I never said anyone was delusional. I just said that there is a gross misunderstanding of where these difference may be coming from.
Now, if two files ripped differently but that have the same checksum are said to sound different off the same media and the same player? Well, that is delusion.
Close the thread? No. Even tho the argument is pointless at the moment, there may be a breakthrough. I live in hope.
After all, we are all music and audio fans here, so we have more in common than different. I don't really have a point to prove or an ax to grind (tho it may sound like it at times). I would just like others who share the same interest to understand better what is going on. Is there a mystery? OK, solve it. It can be done. A better understanding can lead to better audio. That's a good thing.
Now, if two files ripped differently but that have the same checksum are said to sound different off the same media and the same player? Well, that is delusion.
Close the thread? No. Even tho the argument is pointless at the moment, there may be a breakthrough. I live in hope.
After all, we are all music and audio fans here, so we have more in common than different. I don't really have a point to prove or an ax to grind (tho it may sound like it at times). I would just like others who share the same interest to understand better what is going on. Is there a mystery? OK, solve it. It can be done. A better understanding can lead to better audio. That's a good thing.
I was under the impression that two .wav files are available for comparison. They are bit identical. You can download them and provided your ears are ok you will hear a difference. Have i not grasped the concept?
Yes, you can. It's called "ripping the CD." The file exists on the CD, it's just getting them off the CD that's the worry. And that worry has been solved. EAC, checksums, etc.
Ah Ha!! Light dawns.
Now the files reside on another but different medium, so? Is this medium now "perfect" whereas the CD wasn't? Is there variation in RAM, HDD, SDD, in how the data passes through the computer? You are just swapping one medium for another, so what?
Ah Ha!! Light dawns.
Pano, just to throw some kerosene on the dying embers...would you admit that it's possible that, in fact, with any kind of digital source good enough to not lose bits at the receiver (99% of them), there really is no audible difference?
Your focus on bits is fundamental to your lack of understanding about digital audio - the timing is crucial!
How about my other Q "When are you sending out the Hiface + attenuators"? it's over 3 weeks now since you said you would do so - I'll pay!
No, I would not admit that - if I understand what you are asking.
All the correct bits may get there, but timing (an analog dimension) can be wrong.
And of course the conversion of those bits to analog levels may be done in better or worse ways. And then all the power supply issues for the analog section, low pass filters, buffer stages, etc.
But I am not, at present, convinced that the weaknesses are on the digital side. It seems to be the most trouble free.
All the correct bits may get there, but timing (an analog dimension) can be wrong.
And of course the conversion of those bits to analog levels may be done in better or worse ways. And then all the power supply issues for the analog section, low pass filters, buffer stages, etc.
But I am not, at present, convinced that the weaknesses are on the digital side. It seems to be the most trouble free.
Then maybe I wasn't clear. When I say, "Is it possible?" I'm not asking if it's certainly inaudible. I'm asking if it's potentially possible that no-one can actually hear it. Maybe they can, maybe the mechanisms you named are significant, but is it even possible that it's an imaginary effect from an audibility standpoint?
Sorry, I don't understand some of these questions. Help me out here.
So.....what? You've lost me.
Who said perfect, me? I don't see what you are getting at. CDs and HDD, USB, RAM, ect. are capable of holding perfect copies, yes. They don't have to be "perfect" devices to do so. Getting them off these various media in perfect form is not difficult either, as surprising as that may seem. (It surprised me, anyway)
I don't think there is, but I don't really know on a hardware level. But it practice it does not matter because I can move the files all over the place, even to different continents and back, and it remains absolutely identical. I think that's pretty darn cool! No matter what the hardware is doing, the files come out the same. See Akira's recent post.
I don't understand the question.
I never said anyone was delusional. I just said that there is a gross misunderstanding of where these difference may be coming from.
Now, if two files ripped differently but that have the same checksum are said to sound different off the same media and the same player? Well, that is delusion.
Close the thread? No. Even tho the argument is pointless at the moment, there may be a breakthrough. I live in hope.
Michael
Then would you say I was delusional if I claimed that a .wav file, ripped by a BR writer to a Corsair Voyager USB pen sounded different when played back,
to the same file ripped the same way to a Corsair Voyager USB pen, when the noisy SMPS +5V supplying the USB pen had been replaced by a very low noise, and low impedance Linear PSU, despite the checksums being identical in both cases ?
Alex
Good. You had me worried for a minute that you'd spent too much time on Willie's bus.
