Hard Drives Make a Difference in Sound

[sandyk]

coxhaus

What type of files are you playing ? For example,copying a .wav file to another location normally results in a small but noticeable degradation.

 

Alex

 

 

 

 

 

 

"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD, you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist."-Cookie Marenco. cookiemarenco.com/

[sandyk]

coxhaus

Just to be perfectly clear here. So you have the 1st generation.wav files on a different drive altogether, and aren't copying them from the original Seagate HDD to the new one ?

Alex

[sandyk]

I guess from what you are saying I should map a drive and rip across the network to the music server directly.

If you are using .wav files, yes. If you use .flac then there won't be a problem. Like several others here, I find .wav files sound better than .flac. However, I find the difference is much less obvious with recent PCs and operating systems such as W8/64

BTW, a friend and myself both thought there was a small deterioration in SQ when going from a 500GB HDD to a 1TB HDD.

The difference may come down to different PSU demands ,and their interaction with other sensitive areas via the PSU ?

 

Alex

[sandyk]

A poorly isolated DAC will pick up this noise an thus contaminate sound beyond the pure bit perfect 0's and 1's.

 

Where do you get all these pure bit perfect 0's and 1's from ?

Both Martin Colloms and Barry have already verified that "bit perfect" .wav files can sound different.

Martin has confirmed that those ripped with higher quality PSUs sound better, despite having identical checksums.

I have further confirmation (last Sunday) from a highly qualified E.E. with wide industry experience. that I can't presently discuss in this forum , until he does further tests for his own satisfaction.

Jud and Superdad are already posting in other threads that there are marked differences in SQ between different storage mediums, despite the files being played from System Memory. I expect that there will be even more interesting developments when Alex C. hooks up his under development Linear PSUs that were designed by John Swenson.

Digital Audio isn't all cut and dried like some members insist. Keep burying your heads in the sand, and all these numerous new reports may disappear !

 

Alex

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signature

"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD, you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist."-Cookie Marenco. cookiemarenco.com/

[sandyk]

So Alex, I wonder if, given all that is now known about directory structure, file block storage, and media formatting, and given how you have said that your file differences survive best when the files are unzipped in place, onto the media they will be played back from, and without being move further, have you done some research into those aspects? Please, if you know something or have ideas about why two identical, static files can be different--essentially before playback--do share that.

Alex C

TBH, I don't feel the need for further validation from you, but I will say something further off line in confidence. I am however pleased that you are now taking the performance of your Mac to a much higher level. You are now posting similar findings to those posted by numerous XXHE members using those terrible Windows based computers. (grin)

The files used for demo purposes on Sunday were both on a Corsair Voyager as .wav files. The Corsair was simply plugged into the external +5V JLH PSU., and then into a USB port of the Oppo 103, and via coax SPDIF to a couple of DACs with a little higher performance than Analogue Out from the Oppo . No PC was involved here. So there was no further degradation due to Zipping, and Unzipping etc.

M.C. actually did something similar when he took the PC out of the equation by plugging in the USB memory stick he had saved the files to, into a USB port on his Naim Unitserve. Later he found an improvement from the same saved files with a later release version, which appears as though it may have used a Linear PSU for the digital area this time around.

Alex K.

[sandyk]

Hey Alex-

 

I am not disputing that your files sound different. But- a binary 1 is a binary 1 and a binary 0 is a binary 0. There is no other possibility there.

 

Whatever is making your files sound different, it absolutely is not the data. Or to put it another way, there are only pure bits. If a bit is corrupted, it will either change in value or be unreadable- both cases are easily and quickly detected as changes in the data.

 

This is very different than having a poorly written CD or storing a file on a USB stick or spinning drive. In those cases it is possible the media could make a difference. The actual data that hits the DAC has been copied several times from the data that is on the media. Not only copied, but converted from one format to another, electrically, at least twice. And transmitted too. But through all of that, excepting any DSP processing, the data remains the same.

 

Media differences, playback chain equipment, yes. Those are possible, but not the data itself. I do not know what the answer to your puzzle is my friend, and I agree you have uncovered a puzzle, but I do know we can rule out the data as the cause. None of your experiments have shown the data changing, to the best of my knowledge.

 

Paul

Hi Paul

Barry said this about the .wav files made using an external USB powered writer and saved to the same CD-R

"as though some random treble energy surrounded the details in the recordings"

That is consistent with PSU/EMI problems. I have never claimed that the binary data is different, however there seems to be some mechanism by which a " snapshot" of the system noise comes along with the data. Some (including Martin Colloms) also saw this in an earlier experiment where the same 1080 video frame stored at 2 different locations was captured as a .bmp image , and the 2 images placed side by side using Photoshop. Those who picked up on the apparent differences with the jewellery on Christina Aguilera's hand, also found that the preferred image changed sides when the position of the screen grabs was reversed using Photoshop and a new composite image made. The checksums of both .bmp images were the same,

yet the still frame saved from the identical .ts stream on the Corsair Voyager with it's linear PSU seemed to reveal more " sparkle" from the jewellery. It was as if there was a slight haze around the other version. This experiment was suggested by a Melbourne DIY Audio member who also hears these differences.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

Paul

Further down the track I intend replacing the bridge rectifier diodes in my Oppo 103's SMPS with fast, slow recovery types.

I will probably need to make a tiny PCB to use individual diodes though. With my old Oppo 981 that also resulted in better audio, as well as a glossier picture via HDMI. IIRC, your Oppo has linear PSUs.

