I'm not at all surprised at this, from what I've read over on rec.audio.pro - they don't just hear, for example, the effects produced by an mp3 encoding, they can probably tell you the exact bitrate just from listening. Apparently after working in a recording studio a few years one can listen to a recording of a singer they've never heard before, recorded by someone else in the studio, and they can tell what mic was used, the position of the mic in the room, and the position of the singer in the room.
But that's about what one would expect from people who live half their lives in a ... Faraday cage.
That's a sign they're using a suck-y DAC, one where the designer hasn't considered the effects of common-mode noise induced via the loop through the mains wiring.
not possible, right?
OK, so I read the first post and there is no way this is possible. I too use Exact Audio Copy. It reports back that it got an exact copy. What could improve on that?
I rip using EAC on one machine and load it onto a memory stick or usb drive to take it to a fully optimized CMP/CPLAY machine. Now those same bits have been copied and recopied. What difference can it make if it was originally extracted in safe mode?
Despite all the expected ridicule the original poster just said he heard it.. Give it a try.
I am ripping some new CD's tonight. I finished my copies (not in safe mode). And I thought what the heck. Why not prove him wrong.
I ripped a copy of Patricia Barber's Companion CD using safe mode on a Thinkpad running Windows7. Same machine I used to rip it the first time. I used this CD because she usually has a reasonable quality of recording. I have a pristine copy that's really only ever been used to copy it the first time. And l like it and know the sound pretty well. I put it on my CMP HDD. Defraged the drive for good measure.
To my surprise and confusion, there is no question that the safe mode copy is better. It’s the kind of improvement you get when you replace a noisy regulator with a shunt reg on the dac power supply. Same sound. It’s just way more relaxed and natural. Better sound stage. Did I say natural? All of a sudden you realized the old sound had a machine metallic sound that was somehow not full or real.
I know this will kick off many rounds of engineering hyperbole and mockery. I don't really care and will avoid coming back to see it because it kind of disgusts me. I think Erin had the right message. Give it a try and see for yourself. If you hear nothing, you are missing nothing and the universe will be ok.
Now I do not think this in any way makes sense. I am a computer geek working in digital network industry. To me this completely is not possible or logical. I get the notion that lots of things count in digital playback as it appears we really only get a subset of the bits to the DAC chip to make the music and even those that do get there are skewed in time by jitter making the sound that makes your ears bleed. But so called bit perfect ripping? This one does not make sense. But in my sample size of one cd; no question. I've gone back and forth on several cuts. It’s just better on the safe mode copy. I have a choice of which I will delete. It will be the original.
My system is no reference work of art, but its pretty reasonable DIY effort that is mostly constrained by the quality of the software I feed it. Source is fully optimized CMP (Ultra slim XP & registry) XMOS usb into 1541a dac with nice power supply, passive IV & 6np2 output stage.
Will I go out and re rip all my collection? No. Will I use safe mode to rip in future? I’ll try a couple more. If they all sound like this , then yes.
OK, so I read the first post and there is no way this is possible. I too use Exact Audio Copy. It reports back that it got an exact copy. What could improve on that?
I rip using EAC on one machine and load it onto a memory stick or usb drive to take it to a fully optimized CMP/CPLAY machine. Now those same bits have been copied and recopied. What difference can it make if it was originally extracted in safe mode?
Despite all the expected ridicule the original poster just said he heard it.. Give it a try.
I am ripping some new CD's tonight. I finished my copies (not in safe mode). And I thought what the heck. Why not prove him wrong.
I ripped a copy of Patricia Barber's Companion CD using safe mode on a Thinkpad running Windows7. Same machine I used to rip it the first time. I used this CD because she usually has a reasonable quality of recording. I have a pristine copy that's really only ever been used to copy it the first time. And l like it and know the sound pretty well. I put it on my CMP HDD. Defraged the drive for good measure.
To my surprise and confusion, there is no question that the safe mode copy is better. It’s the kind of improvement you get when you replace a noisy regulator with a shunt reg on the dac power supply. Same sound. It’s just way more relaxed and natural. Better sound stage. Did I say natural? All of a sudden you realized the old sound had a machine metallic sound that was somehow not full or real.
I know this will kick off many rounds of engineering hyperbole and mockery. I don't really care and will avoid coming back to see it because it kind of disgusts me. I think Erin had the right message. Give it a try and see for yourself. If you hear nothing, you are missing nothing and the universe will be ok.
