Jump to content
IGNORED

Do you think that many copy of a music files could domage the file....


Recommended Posts

When I said domage the file I would like to say just take off some small détails of the music.

MacMini SSD 500go / Amarra 2.3 / Weiss DAC 202 / Classé Audio CP700 & CA 2200 / B&W 802D / Furutech TP609 Power ref III / Ecosse The Myth Pro / Cardas Golden Cross speaker /

Link to comment

.wav - YES. Very low level detail and ambience appears to be degraded . The actual amount of degradation appears to be related to how electrically quiet the computer is.

 

.flac - NO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"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/

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
and Aiff ?

 

I think that would be highly likely, but being a W8/64 user I can't personally confirm that.

I have spent about 5 years researching the .wav and .flac areas though.

 

 

 

 

 

"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/

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
When I said domage the file I would like to say just take off some small détails of the music.

 

No. You can copy wav (or any digital file) thousands of times and never change its checksums, so the copies are bit-identical. Sandy (Alex's) claim is that despite the identical digital fingerprints, somehow the files contain changes. That claim is controversial, to say the least.

 

If you google "Operational Definition of Insanity," the first hit says "the operational definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result".

 

His claim is insane.

Link to comment

Hi citi

 

I figure this is a question you can lay to rest to your own satisfaction without too much difficulty:

 

Try copying the file, then make a copy of the copy. Rinse and repeat ten times - I figure ten times will be enough to put paid (or otherwise) to any notion of analog-type file degeneration. At least to my satisfaction. But if not then try a hundred repeats, which won't take long on a computer but is way more than the likely number of generations you'd get through normal use (i.e. copying files to a new drive etc).

 

I note that you are talking about subtle degeneration of the sound quality of the file, as opposed to unsubtle clicks or distortion. IME the second one is much more likely, for example as a result of copying files from a drive that is starting to fail. In this case there is some advantage in a format like flac which has (I think) a built-in checksum, whereas wav and aiff mostly don't. The checksum probably won't be enough to repair a damaged file, but at least it will warn you that the file has been damaged.

 

If making a few copies and testing for yourself doesn't appeal, you may want to try this - (anecdotally of course) lots of CA members derive immense satisfaction from this activity! :D

 

Ryy3OvI_zps536b0c27.gif

Link to comment
When I said domage the file I would like to say just take off some small détails of the music.

 

Doing so won't change anything. This is one of the greatest benefits of digital technology. It is even safer if doing so with a file format that carries its own checksum, such as FLAC, to verify that the copy occurred with no corruption of the data.

Link to comment

Nope- as long as you do not have any errors in copying, I think you can copy it an infinite number of times with no degradation or other problems.

 

Every time you play a piece of music, you are making several copies of it- from DISK to ram, from RAM to device driver, over some kind of media, to one or more copies in your DAC. The digital data stays the same and is never lost.

 

Now, there are reasons it might sound different, as you copy the data from type of media to another, or where on the media the music is stored, etc. But if you copy the music file to a poor media, then copy it back to better media, it will not be damaged and will probably sound exactly the same.

-Paul

 

When I said domage the file I would like to say just take off some small détails of the music.

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
Hi citi

 

I figure this is a question you can lay to rest to your own satisfaction without too much difficulty:

 

Try copying the file, then make a copy of the copy. Rinse and repeat ten times - I figure ten times will be enough to put paid (or otherwise) to any notion of analog-type file degeneration. At least to my satisfaction. But if not then try a hundred repeats, which won't take long on a computer but is way more than the likely number of generations you'd get through normal use (i.e. copying files to a new drive etc).

 

I note that you are talking about subtle degeneration of the sound quality of the file, as opposed to unsubtle clicks or distortion. IME the second one is much more likely, for example as a result of copying files from a drive that is starting to fail. In this case there is some advantage in a format like flac which has (I think) a built-in checksum, whereas wav and aiff mostly don't. The checksum probably won't be enough to repair a damaged file, but at least it will warn you that the file has been damaged.

 

If making a few copies and testing for yourself doesn't appeal, you may want to try this - (anecdotally of course) lots of CA members derive immense satisfaction from this activity! :D

 

Ryy3OvI_zps536b0c27.gif

 

Government Theory

The tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from generation to generation, says that; “When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, best strategy is to dismount “.

 

However, in government, more advanced strategies are often employed, such as:

1. Buying a stronger whip.

2. Changing riders.

3. Appointing a committee to study the horse.

4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses.

5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.

6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired.

7. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.

8. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.

9. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse's performance.

10. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance.

 

11. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.

12. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.

And of course....

13. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position.

If you don't understand this theory, you haven't lived long enough.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
Government Theory

The tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from generation to generation, says that; “When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, best strategy is to dismount “.

