Hi Richard,
I have re ripped and listened to quite a few albums.
I'll mention 3.
Amy Winehouse -Frank (ripped using Fidelizer) (The listening results from this rip prompted me to try ripping in safemode)
Fedelizer listening notes :I immediately noticed that the bass was less boomy, and obviously so, the attack of the bass was more obvious. The leading edges of notes were faster. Amy's vocals seemed to sit further back in the mix. Instruments had more "space" around them.
Frente -Clunk ep. (ripped using safemode)
Listening notes : Immediately obvious that the high frequencies are more extended. Leading edges of the high hats are very distinct. There is less sibilance on Angie Harts vocals. Plucking of the accoustic guitar has more attack, each pluck of the strings sounds tonal. The resonance of the guitar body is easily heard. Bass guitar is easier to follow. There is greater tone to the bass guitar, the vibrations from each pluck of the strings are more easily heard with less boom and more tone.
Dire Straits - Self titled (ripped using safe mode)
Listening notes : The normal rip has a lot of tape hiss in the intro of the first song (Down to the waterline) the tape hiss is very prominent. The safemode rip moves the hiss higher up in frequency. The safemode rip sounds more detailed, Mark's guitar has more tone and attack. Everything has a faster attack on leading edges of notes and drum strikes. High hats have more clarity. Bass is tighter. There is clearly less grain through the midrange.
I am not a professional reviewer, so this is about the best I can do for the description of the difference of sound.
I'd also like to say the the DIYAudio rules don't specify that a person making a claim must back it up with evidence, so the insistence from some that I provide it seems a moot point, as some people appear that they have their minds made up anyway and would question the validity of the "proof".
My original post was fairly clear, to quote myself
"Criticism from those who don't try it will be counterproductive, so please refrain until you try it. "
Surely the original poster has some rights to lead the thread in a certain direction? It might be considered to be part of forum etiquette?
Considering that the test is rather simple to do, I'd consider the evidence to be the reports of other people who try it. So far there has been one other person who tried it (thank you), and also noticed a positive improvement to the sound.
If someone wants a binary check, they may do the experiment for themselves.
If someone wants a subjective review, I've given two, if anyone wants more they may try it for themselves and present their findings.
If anyone does not want to try it. Then no worries. I'm not forcing anyone.
Last edited:
Erin, have you managed to do the ABX testing suggested by SY yet?
You're entitled to your own opinions, but if you want to state them on here, expect people to express their opinions of what you're claiming.
Subjectivist BS in audio has wasted so much resources, both human and material, that to expect a friendly reception to what you're claiming with only your opinion as evidence is, frankly, naive.
The reason you're getting so much attention here (and I begin to suspect that that is what you really want) is that so many other people feel the same way as I do.
Also, and easier still, have you done a file comparison yet? All you have to do is type fc /b <normal-rip-filename> <safemode-rip-filename>.
Is there a problem for you in doing this? It does make more sense for you to do it - you're the one hearing the differences, so it's whether your files are different or not, on a binary level, that is relevant here.
You're entitled to your own opinions, but if you want to state them on here, expect people to express their opinions of what you're claiming.
Subjectivist BS in audio has wasted so much resources, both human and material, that to expect a friendly reception to what you're claiming with only your opinion as evidence is, frankly, naive.
The reason you're getting so much attention here (and I begin to suspect that that is what you really want) is that so many other people feel the same way as I do.
Also, and easier still, have you done a file comparison yet? All you have to do is type fc /b <normal-rip-filename> <safemode-rip-filename>.
Is there a problem for you in doing this? It does make more sense for you to do it - you're the one hearing the differences, so it's whether your files are different or not, on a binary level, that is relevant here.
Last edited:
Tangential. Erin's clarified what previously looked like opinions, now we have his listening descriptions. That's evidence, not merely claims because descriptions can be falsified by others doing the experiment he's describing. Opinions can't.
Again, tangential because he's posted descriptions, not merely opinions. Objectivist BS (like you've offered in the bits of your post I've snipped) is just as harmful as subjectivist towards the earth's precious resources so your argument here has zero foundation.
Unfortunately I can see where this thread is now bound. And it ain't pretty.
We now are at page 15 and only 1 person (other than the op) has actually done the test. What is everyone afraid of? Their world view changing?
I know it doesn't make sense. I don't believe in homeopathy either.
Fran
We now are at page 15 and only 1 person (other than the op) has actually done the test. What is everyone afraid of? Their world view changing?
I know it doesn't make sense. I don't believe in homeopathy either.
Fran
Abraxalito, you're right, points taken.
Fran, Erin, I'll do the test, but the trouble is that what is needed here is for someone who is NOT sceptical about the idea to do ABX testing, as SY has suggested. There is a very limited supply of such folk. My Experimenter expectation will be no less biased than anyone else's.
OK, screw it. I know I'm going to hate myself for this.
I'm going to try some tests. I don't know much about Windows, but should be able to figure it out. I have a machine running Windows 7.
Can someone explain how to rip a track from a CD without buying anything please. On a Mac, I would open the CD and just drag the track to my desktop. On Windows when I attempt this, all I see is a bunch of .cda files, 1k bytes each. How do I see the audio data and get it onto my computer?
