I can imagine that CD-DA burnt by a bluray burner sounds different to another CD-DA burnt by a different burner. But playback of bit-identical files sounds equal, no matter how the files were created.
Another perspective
Several years ago, I tried EAC, I even tested various drives with the doctored disks. At that time I found that EAC was far too tedious to use, and that the Plextor Premium CD Burner drive was quite capable of achieving excellent results even without specialized ripping software - just to be safe, i set the read speed way down to 2X with the excellent Plextools software which comes with the drive (and only works on Plextor drives). With bad disks, the Plextor drive would always retry ad absurdum, so a crap drive was used to rip damaged disks - most drives never report any errors, and in that case a software correction tool is obviously useful. When you consider that many if not most CD-ROM drives don't implement the C1/C2 hardware correction properly or at all, the usefulness of software rippers become obvious - with a good drive, however is it really necessary to use such tools?
But I am digressing. The first point is that good hardware is always useful. The second point is that you really need to figure out which family of metadata you want - Windows Media player for example uses a different database and has differences in how the songs are tagged. The good thing about Windows Media player is that it was set up so that music would start playing as you started ripping, and stop playing when it was time to put in another CD.
The reason why ripping CD's is a problem is that Phillips and Sony in their infinite wisdom chose to not add enough recovery information to Red Book audio so you never actually know that you read the data correctly. For files formatted as data, that is not a problem which is why you always get bit-correct reads of data even at 52X rip speeds using the cheapest drives.
Petter
Several years ago, I tried EAC, I even tested various drives with the doctored disks. At that time I found that EAC was far too tedious to use, and that the Plextor Premium CD Burner drive was quite capable of achieving excellent results even without specialized ripping software - just to be safe, i set the read speed way down to 2X with the excellent Plextools software which comes with the drive (and only works on Plextor drives). With bad disks, the Plextor drive would always retry ad absurdum, so a crap drive was used to rip damaged disks - most drives never report any errors, and in that case a software correction tool is obviously useful. When you consider that many if not most CD-ROM drives don't implement the C1/C2 hardware correction properly or at all, the usefulness of software rippers become obvious - with a good drive, however is it really necessary to use such tools?
But I am digressing. The first point is that good hardware is always useful. The second point is that you really need to figure out which family of metadata you want - Windows Media player for example uses a different database and has differences in how the songs are tagged. The good thing about Windows Media player is that it was set up so that music would start playing as you started ripping, and stop playing when it was time to put in another CD.
The reason why ripping CD's is a problem is that Phillips and Sony in their infinite wisdom chose to not add enough recovery information to Red Book audio so you never actually know that you read the data correctly. For files formatted as data, that is not a problem which is why you always get bit-correct reads of data even at 52X rip speeds using the cheapest drives.
Petter
CD to HDD
Netlist
I am well aware of your expertise in general. However, this is one occasion where perhaps you shouldn't dismiss subjective reports out of hand just because present theory says so.
I would encourage members who have BluRay writers to try this for themselves, instead of dismissing it out of hand because theory dictates otherwise. If nothing else they will find that provided the LG BluRay writer mentioned in the other diyAudio thread (that several Rock Grotto members own,) is used with decent CD-Rs , that the resultant copy made from the E.A.C. rip on their HDD sounds better than the original CD on many CD/DVD players because of the burn precision, which translates to less read errors and resultant correction, as well as the Laser's tracking motor not working so hard, which means less power supply interaction due to the motor's relatively heavy current draw.Sony has already given this as a reason for the
improved performance of the Blu-spec discs.
Yet another Sydney member can confirmed that high resolution files burned to DVD video by this BluRay, are markedly better sounding on his DVD player, yet the difference is much harder to pick with his expensive Marantz SA11
I will also mention that with my PC setup , I am able to hear the less well defined SQ of high quality CDs that have been ripped to the HDD, then converted to.flac, and again reconverted to.wav files.The resulting burned CD-Rs are also noticeably worse sounding through my 15W/Ch Class A amplifier and speakers.
A couple of other diyAudio members from Sydney can verify this.
Interestingly, .wav files converted to Monkey's Audio (.ape) then
reconverted to .wav, are very hard to pick any differences with reliably.