 

However, in government, more advanced strategies are often employed, such as:

1. Buying a stronger whip.

2. Changing riders.

3. Appointing a committee to study the horse.

4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses.

5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.

6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired.

7. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.

8. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.

9. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse's performance.

10. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance.

 

11. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.

12. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.

And of course....

13. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position.

If you don't understand this theory, you haven't lived long enough.

;)

Alain

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...
.wav - YES. Very low level detail and ambience appears to be degraded . The actual amount of degradation appears to be related to how electrically quiet the computer is.

 

.flac - NO.

 

I have been wondering about this..

My music pc only has two sata ports, one used for OS the other for stored Music.

Ideally I would have liked to have used this music pc to rip with, but seems impractical.

I purchased an esata card to try running my stored music hdd from an external esata enclosure, (freeing up an internal sata for dvd drive), but the audio performance was not as nice as the internal sata connection, sounded quite dead in comparison.

 

So ripping from my everyday win8 machine with fidelizer running, bb unplugged, etc sounds better than safe mode XP, so I am trying to work out the best way to transfer the ripped files to the music pc - worrying if I use the esata connection the 'not so alive sound' the external esata seems to load onto playback, may have an effect on file transfer. - Yes I need to try it so see if I can hear any difference, but as this thread came up, thought I would ask if anyone had any other ideas?

 

Much appreciate any positive suggestions ;-)

 

I have everyday win8 plugged into a router with linear psu, the music pc is plugged into a wireless access point with linear psu, I have thought of enabling network access point on each window8 PC and getting another ethernet card for the music and everyday pc so I can run a network cable between the two cutting out the router and the AP of any file transfer goings on...

Link to comment

Hopefully your copying and HDs are good... then there should be nothing to worry about.

 

EDIT:

 

Try this out, this will copy your file 1000 times. Just copy the text into a text file and name it with a .bat. After that, copy the file you want to test with into the directory. Open a command prompt and run the .bat file, enter in the name of the file you placed in the directory (might want to call it something simple to make it easier). Then let it run. About 5 minutes later you'll have the file copied 1000 times.

 

Simple enough to test.

 

It worked for me, if anyone sees a flaw in this feel free to make the changes, it's been forever since I did anything in DOS. :)

 

SET COUNT=0

SET /P fninput=Please Enter File Name to Copy:

:CopyLoop

IF "%COUNT%" == "1000" GOTO EndCopy

COPY %fninput% %fninput%%COUNT%

DEL %fninput%

REN %fninput%%COUNT% %fninput%

SET /A COUNT+=1

GOTO CopyLoop

:EndCopy

Link to comment

PewterTA thanks, that should help the original poster and others. However, I have never copied a file in the same format and have wondered if there is a loss going from one lossless format to another using XLD, I am guessing no as my oldest music files are still some of my favorites and they have been in four formats with six changes over the years.

 

Most of my oldest music files started out as FLAC downloads which I converted to Apple Lossless and then later to AIFFs and then back to Apple Lossless when I started running out of memory on my old Mac Mini. Then when I got a new Mac Mini with a bigger hard drive, a Teac DAC and Pure Music I converted all my Apple Lossless to FLAC since FLAC worked with both my software players Pure Music/iTunes and the Teac HR Audio Player. The Teac HR Audio Player cannot play Apple Lossless.

 

After Teac added UTF-8 support for WAV files in Version 1.0.0.1 allowing track titles and artist names of WAV files to be shown I converted all my FLAC files to WAV and now use the Teac HR Audio Player as my primary player with Pure Music/iTunes as an emergency backup.

 

So in short, my oldest 24 bit high resolution music files have went from:

 

FLAC > Apple Lossless > AIFF > Apple Lossless > FLAC > WAV

 

I have no way to confirm if there were in losses over the years, however some of my best sounding recordings have went through all these changes.

 

I don't really need to know if there was any losses as they all still sound great to me, I'm just slightly curious if anyone has went through such changes and kept the original files to compare their latest versions.

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment

Teresa

T.A.S. 220 and 221 reported on this issue. They found that when a .wav file was converted to .flac, then back again to .wav, the resultant .wav file did not sound quite as good as the original .wav file. That has been my experience too.

However, I have found that a .flac file appears to have some protection perhaps due to it's container, and does not appear to degrade when copied or moved around, even when burned to a CD, and copied back again.

In fact when I copy the .flac file to a more electrically quiet storage location , I have found that it can sound a little better than when played from the original location. I have a few 24/96 downloads dating back to 2008 and saved to HDD, and also converted to .wav and saved there too. If I copy the original .flac file to say a USB memory stick powered by a low noise external +5V linear PSU, then both the .flac file and the new resulting decoded .wav file sound better than from the original HDD, despite all being played from System Memory. System noise appears to be playing a part here.

