Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
beerandmusic

Understanding Sample Rate

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

not published, but I once ripped & reripped a CD many, many times and could not hear a difference

 

this was on a system with a Cal Audio CD player with PowerBoss, I think I had the Sunfire amp then, and Sonic Frontiers line One pre - either Vandersteen 2c or 2ce or maybe Maggie 1.5QR speakers - not as good as what I have now...

 

 

 

 


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Is it possible for a large number of such errors to cause a difference in SQ due to interpolations not being correct?

I was referring to correctable errors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

Is it possible for a large number of such errors to cause a difference in SQ due to interpolations not being correct?

 A  problem with most USB powered portable writers is that they are very sensitive to the length , and sometimes the quality of the USB cable used to connect them, due mainly  to voltage drops in the cable and connectors. They also often need to use 2 USB sockets for power.

In this case, particularly if you use a short USB extender cable  to place the writer on a more stable surface, they can sometimes read the contents correctly using EAC for example, but fail during data extraction.

Using an external PSU can often reduce the numbers of errors as shown by the checksums, which can mean a lot of saved time when ripping large numbers of CDs.


"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"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

there is a chart that shows the most accurate cd drives for rips and i believe all of the top 100 on the list exceeded 98%

 

edit to add----

 

this isnt the actual list, ..i am sure a quick google will pop the list i was talking about.

https://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?37706-CD-DVD-Drive-Accuracy-List-2016

I find it difficult to interpret those  tables.

One wonders what they mean.   Inaccurate compared to what? All the others? There is no '100% accurate' reference.

 

Personally, using both EAC when I was obsessive  some time  ago and the JRiver one for two years or so since I was cured (equals not faffing around on pointless activities), only one in a hundred or better has come out less than 100%, and those I knew already made some odd but not intrusive sounds.  Some that have known  faults come out perfect.

 

I don't use any fancy power supplies, cables etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

I find it difficult to interpret those  tables.

One wonders what they mean.   Inaccurate compared to what? All the others? There is no '100% accurate' reference.

 

Personally, using both EAC when I was obsessive  some time  ago and the JRiver one for two years or so since I was cured (equals not faffing around on pointless activities), only one in a hundred or better has come out less than 100%, and those I knew already made some odd but not intrusive sounds.  Some that have known  faults come out perfect.

 

I don't use any fancy power supplies, cables etc.

 

the perecentage is based on the final rips compared to known accurate rips in their database.

 

if it got 99% that means that 99 out of 100 rips were 100% accurate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mansr said:

I won't say it's impossible, but it should be a rare exception. If the player has trouble tracking or maintaining focus, or if the error rate is abnormally high, it could maybe, possibly cause some noise on a poorly designed player. Any two spec-compliant discs played on decent gear should sound the same.

 

He says a lot of things.

 

Dont want to beat a dead horse too much but it was Gordon Rankin from whom I first heard the SQ advantage of ripping a CD to hard drive and subsequent playback. He has a rather good technical background. 

 

@alfe has his own views ;) 

 

In in any case there are many people who have heard SQ differences between CD and hard drive, so CD to CD doesn’t seem too far a leap. 

 

I rip all my CD, DVD, SACD, blu Ray etc to harddrive so dont really think about this ??‍♂️


Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2018 at 1:03 PM, beerandmusic said:

anyone that thinks or suggests that the theorem can be used to suggest that all real life bandwidth of human hearing can be captured at 44.1K sample rate have misappropriated the theorem.

if they use it to suggest it is "good enough" then that is fine....where "good enough" is subjective.

 

There is an "exception" to the Nyquist sampling theorem although not in the direction you would like:

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/412593/why-compressive-sensing-will-change-the-world/

 

I have a buddy who is a math PhD who works in compressive sensing so I'm familiar with some of the concepts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CD to a rip could be:

 

motor or its PS noise is in proximity to DAC 

 

newer or better DAC is used for the rips

 

bits slip on MQA infested snake oil and fall down into the noise floor


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mansr said:

I have no respect whatsoever for Gordon Rankin. He is....etc.

 

Comparing a CD to a rip involves completely different hardware. A slight difference isn't entirely implausible. Two good discs played on the same player really shouldn't sound different. If they do, I'd call the player defective.

You aren't allowed to say that. Do I agree with what you say? You don't need to ask but I'm not telling 'voluntarily'.

(I changed what you posted so nobody can  get  it from my post. Being 'thoughtful' an' all.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sandyk said:

 A  problem with most USB powered portable writers is that they are very sensitive to the length , and sometimes the quality of the USB cable used to connect them, due mainly  to voltage drops in the cable and connectors. They also often need to use 2 USB sockets for power.

In this case, particularly if you use a short USB extender cable  to place the writer on a more stable surface, they can sometimes read the contents correctly using EAC for example, but fail during data extraction.

Using an external PSU can often reduce the numbers of errors as shown by the checksums, which can mean a lot of saved time when ripping large numbers of CDs.

This I agree with and have experienced.  Some USB powered CD-drives can be pretty iffy.  


To paraphrase Rick James, "sighted listening is a helluva drug".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, patagent said:

 

There is an "exception" to the Nyquist sampling theorem although not in the direction you would like:

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/412593/why-compressive-sensing-will-change-the-world/

 

I have a buddy who is a math PhD who works in compressive sensing so I'm familiar with some of the concepts.