Willie Rules!
Well Alex, no. But I would say that you are imagining things and that you are mistaken. It happens to the best of us. It's easier to be fooled than we like to admit.
But "delusional"? No, that seems a bit harsh.
Well Alex, no. But I would say that you are imagining things and that you are mistaken. It happens to the best of us. It's easier to be fooled than we like to admit.
But "delusional"? No, that seems a bit harsh.
Hi Pano,
I begin to understand your point ... I think. Isn't it possible to implement a buffer at the entrance of a DAC to supply the DAC with byte at the right timing (independantly of the reading part that could have potential delay) ? I mean, If one would consider using a 2 second FIFO at the entrance of the DAC (clocked with the a hight precision clock shared by the DAC) this would solve all timing problems, wouldn't it ?
And regarding the hardware and considering the (quite low) frequencies involved, it does not look really difficult.
I begin to understand your point ... I think. Isn't it possible to implement a buffer at the entrance of a DAC to supply the DAC with byte at the right timing (independantly of the reading part that could have potential delay) ? I mean, If one would consider using a 2 second FIFO at the entrance of the DAC (clocked with the a hight precision clock shared by the DAC) this would solve all timing problems, wouldn't it ?
And regarding the hardware and considering the (quite low) frequencies involved, it does not look really difficult.
@Pano
My point is that we all agree that same file on different CDs can sound different, right? Why?
Now copying them off CD to another medium, HDD, RAM, etc. is only changing the medium. Can this medium have the same issues for audio playback as we experience with CD? (We are not talking about bit errors!) Why does changing the medium now make it perfect & beyond the problems that are encountered on CD?
My point is that we all agree that same file on different CDs can sound different, right? Why?
Now copying them off CD to another medium, HDD, RAM, etc. is only changing the medium. Can this medium have the same issues for audio playback as we experience with CD? (We are not talking about bit errors!) Why does changing the medium now make it perfect & beyond the problems that are encountered on CD?
Hi Akira,
Yes. I've often been curious why DACs don't have buffers. It seems the simple and logical solution to the jitter problem. But perhaps the DAC chip designers know something I don't.
Funny about buffers - I remember when they started putting them in the portable CD players to prevent skipping. I was at a trade show, in Paris IIRC, and Sony had rigged up a discman that would keep playing if the lid was opened. The Sony guy opened the lid, pulled out the CD, showed it to us, popped in back in the discman and it never stopped playing! Of course it was real quick, like 2 seconds, but it was amazing for the time. Buffers are good.
Yes. I've often been curious why DACs don't have buffers. It seems the simple and logical solution to the jitter problem. But perhaps the DAC chip designers know something I don't.
Funny about buffers - I remember when they started putting them in the portable CD players to prevent skipping. I was at a trade show, in Paris IIRC, and Sony had rigged up a discman that would keep playing if the lid was opened. The Sony guy opened the lid, pulled out the CD, showed it to us, popped in back in the discman and it never stopped playing! Of course it was real quick, like 2 seconds, but it was amazing for the time. Buffers are good.
Well I'm not sure we all agree to that, but OK. Why? Because the machine reading the CD may have uncorrectable errors. Or because the the machine may not have errors but is struggling to get the info off a bad disc. I suppose this could cause extra noise that would find its way into the analog sections. It's easy enough to imagine. I don't know if it's true, but it does seem plausible.
The ripp has a great advantage. It can read and read and reread until it gets no errors. I've seen it do this. Of course sometimes it fails and it tells me so.
And then there is the checksum that can be compared to many other folks who ripped the same CD. The likelihood that 2, 3 or 100 people ripped the same CD and got exactly the same errors is incredibly tiny. The likelihood that they got the exact same info because it is exactly the same is very, very high. It's a great system.
I rarely play CDs anymore, I just rip them to HDD. So CD player problems are no longer my problems.
Does that answer your question?
Actually a guy on a parallel forum of french DIYer (HCFR) built a DAC from scratch and implemented a buffer. He's not yet finished with it but I'm curious to see how it goes.
[Edit] : Hadn't noticed your signature
Who is making such claims? I personally am lost. Your questions have nothing to do with SandyK's claims that two files, bit identical, but extracted under different conditions can sound different. Irrespective of medium. As if the extraction process has left an invisible and immesurable mark on the files.
I don't know if such a statement qualifies as delusional but certainly gets full marks for being irrational and ignorant.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.