As for ABX listening, it used to be widely used to prove that all amplifiers sound the same! It's rather like a student who knows his subjects quite well, but when put under stress in the examination room, freezes, or has difficulty putting on paper what he does know.Relaxed listening is by far the best way to evaluate audio performance.
SandyK
Attached is a copy of reports generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15 BETA for the Sony Blu-spec disc,and also the normal CD version. Both files were ripped using a BluRay writer and E.A.C.
As I stated previously, there are quite audible differences, and let's face it, Sony wouldn't go to all this trouble if there weren't .
And yes, all the checksums are the same !
CD VERSION.
; Checksums generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15
; http://www.exactfile.com
; 3/04/2009 8:56:27 PM
e995b3b66693a0261bff3db248eb02b9 *Track01.wav
0d2770d07f5509c862522f5980e98050 *Track02.wav
f8f76a28cb2952429dfa01a0936d08d7 *Track03.wav
474df609920783f713acf668a78a69a5 *Track04.wav
6ea2bc30cf42b2d74cc43e34277f7514 *Track05.wav
aafca38d49cbe7786b1a339f8054db9d *Track06.wav
5306e6f23de8f19f0410682942fd5212 *Track07.wav
61f1e2e3808a957bb85768cf058b3b4f *Track08.wav
07c9e9a0ab95031a71ebca76e0f4346d *Track09.wav
0bd6fac2c6115f842f4d372d15164550 *Track10.wav
862c1def4ba09ffa26cb65c96c4f6974 *Track11.wav
f6601d3375a4526e0d4dd57a50aada3a *Track12.wav
4695a6e26370db32e9be839030e51fe3 *Track13.wav
61b69212e44e71b82f36c1fe788927e3 *Track14.wav
d1a9bc6f68454de661ff79315e957312 *Track15.wav
294b5494523e40a9262ba70f1eb60e34 *Track16.wav
8cc4c5e377c3446511a6b8f59a051769 *Track17.wav
3b3055dd88e233f5484333017492a506 *Unknown Artist - Unknown Title.log
a959242f8dfdebdfea3956afb3655510 *Unknown Title.log
; 21 files hashed.
BD VERSION
; Checksums generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15
; http://www.exactfile.com
; 3/04/2009 8:59:07 PM
c95df0ab16a91cde791096763a866e52 *Blu spec CD- front cover- Rock.jpg
a22a6131df5894098f3975898ea0894c *Blu spec CD- inner cover- Rock.jpg
ba724bad744bc0711f956b9162df045c *EXACT FILE REPORT.txt
e995b3b66693a0261bff3db248eb02b9 *Track01.wav
0d2770d07f5509c862522f5980e98050 *Track02.wav
f8f76a28cb2952429dfa01a0936d08d7 *Track03.wav
474df609920783f713acf668a78a69a5 *Track04.wav
6ea2bc30cf42b2d74cc43e34277f7514 *Track05.wav
aafca38d49cbe7786b1a339f8054db9d *Track06.wav
5306e6f23de8f19f0410682942fd5212 *Track07.wav
61f1e2e3808a957bb85768cf058b3b4f *Track08.wav
07c9e9a0ab95031a71ebca76e0f4346d *Track09.wav
0bd6fac2c6115f842f4d372d15164550 *Track10.wav
862c1def4ba09ffa26cb65c96c4f6974 *Track11.wav
f6601d3375a4526e0d4dd57a50aada3a *Track12.wav
4695a6e26370db32e9be839030e51fe3 *Track13.wav
61b69212e44e71b82f36c1fe788927e3 *Track14.wav
d1a9bc6f68454de661ff79315e957312 *Track15.wav
294b5494523e40a9262ba70f1eb60e34 *Track16.wav
8cc4c5e377c3446511a6b8f59a051769 *Track17.wav
d63e7081fac5e19ae77caf64696075f3 *Unknown Artist - Unknown Title.log
; 21 files hashed.
Netlist
I am well aware of your expertise in general. However, this is one occasion where perhaps you shouldn't dismiss subjective reports out of hand just because present theory says so.
