Cds trying to think of a reason.

Discussion in 'Digital Sources' started by vintage 5.0, May 4, 2018.

  1. Bill Ferris

    Bill Ferris Super Member

    Messages:
    2,146
    Location:
    NE. FL.
    Thank you for the most kind compliment Chris.

    I still grieve over having to put down Brandi(her name) because of bone cancer in her front leg on Jan. 20 1998, after doing everything possible to save her, including flying my sister, and her to the animal research hospital(in Colorado, I think) with a open checkbook, as I desperately tried to save her.
    My friends thought I was crazy, spending thousands of dollars on tying to save her !!
    I have the money, and would have to live with myself, for not doing everything in my power to save my "family member" !

    I have to cease discussion about this, if you don`t mind Chris.
    Thank you.
    Best wishes Sir.

    She was my "Big Girl", and my very close friend, as I live alone, and she`s still with me in a urn on my fireplace mantle, and will be interned with me, as instructed in my will.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. JoeESP9

    JoeESP9 ESL's & tubes since 83

    Messages:
    17,115
    Location:
    Philadelphia PA
    The CD format is not separate files.
    Windows reports 0 byte CDA files as the content of a music CD. You have to "convert" the content of a Red Book CD to either WAV, FLAC or whatever you choose for a computer to recognize them. That's a conversion by any standard.

    In any case there is a deeper question. That is if, WAV and FLAC files don't sound the same as the CD, which one sounds closer to the CD and why. They are both supposed to yield bit perfect "conversions"
     
    Alobar, OnTheBlitz and Bill Ferris like this.
  3. Bill Ferris

    Bill Ferris Super Member

    Messages:
    2,146
    Location:
    NE. FL.
    Well, good point Joe.
    However, in my testing of the SQ, only involved comparison between WAV. & FLAC.

    I never tried to compare either to the source CD`s, that those two type digital music files were ripped from(I trusted all the people who said it would be an exact copy, if I went WAV. lossless..

    I assumed(I know a dangerous word !), that to do so(FAIRLY COMPARE) might be complicated, as, though I own 2 OPPO UHD-203`s(one is in the sunroom that has the Flash drive with all my WAV. music files on it sending it`s output via the S/PDIF coax through a 20 meter very high performance 75 ohm air core coax, and the other OPPO is in my A/V rack, also S/PDIF coax fed, albeit through a 2 meter S/PDIF coax to a S/PDIF 4X1 switch, as is the sunroom`s OPPO.
    And my redundant music lap top with the same WAV. music files also feeds that switcher, via a Peach Tree X1 USB to S/PDIF converter, along with my 1987 Mac MCD 7007 CD player, via it`s S/PDIF coax output as well..

    The output of my S/PDIF 4X1 switcher feeds my DAC`s S/PDIF input for conversion to analog which feeds my Mac C37 preamp, and on for HQ analog audio distribution into 6 rooms of my house.

    I really never thought to try to compare between the original CD & it`s WAV. ripped clone, primarily because, for 5 years the lion`s share of the CD`s that are now WAV. ripped were being played in my Sony 400 disc player 24/7, also outputted via it`s S/PDIF coax to the same 20 meter 75 ohm coax, switcher, DAC, Mac preamp, etc. and if there was any SQ change/difference from when I went over to in house WAV. digital streaming, I`m pretty sure I would have noticed any change in SQ in CD`s that I had been listening to for years on a all day, daily basis through unchanged & very familiar playback audio systems.

    And finally, if I were to try to compare CD to WAV. using both identical, in both model and menu setup, but separated OPPO`s, with the one in the A/V rack playing the CD, and the identical WAV. ripped CD music via the flash drive playing via the sunroom OPPO, I would be concerned about the substantially different length of S/PDIF coax feeds, might have some kind of influence on the sound of the longer 20 meter coax...
    Even when the A/V rack OPPO, and the Mac CD player are compared, even sounded different, remember all A/V rack player`s/computer are SP/DIF coax fed to the 4X1 switcher and DAC, as the sunroom`s OPPO, is as well.

    I`m personally happy with what my ripping file type(WAV.) and it`s resultant SQ is on all of my house`s audio systems.

    If you guy/`s wish to experiment,/compare, well then, have at it.

    I put off ripping any of my music until the Sony player`s NLA optical block failed over three years ago during hurricane Mathew, and was forced into this ripped music situation !!

    Mercy Sakes Alive !! That`s a lot of one finger/one hand typing, and it`s time for another Stella, and a Winston.

    Be safe, and happy New Year`s eve, and day, folks.

    Kind regards, Billy Ferris
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2019
    OnTheBlitz likes this.
  4. cpt_paranoia

    cpt_paranoia Super Member

    Messages:
    1,246
    The index provides information on where individual tracks start and finish. That's how you can fast forward to individual tracks.

    Really, there is nothing magic about the information recorded on a CD. Each track really is just a file of 16-bit word pairs, encoded using an error-protected, interleaved format, designed to protect against read errors due to dirt due damage to the physical disc. When played in a CD player, the file boundaries are simply passed over, entirely transparently, as the files are defined only by positions in the stream of samples recorded on the disc. This continuous stream is simply passed to the DAC. When ripped, the sequence of samples identified by the index positions is assembled into each ripped track.

    Whether people can or cannot tell the difference between WAV and FLAC playback is debatable. One way to test the bit true reconstruction would be the take a pure WAV file, encode it to FLAC, and then decode it back to WAV, and then compare the audio samples ( using either a simple file compare, or an audio tool such as Audacity). If the audio samples are identical, then the FLAC encoder and decoder are correctly implemented, and the WAV and FLAC files are bit true equivalents. If they are not identical, the encoding or decoding implementations are incorrectly implemented.

