If by 'objective difference' you mean that the layout of the files on the disk (in terms of relative locations of sectors) might be different, leading to a difference in conducted noise levels when they're played back, then yes. Its a bit of a long shot, but it is a possibility
In my experience one can perceive any sort of 'can't-quite-put-your-finger-on-it' changes in sound quality based on expectations, but also fears, mood, the weather etc. As an objectivist myself, I should 'expect' that renewing the electrolytics in an old amplifier should, at the very least, make no difference to its sound, and should really improve it. But also, having read too many of the posts in this forum, I 'fear' at the back of my mind that I've upset some delicate balance, or that they're not 'burned in' or of worse quality than the old ones. Really, audio is no fun at all if you dwell on this stuff rather than just listening to the music - and of course sometimes a record heard over an old AM radio can make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up, while on your mega-system a day later it sounds lifeless and flat. Best just to have an objectively good system and go with the flow without worrying about it. I'll manage it one day.
If by 'objective difference' you mean that the layout of the files on the disk (in terms of relative locations of sectors) might be different, leading to a difference in conducted noise levels when they're played back, then yes. Its a bit of a long shot, but it is a possibility
Ah yes, there's a possible long shot to explain absolutely everything.
Do you have any other players ?
Maybe try them both in Windows Media Player ?
WinAmp
VLC ... I think vlc can even tell you what codec is being used too.
I change my position
A new day, some more samples, and I have to say I reverse my position. I hear nothing significant in the Safe Mode rip vs normal.
I riped 4 more CD's. Did file compares. They are identical. If there is a difference in sound its not apparent.
So what did I hear the other evening? It is possible I imagined it. Certainly did not seem so at the time. I had changed some caps. Could be I confused some settling there with the limited A/B on the Safe Mode rip. I use CMP. Some advocates claim there is improved sound quality if there are very few tracks in the folder you point CMP to scan. I did have the Safe Mode rip in its own folder. Could be there was something like this going on. Perhaps it was just the beer.
At any rate, I have since learned a bunch about Accurate Rip, EAC and CMP. I don't consider the exercise a waste.
A new day, some more samples, and I have to say I reverse my position. I hear nothing significant in the Safe Mode rip vs normal.
I riped 4 more CD's. Did file compares. They are identical. If there is a difference in sound its not apparent.
So what did I hear the other evening? It is possible I imagined it. Certainly did not seem so at the time. I had changed some caps. Could be I confused some settling there with the limited A/B on the Safe Mode rip. I use CMP. Some advocates claim there is improved sound quality if there are very few tracks in the folder you point CMP to scan. I did have the Safe Mode rip in its own folder. Could be there was something like this going on. Perhaps it was just the beer.
At any rate, I have since learned a bunch about Accurate Rip, EAC and CMP. I don't consider the exercise a waste.
Yet again, you are talking about playback, not ripping. This has been discussed in this thread and others like it. Ripping is not playing.
We can dismiss any theoretical advantages of playback here because "ripping in safe mode sounds much better" would not stick if the files are moved somewhere else. There is nothing in the file itself that is different. Any possible advantage safe mode ripping might have had in laying down or sectoring the tracks on the HDD will go away if the files are moved or copied, or the drive is defragged.
How the files are played back from storage might be important (yet to be proved) but it's a different subject.
Yes, I'm aware that playing back is not ripping.
If the advantage of a safemode ripped file is that its contiguous (that's my hypothesis at present), then I would also expect the file after moving to remain contiguous. Moving a non-safemode rip might make that contiguous too, conferring the (purported) safemode advantages onto a non-safemode file. So I must have missed the post where erin said he'd listened to a safemode ripped file which he'd moved to a different device and heard the same effects against a non-safemode file moved to that same device. Please (gently) point me to that post.
Not necessarily if they're moved to a different place on the same drive. All that happens then is the directory is updated. No sectors of the moved file will be jiggled around. But to a different drive, or different device then yes. If the file is originally contiguous then defragging will maintain it as contiguous though it might get moved. So I'd expect the advantages (if there really be advantages) of safemode ripping to be carried over after defragging. But defragging might improve the sound of non-safemode rips.
Sure, but then it's easy to make any advantages or disadvantages of the ripping method go away. Just move the file to a different place.
But we are getting ahead of ourselves. We don't even know if there is a real difference in how they sound. We have only one anecdotal example saying that they do.
But we are getting ahead of ourselves. We don't even know if there is a real difference in how they sound. We have only one anecdotal example saying that they do.
Ripping CD's in Safemode sounds much better?
This is some serious BS, looks like that article from TAS really did more harm than good.
Anyway, if you made a perfect 1 to 1 copy of the CD image, then problem solved. Just mount it and do the rest like how you would.
Better yet, you can copy over the cda files inside and you are done.
Safe mode is just overkill for something so simple.
This is some serious BS, looks like that article from TAS really did more harm than good.
Anyway, if you made a perfect 1 to 1 copy of the CD image, then problem solved. Just mount it and do the rest like how you would.
Better yet, you can copy over the cda files inside and you are done.