I would encourage members who have BluRay writers to try this for themselves, instead of dismissing it out of hand because theory dictates otherwise. If nothing else they will find that provided the LG BluRay writer mentioned in the other diyAudio thread (that several Rock Grotto members own,) is used with decent CD-Rs , that the resultant copy made from the E.A.C. rip on their HDD sounds better than the original CD on many CD/DVD players because of the burn precision, which translates to less read errors and resultant correction, as well as the Laser's tracking motor not working so hard, which means less power supply interaction due to the motor's relatively heavy current draw.Sony has already given this as a reason for the
improved performance of the Blu-spec discs.
Yet another Sydney member can confirmed that high resolution files burned to DVD video by this BluRay, are markedly better sounding on his DVD player, yet the difference is much harder to pick with his expensive Marantz SA11
I will also mention that with my PC setup , I am able to hear the less well defined SQ of high quality CDs that have been ripped to the HDD, then converted to.flac, and again reconverted to.wav files.The resulting burned CD-Rs are also noticeably worse sounding through my 15W/Ch Class A amplifier and speakers.
A couple of other diyAudio members from Sydney can verify this.
Interestingly, .wav files converted to Monkey's Audio (.ape) then
reconverted to .wav, are very hard to pick any differences with reliably.
As for ABX listening, it used to be widely used to prove that all amplifiers sound the same! It's rather like a student who knows his subjects quite well, but when put under stress in the examination room, freezes, or has difficulty putting on paper what he does know.Relaxed listening is by far the best way to evaluate audio performance.
SandyK
Attached is a copy of reports generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15 BETA for the Sony Blu-spec disc,and also the normal CD version. Both files were ripped using a BluRay writer and E.A.C.
As I stated previously, there are quite audible differences, and let's face it, Sony wouldn't go to all this trouble if there weren't .
And yes, all the checksums are the same !
CD VERSION.
; Checksums generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15
; http://www.exactfile.com
; 3/04/2009 8:56:27 PM
e995b3b66693a0261bff3db248eb02b9 *Track01.wav
0d2770d07f5509c862522f5980e98050 *Track02.wav
f8f76a28cb2952429dfa01a0936d08d7 *Track03.wav
474df609920783f713acf668a78a69a5 *Track04.wav
6ea2bc30cf42b2d74cc43e34277f7514 *Track05.wav
aafca38d49cbe7786b1a339f8054db9d *Track06.wav
5306e6f23de8f19f0410682942fd5212 *Track07.wav
61f1e2e3808a957bb85768cf058b3b4f *Track08.wav
07c9e9a0ab95031a71ebca76e0f4346d *Track09.wav
0bd6fac2c6115f842f4d372d15164550 *Track10.wav
862c1def4ba09ffa26cb65c96c4f6974 *Track11.wav
f6601d3375a4526e0d4dd57a50aada3a *Track12.wav
4695a6e26370db32e9be839030e51fe3 *Track13.wav
61b69212e44e71b82f36c1fe788927e3 *Track14.wav
d1a9bc6f68454de661ff79315e957312 *Track15.wav
294b5494523e40a9262ba70f1eb60e34 *Track16.wav
8cc4c5e377c3446511a6b8f59a051769 *Track17.wav
3b3055dd88e233f5484333017492a506 *Unknown Artist - Unknown Title.log
a959242f8dfdebdfea3956afb3655510 *Unknown Title.log
; 21 files hashed.
BD VERSION
; Checksums generated by ExactFile 1.0.0.15
; http://www.exactfile.com
; 3/04/2009 8:59:07 PM
c95df0ab16a91cde791096763a866e52 *Blu spec CD- front cover- Rock.jpg
a22a6131df5894098f3975898ea0894c *Blu spec CD- inner cover- Rock.jpg
ba724bad744bc0711f956b9162df045c *EXACT FILE REPORT.txt
e995b3b66693a0261bff3db248eb02b9 *Track01.wav
0d2770d07f5509c862522f5980e98050 *Track02.wav
f8f76a28cb2952429dfa01a0936d08d7 *Track03.wav
474df609920783f713acf668a78a69a5 *Track04.wav
6ea2bc30cf42b2d74cc43e34277f7514 *Track05.wav
aafca38d49cbe7786b1a339f8054db9d *Track06.wav
5306e6f23de8f19f0410682942fd5212 *Track07.wav
61f1e2e3808a957bb85768cf058b3b4f *Track08.wav
07c9e9a0ab95031a71ebca76e0f4346d *Track09.wav
0bd6fac2c6115f842f4d372d15164550 *Track10.wav
862c1def4ba09ffa26cb65c96c4f6974 *Track11.wav
f6601d3375a4526e0d4dd57a50aada3a *Track12.wav
4695a6e26370db32e9be839030e51fe3 *Track13.wav
61b69212e44e71b82f36c1fe788927e3 *Track14.wav
d1a9bc6f68454de661ff79315e957312 *Track15.wav
294b5494523e40a9262ba70f1eb60e34 *Track16.wav
8cc4c5e377c3446511a6b8f59a051769 *Track17.wav
d63e7081fac5e19ae77caf64696075f3 *Unknown Artist - Unknown Title.log
; 21 files hashed.