Now I do not think this in any way makes sense. I am a computer geek working in digital network industry. To me this completely is not possible or logical. I get the notion that lots of things count in digital playback as it appears we really only get a subset of the bits to the DAC chip to make the music and even those that do get there are skewed in time by jitter making the sound that makes your ears bleed. But so called bit perfect ripping? This one does not make sense. But in my sample size of one cd; no question. I've gone back and forth on several cuts. It’s just better on the safe mode copy. I have a choice of which I will delete. It will be the original.
My system is no reference work of art, but its pretty reasonable DIY effort that is mostly constrained by the quality of the software I feed it. Source is fully optimized CMP (Ultra slim XP & registry) XMOS usb into 1541a dac with nice power supply, passive IV & 6np2 output stage.
Will I go out and re rip all my collection? No. Will I use safe mode to rip in future? I’ll try a couple more. If they all sound like this , then yes.
wlowes
Thanks for being the 1st here to actually TRY Erin's suggestion instead of claiming it is a waste of time. It does work better than when using Fidelizer too.
If you have a high quality high resolution .flac DL saved on an internal HDD, while in Safe Mode , try copying it to a quality USB memory stick, then decoding it to a .wav file using Foobar to the same USB memory stick. (the .flac front end has problems in W7) Then play it directly from the USB memory stick after re-booting. Even better is if the USB memory stick is powered by a high quality external +5V Linear PSU which I believe Erin may be using (?)
YMMV.
SandyK
Thanks for being the 1st here to actually TRY Erin's suggestion instead of claiming it is a waste of time. It does work better than when using Fidelizer too.
If you have a high quality high resolution .flac DL saved on an internal HDD, while in Safe Mode , try copying it to a quality USB memory stick, then decoding it to a .wav file using Foobar to the same USB memory stick. (the .flac front end has problems in W7) Then play it directly from the USB memory stick after re-booting. Even better is if the USB memory stick is powered by a high quality external +5V Linear PSU which I believe Erin may be using (?)
YMMV.
SandyK
Did you try a blind test to see if it still sounds better when you don't know which is which?
some input ....
often in company presentations the most common program to use is power point ... problem is that in between you might wana show a video of the chairman ... now you may either park PPT and open media player or other related program to play the video ....
or import the video to Power point and play it from there between slights ....You have no controls over it there is no pause rewind,skip, or forward just enter to start and enter for the next slide
point is that when power point plays a video takes resources from media player to do that...resources means that takes only what it need to play nothing else ... meaning no skins , no commands , no updates , no controls or other applications that can cause video to crush in any form.... Its common practice between PA people that run company presentations to apply this and play video through PPT
Now if similar situation exists when making CD's in safe mode it is obviously expected to have better results than in normal mode ..
One way or another will make the test and see how it goes also post my findings here ...even though i will not be able to tell why i am pretty sure that it will sound better ...
Kind regards
sakis
often in company presentations the most common program to use is power point ... problem is that in between you might wana show a video of the chairman ... now you may either park PPT and open media player or other related program to play the video ....
or import the video to Power point and play it from there between slights ....You have no controls over it there is no pause rewind,skip, or forward just enter to start and enter for the next slide
point is that when power point plays a video takes resources from media player to do that...resources means that takes only what it need to play nothing else ... meaning no skins , no commands , no updates , no controls or other applications that can cause video to crush in any form.... Its common practice between PA people that run company presentations to apply this and play video through PPT
Now if similar situation exists when making CD's in safe mode it is obviously expected to have better results than in normal mode ..
One way or another will make the test and see how it goes also post my findings here ...even though i will not be able to tell why i am pretty sure that it will sound better ...
Kind regards
sakis
Which is why blind testing should be used to remove expectations. By your comment, I'm also pretty sure it will sound better... to you.
"We're" not looking for confirmation of expectations.
We're looking for scientifically sound audible differences between safe-mode rips and normal-boot rips. Yet still looking...
Thankyou Wlowes for actually having the guts to try it.
Thankyou Erin for having the guts to report something that sounds heretical.
My 2c worth,
1 - CD audio (RED Book) is NOT like a Data CD. It was developed A LONG time ago, for technology 30+years old and was designed for streaming, errors are acceptable in streaming. Red Book quite good error checking but when it can't read a byte properly it will interpolate ( approximate) and simply move on.
