Beware of SACD Transports -- they probably will not work with your favorite DAC


Hello, I just learned a painful lesson. I'm guessing that not many people will know this so I'm going to put it in here.

The audio on a SACD is encrypted.
If I were to purchase a SACD / CD player I have nothing to worry about. The Audio is un-encrypted inside the player.
However if I were to purchase a SACD / CD Transport made my brand Z, I would have to purchase a brand Z DAC???
Apparently Sony who owns the SACD format mandated that the audio on the SACD itself is encrypted and
the digital output from a SACD transport is ALSO encrypted. It looks like the actual un-encryption is done in the DAC.
There is no standard for doing the un-encryption so every manufacturer has their own proprietary way of doing this.
So I cant use a Esoteric SACD transport and an Auralic DAC which is what I tried to do?
londontk
SACD is a proprietary format. It must be played using an SACD player or a transport with SACD outputs. Not many player/transports have that, if they do they are $$$$$.

I have a Oppo 105, which I can use as a transport(bypassing the internal dacs) BUT it will NOT output SACD signal UNLESS the signal receiving dac has a SACD input, and even then not always will they sink up. And while the 105 has a volume control to play SACDs, it is average at best, meaning the resultant SACD signal is highly compromised

hth
OK, i have not researched this specifically.  but here is my logic and belief.  If your transport outputs S/PDIF as the digital signal to the DCA, that is a standard. I know of no encryption on S/PDIF since it must be backwards compatible.

This makes me believe that there is no problem so long as your transport decrypts the SACD. SACD is basically DSD.
G
itsjustme
... there is no problem so long as your transport decrypts the SACD.
But that’s the problem - very, very few transports "decrypt" SACD . SACD is a proprietary format, as others have noted here.
Right. If the SACD encryption scheme is anything like that used for DVD, or Blu-Ray, the concept was a closed system that did not permit users to access the raw digital stream at hi-rez, to avoid piracy issues. The only way to decode the encrypted material was to use a licensed device and that did not afford a digital output that was ’in the clear.’ This was done through a patent pool as I recall, with licensing arrangements among CE manufacturers of hardware and "software" content owners, who did not relish the idea of putting out hi-rez copies of their content on an ’open’ format.
I don’t really do much with SACD- in fact, i only installed digital audio in my main system in the past 6 months, but have an Oppo that I use in the home theatre system. As I recall, one can use the analog outputs from the Oppo to play back SACD by letting the internal DAC and decryption function occur entirely within the Oppo box; I also recall that the hdmi output on the Oppo, which goes into an AV pre-pro (used mainly for AV, not for music listening), should be able to decode the SACD. But, the quality of the AV pre-pro, while sufficient for my purposes for movies/TV shows, isn’t something that I would normally use for serious music listening. As to transports and DACs that are within this protocol, I have no idea. I suspect that the huge uptick in stand-alone DACs has occurred after SACD already dwindled in the marketplace. I also suspect that the cost of the license to permit SACD decryption on a DAC otherwise intended for two channel audio would have only added to the retail cost of the DAC and was probably viewed as a limited market, but i’m speculating.
Jafant 

yes, I prefer the Sony/Bryston combination to the stand alone Sony SACD