Re: CD to HDD
*Excepting really cheap, old or poorly designed ones, or ones that are deliberately designed to not be transparent, like many tube amps.
That's because they do all* sound the same.sandyK said:
*Excepting really cheap, old or poorly designed ones, or ones that are deliberately designed to not be transparent, like many tube amps.
Re: CD to HDD
I very much doubt Sony had even the slightest interest in audio playback of CDs when they designed Blueray.
sandyK said:
I very much doubt Sony had even the slightest interest in audio playback of CDs when they designed Blueray.
Sandy to prove that this difference does exist you would need something that shows when the error correction is requested as the two different discs spin, and that there is a difference in read error that could lead to the PS fluctuations that are speculated.
Without proving that error correction is called upon more often with one disc vs the other all you have are two different discs with identical data on them.
Specualtion without measurement will get you nowhere.
For the record, on average Reed Solomon is probably called up to priovide less than 10 bits of data per 72minutes of playtime on a new cd, so it's kinda unlikely to be the cause.
For there to be a genuine difference in playback quality the PS of the blue ray player would have to be irrevocably compromised to such an extent that calling and powering circuits to provide Reed Solomon broke through onto other circuits. It would also have to be so badly designed that it was calling Reed Solomon virtually all the time. 10 bits in 72 minutes would not be audible. ;-)
That's not the amazing blue technology you think it is, it is just utterly 5hite circuit design and layout with compromised PS and a read head that struggles with the cd laser.
It's just bad design.....
Without proving that error correction is called upon more often with one disc vs the other all you have are two different discs with identical data on them.
Specualtion without measurement will get you nowhere.
For the record, on average Reed Solomon is probably called up to priovide less than 10 bits of data per 72minutes of playtime on a new cd, so it's kinda unlikely to be the cause.
For there to be a genuine difference in playback quality the PS of the blue ray player would have to be irrevocably compromised to such an extent that calling and powering circuits to provide Reed Solomon broke through onto other circuits. It would also have to be so badly designed that it was calling Reed Solomon virtually all the time. 10 bits in 72 minutes would not be audible. ;-)
That's not the amazing blue technology you think it is, it is just utterly 5hite circuit design and layout with compromised PS and a read head that struggles with the cd laser.
It's just bad design.....
"Speculation without measurement will get you nowhere."
sq225917
I agree. I have also had a close look at both versions using Sound Forge 9, but so far I am unable to get enough resolution to spot the reason for the audible differences. I have also found that the audible differences are much more pronounced with DVD-A rips of good 24/96 and 24/192 material. So much so, that I have now re-ripped all my DVD-A s' stereo files to the HDD.
The DVD-A rip of "Linda Ronstadt -What's New" (24/192) is very much better after being ripped by the LG BluRay writer, but perhaps this is more of a reflection on the very poor quality of typical DVD writers ,and DVD players, and especially so, those that use SMPS for power. For example, on many DVD players, there is only a small improvement in quality of DVD-A and SACD in comparison to the same material on a well recorded CD. Is it any wonder that DVD-A is now dead, and SACD remains a niche product ?
SandyK
sq225917
I agree. I have also had a close look at both versions using Sound Forge 9, but so far I am unable to get enough resolution to spot the reason for the audible differences. I have also found that the audible differences are much more pronounced with DVD-A rips of good 24/96 and 24/192 material. So much so, that I have now re-ripped all my DVD-A s' stereo files to the HDD.