 

 

Yes, MQA hinted they were using sparse sampling (another word for compressive sensing) to achieve their reduction in file size while having hirez results.  Unfortunately it appears they are in fact doing nothing of the sort.  It was intended to provide cover for their lazy filters and the resulting aliasing in my opinion. 


To paraphrase Rick James, "sighted listening is a helluva drug".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, esldude said:

I had a bright little lamp next to my TT in the days or yore.  So I could see when placing the needle in the groove and any dust that was on the disc.  When CD came out I found looking thru them at this little lamp that many had pin holes in the substrate of aluminum.  In time those mostly disappeared as CD manufacturing improved.  When I first purchased some gold MSFL discs why those things were nearly transparent and full of pinholes.  Lots and lots of them.  They still sounded fantastic, but I don't think the gold had much to do with it. If they weren't in storage I could take some pics of that. 

 There were heaps of problems with earlier CDs from almost all suppliers, where they appeared to skimp on the aluminium layer, and you could see daylight through them.

 I have previously posted a photo of an Elton John CD with large pinholes in it that caused it to become unplayable.

It was caused by the printing inks used at the time on the non reflective side.


"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"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mansr said:

I have no respect whatsoever for Gordon Rankin. He is a liar and a jerk. He'll say whatever will sell his latest snake oil.

 

Comparing a CD to a rip involves completely different hardware. A slight difference isn't entirely implausible. Two good discs played on the same player really shouldn't sound different. If they do, I'd call the player defective.

 There are many people who have reported that even the same discs manufactured in different pressing plants can sound a little different. This includes Barry D. as well.

 In the early days many preferred to obtain their CDs from overseas manufacturers such as Germany, rather than locally, because they sounded better !


"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"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, esldude said:

This I agree with and have experienced.  Some USB powered CD-drives can be pretty iffy.  

 If you are using a normal Windows PC you can  use something like the attached which has the power supply leads of both ports in parallel for a 1A current capability from 1 port at a time.  Each port's +5V lead  is bypassed by a 100uF electrolytic capacitor, which further reduces the USB noise on the +5V line. Replacing them with 100uF 16V Panasonic FM low ESR capacitors gives a further small improvement.

 

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/3-5-2-USB-2-0-Port-HUB-HD-Audio-Output-Floppy-Drive-Expansion-Front-Panel-KK-/281849530542?hash=item419f8a88ae


"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"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crenca said:

 

I know you believe this.  It got me thinking, I am down to a cheap commodity LG usb powered/connected disc reader connected to my computer via usb with not a decrapifier in sight.  This thing had to be made in China with parts that cost less than $2. My belief is that, if I ripped the same CD (regular - neither "blue" nor "gold") over and over again for the lifetime of the unit (for argument sake, let's say 1 year of man hours) the checksums would agree >99.5% of the time.  Even in the cases where they would not, the stray bit here or there would be inaudible in all but a handful of rips.

 

Anyone ever actually published the results of such a test?

 

 

as you can see above, dbpoweramp used to test error rates of CD rippers and publish the results. I don't know if they still do.


Main listening (small home office):

Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>CAPS IV Pipeline Server + Sonore 12V PS >SOtM Lan Isolator>Bricasti M5 Network Player >Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.
 

Secondary Listening: CAPS Pipeline>IFi iOne DAC>Schiit Freya>Kii Three . Also an SBT and a RB Pi 3B+ running piCorePlayer as an SBT emulator. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Spacehound said:

Put all of them together and their 'factories'  would fit in my garden shed.

 

I don't know about some of the others but Audio Note have a large factory in Sussex.

 

There's exaggerating for effect and there's nonsese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, mansr said:

Go look at his tone towards me and others in the MQA on Dragonfly thread, then tell me he isn't a jerk. People have been banned for less. In the same thread, he also made various factually incorrect statements about his own design. If that doesn't make him a liar, I don't know what does.

 

No sorry (not going to read it). He likely was defending his product which you were likely attacking but less assume we are all adults and in my mind, a single heated thread does not make someone a jerk. Particularly if someone is defending his own work.

 

Making "factually incorrect" statements does not make someone a liar, particularly when you've made an above unqualified statement. At most you could say that someone "has lied about X" ... there is an important difference. Words matter.

 

Look, I'm no fan of MQA primarily because I detest closed formats. I've made my views known. You've done a great job debunking the technical claims of MQA. Really great job. So why not keep it technical? No reason to let technical arguments spill over into personal.


Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jabbr said:

Making "factually incorrect" statements does not make someone a liar,

No, not necessarily. If the person genuinely believes the statements to be true, he is not a liar. Someone who knowingly makes false statements is a liar. Since Gordon was talking about his own product, the only way for him to not be a liar is to be incompetent, which is just as good a reason to distrust him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

No sorry (not going to read it). He likely was defending his product which you were likely attacking but less assume we are all adults and in my mind, a single heated thread does not make someone a jerk. Particularly if someone is defending his own work.

 

Making "factually incorrect" statements does not make someone a liar, particularly when you've made an above unqualified statement. At most you could say that someone "has lied about X" ... there is an important difference. Words matter.

My FTL spaceship is terrific. Only  a million dollars and seats two and a dog. Want one?

"Alternative facts" perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Spacehound said:

"Alternative facts" perhaps?

Fair enough, but for example: https://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pauling.html

 

The fact that Linus Pauling's statements about the merits of Vitamin C are called into question does not diminish the respect that should be accorded to him as a scientist.

 

Thats an example.


Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...