2 - Data CD Yellow book has lots of error checking and is error free. Fits less data on a CD tho.
When you burn a CD you select mode 1 or mode 2 ( music or data ). In the early days this was a physical difference, some burners couldn't read or burn mode 1 or mode 2, you couldn't put data on a music CD etc. My point is, don't compare the error correction of a data CD with an audio CD, they are different. An audio CD was never intended to be perfect so never believe it is.
EAC says perfect copy. I think this just means that the drive handled errors within acceptable limits, i don't really know, but it sounds like it's version of perfect copy isn't the same as our version.
SO, given that CD's are exact duplicates and all drives are digitally perfect, if a dozen people ripped the same track off the same CD and posted their CRC's they should be identical right ?.
How about Track 1 off Brothers in arms ?. Rip it and post your CRC. Lets see if we can get some variance.
Good luck
Thankyou Erin for having the guts to report something that sounds heretical.
My 2c worth,
1 - CD audio (RED Book) is NOT like a Data CD. It was developed A LONG time ago, for technology 30+years old and was designed for streaming, errors are acceptable in streaming. Red Book quite good error checking but when it can't read a byte properly it will interpolate ( approximate) and simply move on.
2 - Data CD Yellow book has lots of error checking and is error free. Fits less data on a CD tho.
When you burn a CD you select mode 1 or mode 2 ( music or data ). In the early days this was a physical difference, some burners couldn't read or burn mode 1 or mode 2, you couldn't put data on a music CD etc. My point is, don't compare the error correction of a data CD with an audio CD, they are different. An audio CD was never intended to be perfect so never believe it is.
EAC says perfect copy. I think this just means that the drive handled errors within acceptable limits, i don't really know, but it sounds like it's version of perfect copy isn't the same as our version.
SO, given that CD's are exact duplicates and all drives are digitally perfect, if a dozen people ripped the same track off the same CD and posted their CRC's they should be identical right ?.
How about Track 1 off Brothers in arms ?. Rip it and post your CRC. Lets see if we can get some variance.
Good luck
Yup. Seems like the only sensible explanation lies with the way data is stored physically on the disk.
Has anyone tried making copies of the extracted identical files? Do they still sound different?
Wlowes, you dont say whether the files are exactly the same. And that is the point of contention here, files that are exactly the same, sound different, and this is down to the ripping...
Sorry, but whether the files are on a memory stick, an SSD or a HDD, if they are the same they are exactly the same, souround it with as many myths, but you cannot have two bit identical digital files that are different.
A bit like the battery myth, they are no better than a good SMPS or linear, there are numerous on board convertors to get the required on board voltages, and most of the noise in a PC is generated by the digitalo circuitry itself.
I am also using two machines one vista and one W7, when I got exact copies, I cannot detect any audible difference, neither can I detect any difference between some flac copies and the same song done in WAV, not any difference betweeen a W& rip and a Vista RIP. I also have files riped using windows media player and EAC, that are the same, and sound the same. I will do a proper experiment with safe mode when I next have a copying session
I have also copied tracks from disk to disk, to memory stick and shoved that into the Squeezebox, same file same sound.
Sorry, but whether the files are on a memory stick, an SSD or a HDD, if they are the same they are exactly the same, souround it with as many myths, but you cannot have two bit identical digital files that are different.
A bit like the battery myth, they are no better than a good SMPS or linear, there are numerous on board convertors to get the required on board voltages, and most of the noise in a PC is generated by the digitalo circuitry itself.
I am also using two machines one vista and one W7, when I got exact copies, I cannot detect any audible difference, neither can I detect any difference between some flac copies and the same song done in WAV, not any difference betweeen a W& rip and a Vista RIP. I also have files riped using windows media player and EAC, that are the same, and sound the same. I will do a proper experiment with safe mode when I next have a copying session
I have also copied tracks from disk to disk, to memory stick and shoved that into the Squeezebox, same file same sound.
Last edited:
Actually, I don't think it was a physical difference. It was a difference in the structure of the data on the disc. Modifying the structure allowed for "enhanced CD" audio+data.
The topic really seems to have gotten lost along the way, though.
My PC isn't as anthropomorphic it seems. It only knows data.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.