The DVD-A rip of "Linda Ronstadt -What's New" (24/192) is very much better after being ripped by the LG BluRay writer, but perhaps this is more of a reflection on the very poor quality of typical DVD writers ,and DVD players, and especially so, those that use SMPS for power. For example, on many DVD players, there is only a small improvement in quality of DVD-A and SACD in comparison to the same material on a well recorded CD. Is it any wonder that DVD-A is now dead, and SACD remains a niche product ?
SandyK
Re: Re: What's the best method to rip CD to HDD?
Seems to be pretty common, an artifact of the test methodology.
dave
mako1138 said:
Seems to be pretty common, an artifact of the test methodology.
dave
CD to HDD
planet 10
Hmm, the 3rd Moderator to poo poo the the suggestion.
I would have thought that the moderators of all people, would have been less closeminded. 😉
SandyK
P.S. I have already sent one of you (pinkmouse) an email with a more indepth explanation, as well as pointers to a couple of threads where my other subjective SQ findings have after the same kind of initial rejection, become more widely accepted.
planet 10
Hmm, the 3rd Moderator to poo poo the the suggestion.
I would have thought that the moderators of all people, would have been less closeminded. 😉
SandyK
P.S. I have already sent one of you (pinkmouse) an email with a more indepth explanation, as well as pointers to a couple of threads where my other subjective SQ findings have after the same kind of initial rejection, become more widely accepted.
Re: CD to HDD
I'm not poo-pooing what you are saying, i'm poo-pooing the validity of ABX testing.
I haven't done sufficient experimentation/inquiry along the lines you propose to offer any opinion -- i have seen things just as strange pass from, can't be to common practise. I certainly am not discarding what you have to say out of hand. Lots of people say i can't be hearing things i (beleive i) hear in the lines of inquiry that i am working in -- they have to be mass audio halucinations they say.
dave
sandyK said:
I'm not poo-pooing what you are saying, i'm poo-pooing the validity of ABX testing.
I haven't done sufficient experimentation/inquiry along the lines you propose to offer any opinion -- i have seen things just as strange pass from, can't be to common practise. I certainly am not discarding what you have to say out of hand. Lots of people say i can't be hearing things i (beleive i) hear in the lines of inquiry that i am working in -- they have to be mass audio halucinations they say.
dave
CD to HDD
"I'm not poo-pooing what you are saying, i'm poo-pooing the validity of ABX testing."
Dave
Hallelujah ! Perhaps someone else who believes that audio should be listened to,and enjoyed when relaxed, and with no expectations ? Good quality audio can even relax you so much, that you may even drift off momentarily.
SandyK
"I'm not poo-pooing what you are saying, i'm poo-pooing the validity of ABX testing."
Dave
Hallelujah ! Perhaps someone else who believes that audio should be listened to,and enjoyed when relaxed, and with no expectations ? Good quality audio can even relax you so much, that you may even drift off momentarily.
SandyK
Re: CD to HDD
Sandy, what you want us to believe would be equal to saying that a software packet -say WindowsXp- , installed from different drives, should behave differently although their checksum is identical. Pray tell us, what are checksums for?
Sandy, what you want us to believe would be equal to saying that a software packet -say WindowsXp- , installed from different drives, should behave differently although their checksum is identical. Pray tell us, what are checksums for?
CD to HDD
Netlist
At the attached link, TerryO mentions the reports from his friend with the audio lab. Perhaps you could get TerryO to ask his friend to try similar tests ?
SandyK
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133986&perpage=25&pagenumber=6
Netlist
At the attached link, TerryO mentions the reports from his friend with the audio lab. Perhaps you could get TerryO to ask his friend to try similar tests ?
SandyK
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133986&perpage=25&pagenumber=6
Re: Re: CD to HDD
Hugo,
You cannot make that analogy. Playing back software is asyncronous, playing back music is syncronous, the timing is very important. The bits-is-bits arguement does not take into account that the bits require very strict timing to express their meaning. ie the problems aren't likely the bits, but the timing.
dave
Netlist said:
Hugo,
You cannot make that analogy. Playing back software is asyncronous, playing back music is syncronous, the timing is very important. The bits-is-bits arguement does not take into account that the bits require very strict timing to express their meaning. ie the problems aren't likely the bits, but the timing.
dave
Dave, you will be correct. As said, I'm not a digital expert.
You are entitled to believe what you want Sandy, but I think you are deceiving yourself.