Safe mode is just overkill for something so simple.
I've received a number of emails from members who would like to see a different sort of test because they feel the three-way file test is unfair in one direction or another. Aiming to please, here is an alternative test for those who prefer it. I'll even supply the answer (sort of).
1. Download the music files here.
2. Listen to them (X,Y,Z) however you like.
3. Clip X was ripped in safe mode, Clip Y in normal mode.
4. Then take this survey.
For those who've asked, yes I have tried it, and yes I am forming an opinion on the subject.
FastSum MD5 = D1EECD949830635838D1CBBDAA5B5269
1. Download the music files here.
2. Listen to them (X,Y,Z) however you like.
3. Clip X was ripped in safe mode, Clip Y in normal mode.
4. Then take this survey.
For those who've asked, yes I have tried it, and yes I am forming an opinion on the subject.
FastSum MD5 = D1EECD949830635838D1CBBDAA5B5269
Last edited:
We do know that erin heard a difference. What we don't yet know is if that was placebo effect. Talk of 'real' differences is for philosophers.
No, we have description by one person of the differences he heard.
When I listen to well recorded music on a decent stereo system, I hear sounds coming from locations to the left of the left speaker, or to the right of the right speaker, and various locations in between. I hear instruments located 20 feet in front of me, even though there's a wall only 10 feet in front of me, just behind the speakers.
Sometimes I even have a sense of sounds at different vertical locations, though how this would be possible with only two speakers and two ears is beyond me. What I just said is also true when I listen with headphones, so don't talk to me about diffraction, interference, room reflections, etc.
Is this an illusion? Is it a delusion? Is it the truth? Is all of this information really, objectively present in the recording?
Whatever it is, it's highly pleasurable, and something that we strive towards when we select our source, tweak our components and arrange them as a listening system.
Sometimes I even have a sense of sounds at different vertical locations, though how this would be possible with only two speakers and two ears is beyond me. What I just said is also true when I listen with headphones, so don't talk to me about diffraction, interference, room reflections, etc.
Is this an illusion? Is it a delusion? Is it the truth? Is all of this information really, objectively present in the recording?
Whatever it is, it's highly pleasurable, and something that we strive towards when we select our source, tweak our components and arrange them as a listening system.
I think we can agree that it is an illusion as the performers are not really there.
We should also agree that the information that allows you to construct the illusion is present in the sound field, otherwise you (your mind actually) couldn't construct the illusion.
We take stereo so for granted that we don't realise it is a clever exploitation of how our auditory perception system decides 'what's out there'.
So the fact that we can hear something that in reality is not there should be undisputed.
jan
Again the above three separate files whatever their source completely from start to finish nulls meaning from a scientific approach are the same. Files a, b and c from the previous post and no different from the files posted here in this post.
I'm not sure of the amount of downloads that have taken place for the attached song for there is no counter that I can find. I'm really glad I did the download though because the song is just a wonderful sounding production meaning well written, produced and recorded. The musicianship and vocals are excellent. Thanks for posting it as a sample, oh I meant to say test.
I'm not sure if this link has been posted here before and if it has then please forgive me for posting a rather old link but I found it interesting and it may be interesting to others here. Most of it appears to be on topic. Audio Myths Workshop - YouTube
What distresses me is that there is therefore no 'stake in the ground' when it comes to this forum. We have scientific-sounding talk from all contributors that, (unfortunately) usually boils down to listening tests, but that their ears are so golden that there is little doubt in what they have heard. But then occasionally through this impenetrable wall of bombast we catch a fleeting glimpse of something that proves at least some listening tests are flawed. What do we do? We stretch every sinew to justify it as (a) differences in sound are still valid if they're a placebo effect!, or (b) it must be an ephemeral mechanism (to do with file structure) so unlikely that you wouldn't bet 10p on it if offered odds of a million to one.
So we are left with absolutely no certainty of anything. Any amplifier is as good as any other if you imagine hard enough. Distortion is all in the mind. Linearity is for wimps. It's all in the cables. Green pen can transform the sound of CDs. Digital files are degraded in the copying process even if they are bit-for-bit the same.
Aaaaagh!
@rondr: Perhaps it will bring Sarah some good luck. Sarah Sample
The first test is closed in order to favor the second, much simpler one, Post #250
Sarah SampleThe first test is closed in order to favor the second, much simpler one, Post #250
Sorry CopperTop, I don't follow. 
This thread (IMO) is not as bad as all that.
This thread (IMO) is not as bad as all that.- The OP reported hearing differences in files that should be identical.
- Most of the responses have been of serious doubt that could be the case.
- The OP was asked to take a blind test to determine if the differences heard are real or imagined. He agreed to do so in private. We have no results from him yet.
- A number of other people have done the test and reported no difference heard
Yes I saw that - I'm concerned how the experiment will control for contiguous vs non contiguous files given as it appears the ten files will be emailed or downloaded? Seeing as the files have already been confirmed to be numerically identical, transferring via the net won't preserve the file structure which is the only possible difference here.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.