    Lossless file compression used by FLAC is similar to the Lempel-Ziv algorithm used by ZIP to compress files; do you accept that ZIP is able to perfectly reconstruct the original files? Or do you believe that they are somehow different to the original, but still legible by the software they are created by (Word, Excel, etc)?
     
    OnTheBlitz likes this.
  5. JoeESP9

    JoeESP9 ESL's & tubes since 83

    Messages:
    17,115
    Location:
    Philadelphia PA
    There is no need to be condescending. I stand by going from RBCD to FLAC or WAV constitutes a conversion.

    First of all I didn't raise the question of WAV files sounding different from FLAC files. Bill Ferris did that originally a while ago in a different thread. I'm merely pointing out that if they sound different one or both of them is wrong. The only way to find out is to compare the original CD to both FLAC and WAV versions of the same CD selection. If they do sound different then the question is, does one sound closer to the RBCD or are they equally different but in different ways?

    If one sounds closer to the original RBCD that would be the file type I'd have stuck with.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2018
    Bill Ferris and OnTheBlitz like this.
  6. cpt_paranoia

    cpt_paranoia Super Member

    Messages:
    1,246
    I'm aiming for clarity and comparison, not condescension.
     
    OnTheBlitz and awillia6 like this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  7. awillia6

    awillia6 Super Member

    Messages:
    1,400
    Yup, it either is or it ain't. Not horseshoes, not hand grenades.
     
    Bill Ferris and OnTheBlitz like this.
  8. david1111

    david1111 Nemo saltat sobrius Subscriber

    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    @jcg1112
    I never meet anyone that has a Klipsch sound bar. I have one and its fantastic, especially for the price.
    I was at a friend's place over Xmas, watching a movie, and their basic Sony sound bar sounded like it was in a drum. And the dialogue was terrible. I'm too polite to say anything, but it sure makes me apprecoate the 500 bucks I spent on the Klipsch. And muic is very good on it, must be the horn tweeters. Nothing like my Kefs, of course.
    I also use it outside for BBQs for background music. The 6 inch bluetooth sub is perfect.

    Dave
     
    jcg1112 and OnTheBlitz like this.
  9. david1111

    david1111 Nemo saltat sobrius Subscriber

    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I've read on AK, from even some of the fortunate members with very high-end systems, who can't get their streamed files to sound as good as their CDs. They use streaming for convenience, and not for serious listening.
    Maybe a wide, deep, detailed, sound stage isn't quite attainable with streamed music.
    I don't actually know for sure cuz I haven't been able to A/B the 2 formats, other than on my own system. But I'm very interested, cuz I'd very much like to have the convenience and the available music files; but just not at the expense of inferior listening. I do love me a good sound stage, and an open, detailed sound.

    Dave
     
    OnTheBlitz likes this.
  10. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    On my system, no streamed or MP3 (any compressed file) is anywhere close to the SQ I get from CD, FLAC or DSD. I would agree with that statement. At least for me.
     
    JoeESP9 and david1111 like this.
  11. david1111

    david1111 Nemo saltat sobrius Subscriber

    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I truly do wish it wasn't the case, cuz setting up streaming playlists, and searching out almost any artists, is so wonderfully easy.
    Mais, c'est la vie.

    Dave
     
    jcg1112, GChief and OnTheBlitz like this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  12. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    Me too. It is still great for non-critical listening and checking out music before purchasing the hardcopy or FLAC. So in the end, it's all good. But to answer the OP's original question: Playing CD or taking your CD and ripping to uncompressed file is better SQ then streaming, to my ears and on my system, for me. That's why CD for me :)
     
    Bill Ferris, JoeESP9 and david1111 like this.
  13. david1111

    david1111 Nemo saltat sobrius Subscriber

    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    @OnTheBlitz
    Btw, I really enjoyed, yours and Bill Ferris's posts on state of mind or mind-set when one is listening. It's quite funny some days the way the sound can change. Especially, an enveloping and precise sound stage that was lovely a few days earlier, but isn't as great today. Weird.
    I think that maybe even one's sinuses play a part in that.

    Dave
     
    Bill Ferris and OnTheBlitz like this.
  14. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    :thumbsup:Thanks Dave. Yes, It is odd how that happens.

    Cheers,
    Chris
     
    Bill Ferris and david1111 like this.
  15. GChief

    GChief Not well known, super member or other silliness Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,651
    Location:
    Eastern NC
    @david1111 and @OnTheBlitz

    Sorry you guys can’t get your streaming there!!! That sux since it sounds like thats how you want to roll. Sitting here doing some more comparisons on my main system, as good or better than CD everytime.

    Hope you can get there

    :beerchug:
     
    david1111 and awillia6 like this.
  16. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    Are you using the same DAC for comparison?
     
    david1111 likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  17. GChief

    GChief Not well known, super member or other silliness Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,651
    Location:
    Eastern NC
    Yes both CCA and CDP to same DAC, just changing source at DAC and flipping back and forth.
     
    Bill Ferris likes this.
  18. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    Which streaming service?
     
  19. GChief

    GChief Not well known, super member or other silliness Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,651
    Location:
    Eastern NC
    Tidal, but only HIFI since I am running it from my iPhone. 16/44 vs 16/44
     
    david1111 and Bill Ferris like this.
  20. OnTheBlitz

    OnTheBlitz ->"Throw it again!" Subscriber

    Messages:
    26,188
    Location:
    -27.125817, -109.276726
    Have not tried Tidal. Is it uncompressed EDIT:Lossless? Just looked at the site briefly right now.
     

Share This Page