Let me try one last time with a practical example:
You rip a piece of music with two different burners and store them to your HDD.
Audition and most likely Audacity (freeware) can deduct files. The net result is silence if both files have the same checksum. Now tell me, what does silence sound like?
/Hugo
You are entitled to believe what you want Sandy, but I think you are deceiving yourself.
Let me try one last time with a practical example:
You rip a piece of music with two different burners and store them to your HDD.
Audition and most likely Audacity (freeware) can deduct files. The net result is silence if both files have the same checksum. Now tell me, what does silence sound like?
/Hugo
Attachments
CD to HDD
"I think you are deceiving yourself."
netlist
Do you mean like I was deceiving myself in the Current Mirror,Frugalamp and the current SC ULD2 thread, where I suggested the addition of a 130 ohm resistor in series with the CM transistor with the tied base-emitter junction, or the addition of a diode in place of the tied base- emitter ? The added diode eventually became part of a patent by Halcro in 1999.
These suggestions were based around a subjective finding in 1987, but most people didn't believe me then, either.(Silicon Chip November 1989)
😉 However, we now have quite a few members of diyAudio that no longer disagree about the much closer current balance in the differential pair leading to a substantial SQ improvement. (assuming LTP devices that are closely matched for both VBE and HFE)
SandyK
"I think you are deceiving yourself."
netlist
Do you mean like I was deceiving myself in the Current Mirror,Frugalamp and the current SC ULD2 thread, where I suggested the addition of a 130 ohm resistor in series with the CM transistor with the tied base-emitter junction, or the addition of a diode in place of the tied base- emitter ? The added diode eventually became part of a patent by Halcro in 1999.
These suggestions were based around a subjective finding in 1987, but most people didn't believe me then, either.(Silicon Chip November 1989)
😉 However, we now have quite a few members of diyAudio that no longer disagree about the much closer current balance in the differential pair leading to a substantial SQ improvement. (assuming LTP devices that are closely matched for both VBE and HFE)
SandyK
Sandy,
It may be worthwhile to go back thru your experiments and see if you can identify where timing errors may be generated.
For example one certainly could, given the greater servo accuracy required to read & write the smaller spots, make an argument for BluRay producing a disk that stressed the playback servos less, hence generating less jitter in playback.
dave
It may be worthwhile to go back thru your experiments and see if you can identify where timing errors may be generated.
For example one certainly could, given the greater servo accuracy required to read & write the smaller spots, make an argument for BluRay producing a disk that stressed the playback servos less, hence generating less jitter in playback.
dave
CD to DVD
Dave
I have recently turned 70, and although I can readily identify the differences, I no longer have the drive to get into that kind of depth. I have received an offer from a highly respected software expert from Melbourne (also a diyAudio member) to try and find the reasons for the anomalies. Firstly though, I would like to get a few more reports in from other people who own these LG drives, or have listened to a couple of CD-Rs that I have forwarded to other RG members, before asking for his assistance. I have already posted a couple of extracts in this thread from a few people who have done similar listening tests.
SandyK
Dave
I have recently turned 70, and although I can readily identify the differences, I no longer have the drive to get into that kind of depth. I have received an offer from a highly respected software expert from Melbourne (also a diyAudio member) to try and find the reasons for the anomalies. Firstly though, I would like to get a few more reports in from other people who own these LG drives, or have listened to a couple of CD-Rs that I have forwarded to other RG members, before asking for his assistance. I have already posted a couple of extracts in this thread from a few people who have done similar listening tests.
SandyK
Ripping is as asynchronous as "playing back software" is.
In both cases we're talking about playback from a HDD. Playback of bit-for-bit identical files through the exact same hardware in each case.
Citing the commonness of a belief does not a proof make. Millions of people believe in dowsing, I and millions of others don't, one group is wrong.
In the most literal, least emotionally charged sense of the word, if you think two bit-for-bit identical files on the same drive sound different, you're deluded.
In both cases we're talking about playback from a HDD. Playback of bit-for-bit identical files through the exact same hardware in each case.
Citing the commonness of a belief does not a proof make. Millions of people believe in dowsing, I and millions of others don't, one group is wrong.
In the most literal, least emotionally charged sense of the word, if you think two bit-for-bit identical files on the same drive sound different, you're deluded.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.