WAV or FLAC

[ted_b]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

Hmmh, I thought WavPack (.wv) supports lossless DSD compression these days... I was actually planning add support for it.

Great, but that's news to me (not the first time  ).  How would a PCM container like wavpack support DSD compression...and do you mean DST?  Lost here, sorry.

[ted_b]

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/digital/pc-software/compressing-dsd-files-with-wavpack-5/

 

I see that wv can be used to compress DSF if it is used in Foobar (with correct plugin) or MPD (music player daemon).  HQPlayer support would be great for those that need the storage space and who don't believe the decompression (like that of compressed FLAC, which we are discussing here and ad nauseum) would have any sonic detriments.  But I'm not holding my breath as their change log even mentions DSD decimation (not sure this is relevant as how can lossless and decimation be used in the same sentence) improvements like "less hf rolloff". Argh!  Any hf rolloff is bad.  Tell me this is something unrelated.

[rando]

4 hours ago, ted_b said:

Huh?

 

A month or so back I tagged you when I hit a spot of trouble getting the conversion to work.  Shortly after I realized this was something I'd found on Archimago's blog.  

 

Lossy or lossless, it was a one off experiment to perform a player comparison using some previously unheard material in a few formats.

[sandyk]

6 hours ago, dtb300 said:

To throw another wrinkle into all this discussion...  

 

My cheap DVD/CD drive is an external drive.   On the same hardware I had two different OS installs (Win 10 and Win 2012r2 Core both using AO) then imaged them for easy restore.

 

using dBPowerAmp, ripped the same song (Accurate Rip) on each OS then copied to NAS.  Each and every time when auditioned, without any information on what and why they were listening, everyone picked the 2012 version.   

 

Not hear to argue if this is right or wrong, just adding more information to the discussion.....

 

Crazy stuff these computers.....  ?

 

 Quite a few members have reported their preferences for CDs ripped using dBPowerAmp over EAC.

Are we then assuming that ONE of those rippers hasn't accurately ripped the CD contents despite there being no errors reported ?

[diecaster]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Quite a few members have reported their preferences for CDs ripped using dBPowerAmp over EAC.

Are we then assuming that ONE of those rippers hasn't accurately ripped the CD contents despite there being no errors reported ?

 

Now you are trying to create a problem where none exist. On the Mac side, I prefer dBpoweramp over XLD even though XLD is free. Both use AccurateRip and both end up with the same rips. I just like the features and UI of dBpoweramp better. Sometimes I will use XLD on a CD that dBpoweramp is having issues ripping. Most of the time they both have the same problem. Sometimes, XLD will work where dBpoweramp did not.

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, diecaster said:

Now you are trying to create a problem where none exist.

 

 I am just reinforcing what dtb300 said. It's not as cut and dried as many would like to believe.

[fas42]

11 hours ago, jabbr said:

This is an entirely specious argument. For example I often rip using my MacBook Pro and then transfer to NAS via wireless to fiberoptic to mirrored drives with a large RAM cache. WTF is the noise from the CD reader???

 

Similarly rip SACD on my PS3 which writes via an Ethernet switch, copper in — fiber out to the NAS... 

 

In neither case is there an electrical connection between the reader hardware and any of my DACs. The “transport” is irrelevant 

 

Note in my post I said,

 

Quote

... . In the purely digital world this matters not one iota ...

 

The process of ripping is dealing with stored digital data, and the end result is digital - no aspects of analogue are involved, or harmed at any point along this journey .

 

If the transport is being used at the same time as we are listening to the music - then everything changes ...

[monteverdi]

2 hours ago, diecaster said:

 

Now you are trying to create a problem where none exist. On the Mac side, I prefer dBpoweramp over XLD even though XLD is free. Both use AccurateRip and both end up with the same rips. I just like the features and UI of dBpoweramp better. Sometimes I will use XLD on a CD that dBpoweramp is having issues ripping. Most of the time they both have the same problem. Sometimes, XLD will work where dBpoweramp did not.

I have the experience when dBpoweramp has problems XLD rarely solves it but iTunes works as an emergency solution very often AIFF (if I do not want to replace these wonky CDs). Otherwise I stay far way from iTunes.

[jabbr]

8 hours ago, marce said:

I copied all my CD's to WAV (don't ask, many years ago it was how EAC was set up at the time, started off ripping and basically went through as many as possible in one go), anyone recommend a good batch converter so I can save then to FLAC, probably getting on for 1,000 CD's to convert!

 

There are many options. On OS X I use Yate not for conversion, but to add/edit tags...goes out to Musicbrainz and grabs the tags... XLD.app (GUI version) has a batch mode.

 

I use Audiventory to convert SACD ISOs to dsf.

 

 

[wwaldmanfan]

18 minutes ago, monteverdi said:

I have the experience when dBpoweramp has problems XLD rarely solves it but iTunes works as an emergency solution very often AIFF (if I do not want to replace these wonky CDs). Otherwise I stay far way from iTunes.

 

iTunes will rip a bad CD because it simply passes over the errors. If this is acceptable to you, then it's all good.

[sandyk]

9 hours ago, marce said:

I copied all my CD's to WAV (don't ask, many years ago it was how EAC was set up at the time, started off ripping and basically went through as many as possible in one go), anyone recommend a good batch converter so I can save then to FLAC, probably getting on for 1,000 CD's to convert!

 

 Why do you want to do this ? Do you need to conserve space in a Backup storage medium, or add extra data such as album artwork etc . ?

 

[Ralf11]

12 minutes ago, wwaldmanfan said:

 

iTunes will rip a bad CD because it simply passes over the errors. 

