dbpoweramp pro and Teac drive for ripping

[soppman]

great guide at http://xs.vc/eac/

 

[audioengr]

It turns out that the offsets are different as well. This could be the silver bullet.

 

Steve N.

 

[vortecjr]

Steve, can you expand on that when you have a chance? Thanks!

 

Guys, also wanted to add that I had a small issue with dbpoweramp and track titles today. It mixed some of the titles up making them out of order. I would not have noticed except the title was french and the song was not. Then the song was french and the title was not. Anyway, I had to redue the rip and manually tell it to look for the free db info. Its fixed now, but looks like I will have to pay attention for here on. So its a world class tager huh....hehehe

 

jr

 

[audioengr]

I am waiting for Tony, the software expert/engineer that is analyzing it. He is still learning about this also. The Offset is evidently a pointer that delays the starting point of the data. The question is what is the granularity of this pointer. Can it be within a frame for instance.....

 

Steve N.

Empirical Audio

 

[ted_b]

then the file sizes would also be different (start recording at 6 bits into the file rather than 36). Supposedly 30 samples (offset -30) equals .68 milliseconds. Of course, the read and write offsets need to be consistent for bit perfect file ripping.

 

[vortecjr]

it doesn't sound like a big deal to me! Most tracks are quiet in the first .68 seconds and quite in the last 2X.68 seconds. Not all though I am sure but most. I still think its a pipe dream to want bit perfect.

 

Funny thing with my title error on db it said the rip was accurate. Now this bugs me, because it didnt have the title correct so how in the world could it be accurate? For starters this implies that all the others had also ripped with the wrong title. I really dought this! The different lenth in the title should have been enough to cause the program to question the rip. I am not going to loose sleep over it.

 

JR

 

[audioengr]

Well, I can tell you that the offsets are looking like the smoking gun.

 

Tony has sent me two files without telling me what is what, track1.wav and track2.wav. One is dbpoweramp and one EAC. He stripped all of the tags from these so they compare bit-perfect. The offsets are differnt though.

 

I heard a difference in the two files in a blind A/B. Interestingly the EAC file sounded more focused this time. Also, my original dbpoweramp accurate-rip sounds better than either Track1.wav or Track2.wav, so his editing changed the sound too.

 

He is now in the process of creating some test cases now using the "body" of the EAC rip with changing offsets, so we can determine the audibilty of offsets.

 

Steve N.

Empirical Audio

 

[Cavaille]

This is very interesting. I was always aware that computer drives are sounding different. I still don´t know how. I believed this to be only jitter but if you say you´ve ran it through a re-clocker this can maybe be ruled out.

 

Then we have to find out why the differences are there in the first place. To normal knowledge and science there shouldn´t be any differences at all. Given the same CRC-codes and the expected outcome in bit-to-bit-comparison ("no differences were found") it should sound the same. But why doesn´t it?

 

I have two external USB drives. One from LG, purchased in 2006 and another one from Samsung, purchased a few months ago. The Samsung sounds different, most of the time better indeed. This is something that I´ve learned in 2001 when starting using EAC to do my rips. Back then I used a TEAC drive and a Samsung DVD drive. Both sounded different but the CRC codes were the same. I´ve accepted this for myself though officially it can´t be. It is sonically so evident for me that I believe I am not listening to a placebo.

 

Furthermore, two weeks ago I bought a new powercable for my external Samsung drive. A cheap one, with cables from LAPP, sturdy plugs.... the usual. Just an experiment, hence the price: 20,- Euros. The best thing is the sound: it changed very much. It sounds as if someone would be using a combination of subtle EQ together with a DSP that expands the stereo perspective. The sound is nice but what is worse is that I can´t explain it!

 

I truly believe this to be caused by jitter. Let me explain: the CD uses a very powerful error correction called CIRC which can correct errors up to 4 mm on the CD transparently. According to Wikipedia CIRC is very powerful when it comes to burst errors but very weak when it comes to random errors present in ALL the data. Jitter is exactly that: random errors. This powercable of mine seems to improve the workings of the laser transport with the outcome that the rip was done with less random errors. Being a random error and becoming only evident at D/A-conversion jitter wouldn´t even show in CRC codes or in bit-to-bit-comparisons. Therefore even AccurateRip is pointless when it comes to random errors.

 

I tried to discuss it on Hydrogenaudio.org but they were saying that my PC was faulty. Well, then all of my four PCs since 2001 have been faulty the same way, something I higly doubt.

 

Whatever the reason for sound differences, we have to find it out.

 

[PeterSt]

1.

There are overwhelming empirical proof that iTunes ripper with error-correction is bit-perfect.

 

Aha !, so now ripping is subject to bit perfectness, right ? Well, you will be having a hard time to prove that a rip from a CD is "bit perfect". Any ideas on how to do that ?

But wait a minute ...

 

2.

So people use EAC which uses AccurateRip to check an online checksum database, and this gives peace of mind to some audiophiles.

 

I know there was some cynicism in that (post), but personally I never understood the accuracy levels to begin with ... every album can have many checksums (if you know how it works you'll understand), and half of the checksums have to be ignored because they don't match anyway. Hahaha, so of course I'm ignorant and now my rips are all wrong. So be it. BUT :

We are talking about this accuraterip database which was recently found to be wrong for all these years, right ?

 

3.

I am waiting for Tony, the software expert/engineer that is analyzing it. He is still learning about this also. The Offset is evidently a pointer that delays the starting point of the data. The question is what is the granularity of this pointer. Can it be within a frame for instance.....

 

Let me start with saying that if one person is respected by me, it is this Tony. But this time he must have suffered from drinking too much or whatever. Djeezz, now I see where those "offset" and "header" expressions come from, at finding them all over in posts here at CA (and never looking into this thread here). Copyingcopyingcopying.

