HDD vs Flash Drive - Ripping and Playback (Split) - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18th November 2010, 09:10 PM   #11
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
sandyK: Chris was kind enough to respond quickly to me. He seems like a very smart and friendly guy.

The demonstrations were done completely sighted, no controls whatever. To his credit, although he believes that SSD gives a better sound than HDD, he freely admits that there's no good evidence to back up any claims of audible differences and that nothing they did was even vaguely scientific.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2010, 09:35 PM   #12
sandyK is offline sandyK  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney
Sy
Chris is a smart and friendly guy, and it would be nice if at his next Symposium, he could organise more indepth investigations ?
There certainly are more than enough high profile CA members, including a few respected members from DIYA that don't seem to find as much time to post in DIYAudio these days, to organise something along those lines.
SandyK
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2010, 09:58 PM   #13
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
OK, thanks, so they weren't actually controlled tests.

Lest you hang on to that notion of "recently," double blind tests with better than 95% confidence is a basic standard in sensory research that predates any of us.
Sy,

Could you define what you mean by "Controlled test " ........

Last edited by a.wayne; 18th November 2010 at 10:03 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2010, 10:14 PM   #14
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Double blind, matched levels, statistically significant number of trials.

If under double blind conditions (and there are lots of formats for that) someone in an individual (as opposed to group) test can identify HDD from SSD 8 times out of 10, most skeptics would be satisfied. I certainly would be.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2010, 10:19 PM   #15
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
I get you ....

I believe the statistically number of trials , to be very important and preferable done over days /weeks as oppose to hrs ...
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2010, 10:23 PM   #16
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Sure, in my view, it ought to be whatever is the most comfortable for the listener as long as the controls are air-tight. ABX, repeated AB preference, triangle, whatever, there's a lot of possible formats.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2010, 03:12 PM   #17
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakibaki View Post
You're winding me up aren't you? .
No , I'm telling you as i see it...

I have done CD's were the copies do not sound the same as the original. Terry has stated he has seen the copies sound better than the original, I have not been able to do so myself, yet !


For now i would settle for the same ........
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2010, 05:21 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
analog_sa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sofia
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
have not been able to do so myself, yet !



Me neither. Not that i have been trying very hard. Last time i made some copies for the car (10 years ago?) they sounded obviously inferior even to non-audiophiles. Otoh, provided the extraction has been done properly and the cd writer has a good clock, there is no obvious reason they wouldn't sound as good (or bad) as the originals. People still use cds?
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2010, 06:02 PM   #19
TerryO is offline TerryO  United States
diyAudio Member
 
TerryO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle,Wash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog_sa View Post
Me neither. Not that i have been trying very hard. Last time i made some copies for the car (10 years ago?) they sounded obviously inferior even to non-audiophiles. Otoh, provided the extraction has been done properly and the cd writer has a good clock, there is no obvious reason they wouldn't sound as good (or bad) as the originals. People still use cds?
The worse the original is, provided that it can be ripped at all, the degree of improvement will be more noticable. This has been done so many times by so many people that it's nearly an oxymoron.

If it sounds only as good (or bad) as the original, then I would think that original is either pretty good to begin with or the technique needs to be improved.

Basically, you need to do a good rip then use EAC (or an equivalent program) to get it a perfect as you can. Then use "good" quality media, I have used "Black" discs with good results, although the more expensive gold discs are preferred by many. Finally, if you want a really good sounding copy, use an external Blu-ray burner (with a separate, highly regulated power supply if you can swing it).

I covered this back awhile ago on this thread, so if you like you do a search.

BTW: If you do a checksum, you will probably get the same results on both discs, but you will probably hear a pronounced improvement on your new copy. We have a fair number of Software Engineers in our club playing with this and they have all agreed on the improvement in most cases.

Best Regards,
TerryO
__________________
"If you have to ask why, then you're probably on the right track."
quote from Terry Olson's DIYaudio Forum application
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2010, 10:35 PM   #20
sandyK is offline sandyK  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryO View Post
The worse the original is, provided that it can be ripped at all, the degree of improvement will be more noticable. This has been done so many times by so many people that it's nearly an oxymoron.

If it sounds only as good (or bad) as the original, then I would think that original is either pretty good to begin with or the technique needs to be improved.

Basically, you need to do a good rip then use EAC (or an equivalent program) to get it a perfect as you can. Then use "good" quality media, I have used "Black" discs with good results, although the more expensive gold discs are preferred by many. Finally, if you want a really good sounding copy, use an external Blu-ray burner (with a separate, highly regulated power supply if you can swing it).

I covered this back awhile ago on this thread, so if you like you do a search.

BTW: If you do a checksum, you will probably get the same results on both discs, but you will probably hear a pronounced improvement on your new copy. We have a fair number of Software Engineers in our club playing with this and they have all agreed on the improvement in most cases.

Best Regards,
TerryO
Terry O
You are spot on !
An internal BR writer can also do a good job, provided that non essential PWM controlled fans etc. are disabled during the ripping process using E.A.C.
Better results will be obtained if you rip directly to non moving storage such as SSD, or a high quality USB pen such as the Corsair Voyager GT.
Even better results will be obtained if you use a high quality , low noise and low impedance, Linear PSU for the USB pen. (and most likely for the SSD also ?)
The PSU is just as important for digital as it is for high quality Analogue !
This is an area that EEs from the Dinosaur age steadfastly refuse to believe is possible. Some even believe that all competently designed amplifiers sound the same ! The same types are also unwilling to concede that the HiFace performs and sounds better when critical areas such as the 2 onboard Xtal oscillators are supplied from a decent battery supply.
There are also numerous reports of laptops' audio sounding much better when they are run off internal batteries.
SandyK

Last edited by sandyK; 26th November 2010 at 10:48 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
High quality CD-ROM drive for ripping to FLAC Tripmaster Digital Source 4 3rd August 2008 07:47 AM
Format and Audio Ripping Discussion Split From Blowtorch Thread john curl Digital Source 109 1st August 2008 04:56 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:46 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2