Like this...

So, as you see, it shows song 1 stereo first, then song 1 multi-channel second. I only want multi and anyway, makes for not easy listening as it would play same song twice...

 

[Simon A]

OK - I'm up and running again. So, I've ripped several SACD's now. What I don't like, is I can't just rip the multi-track layer. Each time, no matter what I try, I'm getting both stereo & multi-channel layers. So, when I play the .iso file in Foobar, it shows both layers. Like this...

So, as you see, it shows song 1 stereo first, then song 1 multi-channel second. I only want multi and anyway, makes for not easy listening as it would play same song twice...

Gene, the iso file is an image of your SACD disc, meaning that it's like a virtual SACD. So it will always contain everything that's on the disc. To only have the Multichannel content, you have no choice but to extract to DSF or flac files.

 

[JanBakker]

OK - I'm up and running again. So, I've ripped several SACD's now. What I don't like, is I can't just rip the multi-track layer. Each time, no matter what I try, I'm getting both stereo & multi-channel layers. So, when I play the .iso file in Foobar, it shows both layers. Like this...

So, as you see, it shows song 1 stereo first, then song 1 multi-channel second. I only want multi and anyway, makes for not easy listening as it would play same song twice...

View attachment 27631

In Foobar you can set your preferrable area to multichannel, that should take care of this.

 

[GOS]

In Foobar you can set your preferrable area to multichannel, that should take care of this.

Thanks Jan - I tried those settings, closed and reopened Foobar, yet I still see both versions. @:
I'll keep trying other things.

 

[himey]

OK - I'm up and running again. So, I've ripped several SACD's now. What I don't like, is I can't just rip the multi-track layer. Each time, no matter what I try, I'm getting both stereo & multi-channel layers. So, when I play the .iso file in Foobar, it shows both layers. Like this...

So, as you see, it shows song 1 stereo first, then song 1 multi-channel second. I only want multi and anyway, makes for not easy listening as it would play same song twice...

View attachment 27631

You can set it up to show just the multi's. It isn't one button like Foobar but I am pretty sure it can be done. I think Kal mentioned it in a thread. I haven't done it yet...

Are you outputting as pcm or dsd? If your going pcm, it may be worth the effort to convert within jRiver. It converts to wav at a very high sampling rate. Just take the wav and use Audiomuxer or Foobar to downsample and convert to flac.

 

[GOS]

So, I had a weird thing happen tonight. I have been ripping multi-channel SACD via my oppo flawlessly. Tonight, I tried a 2 channel SACD rip. It went through the same motions. When I plugged the iso into foobar, everything looked the same....the music is playing...but there is NO sound. Zip....
What? What does that mean?

EDIT - Well, I never really figured it out. But, I converted the "soundless" ISO to Flac and it works just fine. Hmmm. Could it be something to do with the fact that the disc I ripped was a MOFI ULTRADISC UHR - GAIN HD?

 

[OldAsMono]

Hey GOS, quick question for you. First glad to hear you're having good luck ripping the SACD ISO files. Are you using an Oppo 83 as this section is called "oppo 83 question" OR are you using a newer Oppo like the 103? I ask because my understandfing is the Oppo 83 does not have the required chipset to rip SACD ISO files.

 

[GOS]

Hey GOS, quick question for you. First glad to hear you're having good luck ripping the SACD ISO files. Are you using an Oppo 83 as this section is called "oppo 83 question" OR are you using a newer Oppo like the 103? I ask because my understandfing is the Oppo 83 does not have the required chipset to rip SACD ISO files.

Yeah, this is one of those threads that might have had a different name, then morphed into something else. Correct, I have the 103.

 

[JediJoker]

Could it be something to do with the fact that the disc I ripped was a MOFI ULTRADISC UHR - GAIN HD?

Nope. There is nothing "special" about a MoFi SACD other than the mastering. It will look the same as any other hybrid stereo SACD to the Oppo, and the ISO should look the same as any other ISO to a piece of software.

 

[ssully]

If you convert to wav/flac you can just delete the damn 2.0 version. There is NO audible quality reduction for such a conversion, and flac is a much more convenient format to deal with all around than the absurd DSD/SACD format.

 

[ssully]

Oppo 83SE which I rarely use anymore now that I rip everything to my server PC.

is the 80FD still working for you?

 

[GOS]

If you convert to wav/flac you can just delete the damn 2.0 version. There is NO audible quality reduction for such a conversion, and flac is a much more convenient format to deal with all around than the absurd DSD/SACD format.

I love flac, yes, it is so easy.

 

[jimfisheye]

FLAC is the most universal format and takes the smallest storage space. There is no danger of 'compromised decoding' like with the lossless versions of dts. Neither MLP or dts HD MA use any less storage space and both require specialized apps.

DSD is another matter. If you really think the HD PCM digital format is lacking (it isn't) and are willing to invest in expansive DSD converters instead of PCM converters (the digital encoding format most of the world uses)... well there ya go! It IS just as good of a HD format though (to my ear anyway). And it converts "losslessly enough" to PCM that you get more bang for the buck converting DSD to PCM and listening through high end converters than listening to DSD natively through consumer grade converters IMHO. YMMV.*

FLAC also includes a built-in checksum to let you verify files after a download.

* Keep in mind that the ability to compare the EXACT same recording digitized in both formats is impossible unless you master your own recordings to both yourself. You hear different mastering work on different releases (at least different levels if nothing else) and you're comparing that rather than the format itself.

 

[himey]

is the 80FD still working for you?

Yup. I only use it for ripping.

 

[himey]

FLAC is the most universal format and takes the smallest storage space. There is no danger of 'compromised decoding' like with the lossless versions of dts. Neither MLP or dts HD MA use any less storage space and both require specialized apps.

DSD is another matter. If you really think the HD PCM digital format is lacking (it isn't) and are willing to invest in expansive DSD converters instead of PCM converters (the digital encoding format most of the world uses)... well there ya go! It IS just as good of a HD format though (to my ear anyway). And it converts "losslessly enough" to PCM that you get more bang for the buck converting DSD to PCM and listening through high end converters than listening to DSD natively through consumer grade converters IMHO. YMMV.*

FLAC also includes a built-in checksum to let you verify files after a download.

* Keep in mind that the ability to compare the EXACT same recording digitized in both formats is impossible unless you master your own recordings to both yourself. You hear different mastering work on different releases (at least different levels if nothing else) and you're comparing that rather than the format itself.

I doubt anyone would argue that, but there is a conversion involved in the process of going from SACD/dsd to FLAC/ pcm that can't be completely overlooked. Each of us must weigh the costs of DSD vs the convenience of FLAC. At this point I choose flac's, but I also keep the full ISO's in case my situation changes.