 

 

eh?  what makes you say that?

[wwaldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

eh?  what makes you say that?

 

I've done it myself with iTunes when XLD could not complete the rip of a scratched CD, even in Burst mode. Unless you check "use error correction when reading CD's", iTunes will ignore many errors and proceed. Whether you will hear the glitches in the rip is another matter.

[Ralf11]

my question is how do you know the non-reads are ignored?

 

maybe they are recognized and filled in with some value?

[lateboomer]

I am using an external Samsung bluray optical drive to do all my rips. It is connected to a laptop powered by lps and I change its usb cable to audiophile usb cable to just have smoother rip. All of these may be overkilled but just for the peace of mind. I even connect a Wurth usb filter to the drive. I used a laptop's internal drive to rip before, and it generated a lot of heat, spinning noise and vibration to the laptop and very often it would hang after 4 or 5 rips. The laptop is Compaq running Windows 7. 

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, lateboomer said:

I am using an external Samsung bluray optical drive to do all my rips. It is connected to a laptop powered by lps and I change its usb cable to audiophile usb cable to just have smoother rip. All of these may be overkilled must for the peace of mind. I used a laptop's internal drive to rip before, and it generated a lot of heat, spinning noise and vibration to the laptop and very often it would hang after 4 or 5 rips.

 

 When you are ripping a large number of CDs, the extra reliability, and far fewer repeat rips needed is a huge timesaver.

[lateboomer]

6 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 Quite a few members have reported their preferences for CDs ripped using dBPowerAmp over EAC.

Are we then assuming that ONE of those rippers hasn't accurately ripped the CD contents despite there being no errors reported ?

I have tried dBPowerAmp and liked it a lot, because for EAC I have to run seperate mp3tag app to fill in the tags for album artist and album etc and all my rips are wav files. However, I have not considered to purchase the dBPowerAmp's license yet, but may be I should as I also preferred its rip compared with EAC.

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, lateboomer said:

I have tried dBPowerAmp and liked it a lot, because for EAC I have to run seperate mp3tag app to fill in the tags for album artist and album etc and all my rips are wav files. However, I have not considered to purchase the dBPowerAmp's license yet, but may be I should as I also preferred its rip compared with EAC.

 At least with earlier versions of dB PowerAmp I found the central image a little too wide and a little louder sounding compared with EAC. In my situation this resulted in a little improvement with the soundstage depth and width when using EAC.

However, these differences may no longer apply with later revisions of both programs, but I don't intend spending $ to find out .

[diecaster]

7 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 At least with earlier versions of dB PowerAmp I found the central image a little too wide and a little louder sounding compared with EAC. In my situation this resulted in a little improvement with the soundstage depth and width when using EAC.

However, these differences may no longer apply with later revisions of both programs, but I don't intend spending $ to find out .

 

Please explain where in the digital file these soundstage depth and width changes are recorded. 

[Paul R]

On 4/9/2018 at 5:32 PM, fas42 said:

 

Specifically, in the "site or domain:" entry box of https://www.google.com.au/advanced_search, insert "www.computeraudiophile.com" - only CA pages then come up.

 

Nice trick that- thank you!

[Paul R]

On 4/9/2018 at 5:46 PM, fas42 said:

 

Because an audio system is an electrical circuit, which usually is housed in a number of boxes, cabled together. Just because one has a nicely shaped bit of metal or plastic around each of the various bits doesn't make them completely independent of each other; electrical behaviour in one box can affect what's in the other boxes - electrons don't care about the sort of packaging we find impressive, .

 

A carefully engineered transport will be a much better citizen in the grouping; not spray potentially degrading electronic noise in all directions. In the purely digital world this matters not one iota; in the audio analogue area it could be absolutely critical, if one is after optimum sound ...

 

Or, use any old reasonably well working CD player to RIP to fast storage, and drop the transport entirely. Problem solved.

 Or rather, turn the transport into Ethernet ,Wireless, Fibre, etc. 

[sandyk]

24 minutes ago, diecaster said:

 

Please explain where in the digital file these soundstage depth and width changes are recorded. 

 

 As I have previously stated , I am NOT suitably qualified to come up with technical explanations for closed minded know-it-all members like yourself.

 That is why I enlist the assistance of other suitably qualified people to verify my observations,  in some cases, involving correctly performed DBT sessions, which are the so called "GOLD STANDARD" that so many of you crave, but completely ignore the results of when the results don't go the way you want them to !! 

[sandyk]

23 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Or, use any old reasonably well working CD player to RIP to fast storage, and drop the transport entirely. Problem solved.

  

 Even retired people with large CD collections may not have the time or patience to do this !

 Then there is the problem of separating the tracks, as not everybody enjoys listening to every track on a CD

[Daverz]

34 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 As I have previously stated , I am NOT suitably qualified to come up with technical explanations for closed minded know-it-all members like yourself.

 That is why I enlist the assistance of other suitably qualified people to verify my observations,  in some cases, involving correctly performed DBT sessions, which are the so called "GOLD STANDARD" that so many of you crave, but completely ignore the results of when the results don't go the way you want them to !! 

 

Is there a record of the dBPowerAmp and EAC versions and settings, and were there log files for the rips?

 

Was accuraterip used?  Was replay gain turned off?

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, Daverz said:

 

Is there a record of the dBPowerAmp and EAC versions and settings, and were there log files for the rips?

 

Was accuraterip used?  Was replay gain turned off?

 Accurate rip was used. Replay gain was turned off .

Do YOU keep records of all rips done more than 5 years ago ?

You could always try both rippers for yourself and see if you have an audible  preference as another poster in this thread has already mentioned.