I've been told I can do it with Windows Media Player, but it won't start when I'm running in safe mode.
I'm going to try some tests. I don't know much about Windows, but should be able to figure it out. I have a machine running Windows 7.
Can someone explain how to rip a track from a CD without buying anything please. On a Mac, I would open the CD and just drag the track to my desktop. On Windows when I attempt this, all I see is a bunch of .cda files, 1k bytes each. How do I see the audio data and get it onto my computer?
I've been told I can do it with Windows Media Player, but it won't start when I'm running in safe mode.
I will NOT do the test unless more reasonable evidence comes down the road. I've been, there, done that, heard no differences.
It's all blindingly simple.
Either the files are identical, or they are not. If Safe Mode produces better rips than normal Windows mode then the files can not be identical. It's very, very simple to confirm this. Why not do it? If Safe Mode actually does produce rips that are different, that's good to know. So far, that has not been proved. Until it has, the discussion is pointless.
It's all blindingly simple.
Unless EAC is faulty in its checksum, then there is no difference in files. None. Not one part per many millions. A number of people have asked Erin to run comparisons on the files with other tools, as a double check. He has not.
Either the files are identical, or they are not. If Safe Mode produces better rips than normal Windows mode then the files can not be identical. It's very, very simple to confirm this. Why not do it? If Safe Mode actually does produce rips that are different, that's good to know. So far, that has not been proved. Until it has, the discussion is pointless.
A contiguous file can be numerically identical to a fragmented one, but not be the same. So Pano what do you mean by 'identical' ? Do you mean identical in terms of sector pattern on the disk or do you mean identical in checksum? No two files will be identical in terms of which sectors they occupy on the disk because each sector can only be allocated to one file in any working filesystem.
I'm not saying this is the reason, its merely a possible reason for sound quality differences. Another possible reason is placebo, of course.
I'm not saying this is the reason, its merely a possible reason for sound quality differences. Another possible reason is placebo, of course.
They can't even be nearly identical, if the effect lasts through the length of the track, then it's not just one or two bits that are different, nearly every single one must be. That is a gross difference and should be easily detectable.
Pano,
I agree .. If the checksums are the same, the files will sound the same. Also i'll agree that mode 2 allows for data transfer and is nearly capable of being bit perfect ( but not quite always ). The only other explanation is that the new files are being picked up by a different codec for some strange reason ( ie, by timestamp ).
If i had a CD i'd give it a shot just out of curiosity, but i don't. It only takes a few minutes. Seems some ppl would rather hurl abuse and quote wikipedia than do a quick real world test.
I'm not really sure what everyone's resistance is .. 150 posts and 2 ppl have tried and about 148 flak msgs... that's disgusting. We could have solved this at post 10 without all the BS !!!
I agree .. If the checksums are the same, the files will sound the same. Also i'll agree that mode 2 allows for data transfer and is nearly capable of being bit perfect ( but not quite always ). The only other explanation is that the new files are being picked up by a different codec for some strange reason ( ie, by timestamp ).
If i had a CD i'd give it a shot just out of curiosity, but i don't. It only takes a few minutes. Seems some ppl would rather hurl abuse and quote wikipedia than do a quick real world test.
I'm not really sure what everyone's resistance is .. 150 posts and 2 ppl have tried and about 148 flak msgs... that's disgusting. We could have solved this at post 10 without all the BS !!!
We've been over this many times before in this thread and others. You know that. Ripping and playback or not the same thing.
You lost me and its really a waste of time you telling us your opinion of what I know. I refer you to Dirty Harry. Can we keep opinions out of this?
If a file is ripped contiguously then it at least has a (very slim) chance of playing back with less collateral noise (due to fewer head seeks on the disk) than one which is ripped in a fragmented form.
If a file is ripped contiguously then it at least has a (very slim) chance of playing back with less collateral noise (due to fewer head seeks on the disk) than one which is ripped in a fragmented form.
Ok, I've done the test.
Erin, bad news, I don't hear any difference from one file to another that shows any correlation with which file I'm hearing.
Additionally, the two files are reported as being identical when compared with fc.exe - they are bit-for-bit identical, all 46,126KB.
It was nice hearing Speed King over and over though!
Erin, bad news, I don't hear any difference from one file to another that shows any correlation with which file I'm hearing.
Additionally, the two files are reported as being identical when compared with fc.exe - they are bit-for-bit identical, all 46,126KB.
It was nice hearing Speed King over and over though!
Last edited:
Sorry dude, now you're just trolling. Please take the time to read back in thread a little. Thanks.
This intrigued me, so I've just had a play, luckily for me in ideal circumstances. I've recently been sorting out my iTunes collection, (all Apple lossless), and due to an error on my part I re-ripped a CD that was already in my library. Now, without delving into the metadata, I've no idea which one was recorded first, when I was starting with a brand new clean HD, and the one that was loaded more recently, on a nearly full one with lots of deletions, moves and such like, so a virtually blind test.
Could I hear any difference. No. Just my opinion of course. And also, of course, it's a Mac, not a Windoze machine.
If they sounded the same, that's not 'just an opinion' that's a description, a data point
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.