 

a. Whatever is in the header is unrelated to sound quality, unless it is about the sample rate and bit depth; there is no way these can be wrong and go unnoticed. You'd have static or Mickey Mouse etc.

 

b. Offsets - as implied - are totally unrelated to sound quality. Those who say this, well, know NOTHING. Stupid speculation, and in the mean time knowing nothing. Blablabla.

 

however ...

 

What a wrong offset *can* do, is changing left and right ...

... and that may go unnoticed, but with a for sure the most different perception from the music.

 

So you see, my respected Tony can be correct. It's easy to check of course.

 

Peter (AKA Ranting P.)

 

 

 

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

A quick question ... I can't follow if your comments are supporting Steve who says that different rips off the same CD (without errors) can sound different is correct; or supporting the counter argument that (assuming no errors) all rips are the same?

 

As for "There are overwhelming empirical proof that iTunes ripper with error-correction is bit-perfect" I think this is referring to Kent Poon's article(s) - http://www.designwsound.com/dwsblog/?page_id=535

 

Eloise

 

[Audio_ELF]

Cavaille wrote... "[...] I have two external USB drives. One from LG, purchased in 2006 and another one from Samsung, purchased a few months ago. The Samsung sounds different, most of the time better indeed. This is something that I´ve learned in 2001 when starting using EAC to do my rips. Back then I used a TEAC drive and a Samsung DVD drive. Both sounded different but the CRC codes were the same. I´ve accepted this for myself though officially it can´t be. It is sonically so evident for me that I believe I am not listening to a placebo. [...]"

 

Can I just get straight what you are saying ...

 

You have transfered the audio data twice, using two different external (USB) drives but the same software? The tracks were saved as .WAV (or another uncompressed format) and both files were exactly the same size and checksumed identically so they contained exactly the same data. However, when you played the files back, they sounded different?

 

Have I got that correct?

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

Hi Eloise,

 

I didn't try to be in favor of on or the other; only expressed my feelings on the arguments used.

 

My opinion ? I don't think rips which are equal for each byte (after aligning the offsets of course) can sound different. However, there are so many people who claim it can, that the least I have in mind is : maybe it can. At this moment I wouldn't have an explanation for it though.

 

Even rips which are not equal to the byte - but containing glitches because of scratches or otherwise poor reading - IMO can not sound different. Apart from the obvious anomalies of course.

 

But, either side may be right.

 

About the Kent Poon stories : If I read something like that, I think "this is upside down" -> first have objects which incur for the same result, and then proove that they are the same (try it with scratched CDs and then think again about what the result will say (depening on the result !)).

The whole point is, I think, that suddenly CDs are not trusted to be ripped bit perfectly, while this (IMHO) should be no doubt to begin with. However, once you are in doubt afterall, it is hard to proove (meaning that it really takes a setup like Kent's story, which you don't do during lunch time). Also, with a more poor CD - which will not be read wrongly all over but will contain glitches and stuff - it will be even harder if not impossible to proove what can and what can not read bit perfectly.

 

So, when all is right (the reader, the CD) no doubts should be there that things will be wrong. But how can you know ? And when today is okay, how will that be tomorrow ?

Here the phenomenon "bit perfect" should not apply I think. It's in another leage.

 

And yet in another leage is the same rip sounding different than the other.

Audio ...

 

(was I vague here ? yes, but I find it difficult to make a subject out of something that in my opinion isn't one)

 

[vortecjr]

Thanks for the link! Kent is a pretty cool dude! I m happy to brag that I was the first to purchase the #3 release. Really he even told me so:) I am sure he gave a bunch away at ces before I got mine though:(

 

Question for anyone. I have both eac and dbpoweramp. I like dbpoweramp, but I kinda like eac better. Can eac drop the cover art in like dbpoweramp? I keep having to go to amazon to get cover art with eac. It it me or is it that eac does not due auto cover art insert?

 

thanks

 

jr

 

[Cavaille]

... I know.

 

Can I just get straight what you are saying ...

 

You have transfered the audio data twice, using two different external (USB) drives but the same software? The tracks were saved as .WAV (or another uncompressed format) and both files were exactly the same size and checksumed identically so they contained exactly the same data. However, when you played the files back, they sounded different?

 

Have I got that correct?

Eloise

 

You did. I tried every possibility. Everytime with EAC and the most secure configuration. Offset was configured for every individual drive. The files were exactly the same size, had the same CRC checksum and the same bit-to-bit-comparison. I did this with a lot of CDs.

 

I compared rips from the Samsung to the one from LG. Another (internal) LG drive resides inside my Desktop PC: same results. A fourth drive resides inside my Laptop (NEC). Also the same. Three of them are sounding different. BUT: the two drives from LG have matching sound. In a blind test done with foobar2000 I couldn´t distinguish the one LG rip from the other LG rip while that was easily possible when I compared them to the drives of the other manufacturers.

 

I therefore conclude that "something" influences the sound and that this "something" goes beyond the capabilities of bit counting checksums (which CRC and bit-to-bit are). These two things are only counting the number of bits, nothing more. I would love to have other utilities for measurment than just my ear...

 

[ted_b]

from Overstock. $52 refurbished.

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/Teac-DW224U-CDRW-DVD-Drive-Refurbished/4306601/product.html

 

When it came today it boots up as a Matshita UJDA 740?? That's a generic Panasonic drive, right? Is there a sno-balls chance that it's still a TEAC drive but has been refurb'd with a Matshita UJDA 740 driver?? It's small (laptop sized) with black case, and looks just like the piocture on the Overstock ad, so it's not like they sent me a completely different product accidentally. I have an email into Overstock (as well as a heads up, mayday mayday review). Thanks

Ted