I have quite a few video clips derived from VEVO and Youtube .mp4 music videos. I convert them to BluRay specs with 16/48 Audio instead of AAC 16/44.1 , and use a tiny amount of " sharpness" to help compensate for the slight loss of detail due to .MP4 encoding at lower than optimum bit rates. I then save the best ones to a Corsair that can plug directly into my 40" Samsung LED backlit TV, and export the audio to my DAC. Some of your U.S.A. SNL derived material looks and sounds fabulous. I just wish we could get our local TV stations to transmit it as you guys see and hear it, often in 5.1 surround as well.

As I said in an email, I didn't get my Oppo to mainly play " spinners" although it can do that better than my previous Oppo 981.

Being behind Perspex doors is enough to stop any mechanical noise from annoying me. I don't believe that hip joints will be of any benefit to me, over existing measures, when playing from USB memory, without any mechanism noise.

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

Paul

As previously stated, the Oppo 103 is sitting on a piece of car sound absorbent material which is designed to do similar.

Have you tried sitting your Oppo 105 on the carpet to see how that compares ? Perhaps you don't need carpets in Texas though? IF I ever start using the Oppo 103 more with those shiny round things, I will try your suggestion.

Are you sure you haven't been smoking those joints ? (grin)

 

Alex

[sandyk]

Paul

What kind of improvement does it make to playback from USB memory vs. playing a disc ?

Perhaps posting a photo of your listening area may make things clearer to me as to why you need to go to such extremes when not playing shiny discs ? I wasn't talking about on a carpet square, I was talking about on the carpet on the floor. That's very different to on a simple carpet square.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

You seem to insist on talking about about the vibrations caused by the device, which is not at all what floating a device does.

 

Paul

And I keep insisting that it is not a problem for me with my gear inside a wooden cabinet behind Perspex doors ,sitting on a shelf using a piece of car sound deadening material under it, speakers on a carpeted floor using cones, and non earth shattering listening levels. I am more interested in reducing the internal vibration from the player's mechanism when playing discs, just as I do when ripping discs on my PC, not further protecting it from room resonances, vibration from speakers etc. That's why my previous Oppo had quite a bit of 3M 2552 tape fitted to it as well. To further clarify. My listening area is in a large converted bed room. I simply do not need to use the kind of power levels you may need in a much larger purpose built listening room. You are likely to find that most listening rooms in major cities are much smaller than in urban areas, so power requirements are considerably lower, as is also the risk of room resonances and vibration.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

I think your system is more coupled than isolated.

 

I also have 50mm thick 1M high soft foam along 2 side walls to absorb some of this stuff. Do you use such measures too, or just rely on "floaties"?

[sandyk]

Duplicate post deleted.

[sandyk]

Paul

Let's just choose to disagree here. If my listening environment was as poor as you seem to think it is, I wouldn't even be posting my findings in C.A. or elsewhere.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

That might also be a possible factor in some of the differences you can hear. Over and above power supplies that is.

 

Most of my findings are initially based on headphone listening, not via speakers.

Nice try though. (grin)

[sandyk]

I just can't resist - your headphones have spinning disks? I gotta get me a pair of those...

 

They must have, because my head spins when I read some of your replies in this thread ! (LOL)

[sandyk]

I live near Yosemite National Park--great vacation destination--maybe someone will come visit with me someday...

 

 

Yogi Bear perhaps ?

[sandyk]

Do note that sata cables also change the sound. I don't know why.

 

Use the shortest possible SATA 3 6GBs cables that have 2 separate shielded cables instead of a group of side by side wires as in generic SATA cables. They are quite inexpensive.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

I just changed my SATA cable to the SSD with a 2 separate shielded cable. It came in the box with the Intel SSD. WOW. The sound is so much richer and fuller with the SSD. The mid-bass and bass are so much better. I will have to retest everything.

 

I'm not rich enough to pay 300 Euros for a Paul Pang SATA cable, so that's why I tried these screened shorter cables.

The original generic SATA cables were so long that they were draped over the motherboard. There are sound technical reasons for using more direct, separately screened SATA 3 6GBs cables.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

Hi Tranz

Just to be different I bought translucent blue SATA3 6GBs 25CM cables from a local ebay PC component supplier.

They were just long enough to avoid them laying on top of the motherboard or being draped around other stuff..

I then ripped a fresh .wav file for a friend in Spain who has an earlier rip of the same track, and he was able to pick the new file 3 times in a row as sounding better under blind test conditions. He did say the differences weren't huge, but worthwhile.

 

Alex

 

P.S.

I will not be responding to smart ass posts on this subject from the usual suspects.

[sandyk]

Tranz

The SATA3 6GBs cables consist of 2 separate screened cables, so there shouldn't be any need to further shield them.

If you use your mouse you can clearly see their construction from this ebay link.

Alex

 

Sata 3 III 3 0 Data HDD SSD Cable 46cm 18" UV Blue W Latch | eBay

[sandyk]

coxhaus

 

Does it need to be 18"long ? Mine are 25CM (10") long, and are just long enough in my W8/64 PC.

There is less internal clutter too with shorter lengths when you have several cables.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

coxhaus

In that case I would suggest, that despite it's shielding that you try to route the cable well away from the motherboard etc.

I also tried searching ebay for a shorter version of that cable. I would certainly try a couple of those myself if they were of a shorter length.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

coxhaus

 

That's pleasing to hear.

Where did you find the 6" SATA 3 cable ? IIRC, the ebay cable you posted about was 18"long.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

Coxhaus

The one in the centre looks like it means business ! Where did you get that one ?

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

I just tested this SATA cable. I would classify the SATA cable as very smooth sounding. It lacks in dynamics and resolution and no 3D. If you want a smooth sounding SATA cable this is it.

 

The little 6 inch UV blue cable has more dynamics, resolution, 3D, and better depth. It is a much better sounding SATA cable

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]9893[/ATTACH]

 

Put simply, the previous one has far better noise rejection, which is also likely to be partly due to the shorter length.