I find that the differences are much harder to pick with a very recent PC running W8/64.

 

Regards

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
I'm just slightly curious if anyone has went through such changes and kept the original files to compare their latest versions.

 

Yes:

 

I used xdl, converted from ALAC -- > wav --> ALAC --> wav

 

The two wav files are in two different directories.

 

 

 

zsh-% md5sum *.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c 04. Flume.wav

zsh-% md5sum ../*.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c ../04. Flume.wav

zsh-%

 

 

The corresponding alac files differ, presumably because of the tags:

 

 

zsh-% md5sum *.m4a

43ee81e94b567157cdd4d9cbfd6d9082 04. Flume.m4a

zsh-% md5sum ../*.m4a

aa7d7481ea5582ebda3f027b9eb9c3b8 ../04. Flume.m4a

 

 

In xld the flac conversion has a variable compression rate, and I need to read the instructions after I am awake. Edit: Ok, I did it and it worked. It adds padding by default, and I unchecked that box, and generated a flac file from the wav, and then went back to the wav and get the same checksum:

 

 

zsh-% md5sum *.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c 04. Flume.wav

 

 

In summary, I did this:

 

alac --> wav --> alac --> wav --> flac --> wav

 

All of the wav files are identical:

 

 

zsh-% md5sum **/*.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c 04. Flume.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c temp/04. Flume.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c temp2/04. Flume.wav

 

 

Also, using the flac utility (installed via fink on os x), I get the same, using the same procedure as miska:

 

 

zsh-% md5sum *.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c 04. Flume.wav

e9b48a469feff84092293186eff04e6c 04. Flume_orig.wav

Link to comment

.....However, I have found that a .flac file appears to have some protection perhaps due to it's container, and does not appear to degrade when copied or moved around, even when burned to a CD, and copied back again......

 

Alex,

Have you tried dbpoweramp with the .wav file in a .flac container?

As I understand it, the .wav stays and the flac container allows tagging etc.

 

One can only hope the .wav music presentation stays, and the flac 'protection' stays... best of both worlds :-)

 

Going to try it here when I get a chance and the house to myself!

 

Cheers

Mark

Link to comment

Hi Mark

I tried dbpoweramp years ago but preferred EAC for SQ, although I really liked the dbpoweramp features.

In the meantime both programs have further matured though. I don't feel the need for album art and if I do wish to have it I simply save it in the same folder, rather like what you get with a HDTracks download.

I would be interested to hear what you find.

 

Regards

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

Thanks wgscott for your test results, it appears my feeling that my music files have survived these six lossless conversions intact was correct.

 

Alex (sandyk) other than individual tests over the years my music collection was not converted to WAV until the very last conversion. These 24 bit high resolution music files have went from: FLAC > Apple Lossless > AIFF > Apple Lossless > FLAC > WAV

 

After your post I am now somewhat concerned. I have deleted the FLAC files and my music is in WAV on my MAC Mini, my Gateway PC laptop and my Seagate backup drive. If I do have to have to reload my WAV files from my backups does that mean there may be some loss of information?

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment

Hi Alex,

 

I came across various places on the net saying that EAC was preferred to dbpoweramp, a while back, and all were old posts.

So yes it will be interesting.

 

I had not actually thought of using dbpoweramp to rip, my trial, when I get a chance, of dbpoweramp was planned to see if I can wrap existing / or new .wav files (ripped with EAC), with the dbpoweramp flac wrapper..

 

So many options ;-o

will report when I eventually get there

Cheers

Mark

Link to comment
I don't feel the need for album art.

 

Alex I use the Teac HR Audio Player on my Mac Mini which doesn't offer album artwork for any music file.

 

Screen Shot 1.png

 

However on my Gateway PC laptop using Foobar 2000 WAV displays everything, including album art work. If iTunes ever updates their player to recognize UTF-8 encoding then WAV would also offer album artwork in iTunes on MACs.

 

Here is a picture of all the metadata in my WAV files as viewed by XLD:

 

Screen Shot 3.png

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment
After your post I am now somewhat concerned. I have deleted the FLAC files and my music is in WAV on my MAC Mini, my Gateway PC laptop and my Seagate backup drive. If I do have to have to reload my WAV files from my backups does that mean there may be some loss of information?

Hi Teresa

It's always a good idea to save the original paid download files in their original form. I got caught ,myself recently with a high res DL of Art Lande from Blue Coast.

The degree of loss of low level detail due to masking by system noise will depend on how electrically quiet your computer is, and whether you also use low noise external Linear PSUs. You have already verified in previous tests between us that this degradation does happen.

 

Regards

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...