Noticeable sonic differences between WAV, AIFF, and ALAC -- why?
Nov 5, 2007 at 12:25 PM Post #32 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by HFat /img/forum/go_quote.gif
And how do you propose he conducts this ABX test? You can't use foobar for this.


Sure you can.

As usual, it's either google or wikipedia to the rescue!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foobar2...l_installation
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 1:11 PM Post #34 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by badmonkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Buh buh buh but then Foobar converts it to a WAV for the ABX test, which means it couldn't possibly give a valid result!
rolleyes.gif



Joking I guess?


Quote:

Originally Posted by badmonkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You are just hearing things, it's placebo, and you're a moron.

Else: prove it. Post the ABX results. Then it might be worth some attention from people to solve your otherwise likely non-existant problem.

You've come to the right place as far as voodoo encouragement is concerned, but even here there are limits and for you to reject common sense as "arrogant" as far as HA is concerned is just, well, arrogant - particularly when it appears you didn't even know what an ABX was.


No need to be rude. You are probaly right though.
AIFF and ALAC are lossless. That means there can be no difference unless there is some decoder/encoder error or some form of resampling in the hardware or sofware.

Take the 16bit Wav, AIFF and ALAC files, uncompress them to wav and create an MD5 checksum for all waves. If the MD5's are identical the AIFF, ALAC and 16bit wav are as well. (this doesn't work for the 32bit though because that is not identical to the original)

Or even better use EAC's "Compare WAVs" tool on the three wavs.
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 4:31 PM Post #35 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Ok, I know it's been discussed before and I've read through all the arrogant posts on Hydrogen Audio about this. But regardless, I have noticed sonic differences and I want to know what is causing it.

AIFF and WAV, pure CD-DA, sounds better than Apple Lossless (ALAC) when played in Foobar or any other media player. I never noticed this before I got my Opera, but now the sonic transparency is obvious.

I am using the Opera's DAC through USB which is being sent from my computer at 16/48. The following are the formats I tested using Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells II, song Maya Gold, ripped directly from CD, in the order in which they sound best:

1) -- WAV (32 bit PCM) ripped with Foobar
2) -- WAV (16 bit PCM) ripped with Foobar
3) -- AIFF ripped with iTunes
4) -- ALAC ripped with iTunes

I have been comparing the above four copies of the same song, ripped from the same CD burner in my computer for the past several hours. They are all being played back through Foobar 0.9.5 beta2 + ASIO4ALL, through USB 16/48 into the Opera's DAC. The differences between numbers 2 - 4 listed above are minimal but they are noticable. Number 1 is a significant improvement over the other three.

I want to know why this is. Lossless formats are supposed to be lossless, so what artifacts are being introduced or what is being left out, if anything? Why would the 32-bit WAV file sound sonically superior than the rest when USB is only transferring 16-bit data to the DAC? Is something happening when the computer is reading the audio and interpreting it?



i think i may be able to help....


try this test...

goto foobar preference, select the output and select "Dither (slow)".

now play ur 16bit wave... now does it sound the same compared to your 32bit wave?
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 9:37 PM Post #36 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnostic /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Take the 16bit Wav, AIFF and ALAC files, uncompress them to wav and create an MD5 checksum for all waves. If the MD5's are identical the AIFF, ALAC and 16bit wav are as well. (this doesn't work for the 32bit though because that is not identical to the original)

Or even better use EAC's "Compare WAVs" tool on the three wavs.


I will try that when I get home. I need to download a copy of EAC. I'd like to know where to get this ABX plug in for Foobar.

And even if these results confirm exactly what I am saying, it still doesn't tell us WHY it is happening.
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 9:55 PM Post #37 of 168
The ABX plugin is part of foobar, just not part of the default configuration. You need to run the installer and choose a full install or something.

But, like we said, it won't work except perhaps for the dithering issue. It's only useful if the data is different because it converts everything to PCM beforehand.
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 10:28 PM Post #39 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by HFat /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The ABX plugin is part of foobar, just not part of the default configuration. You need to run the installer and choose a full install or something.

But, like we said, it won't work except perhaps for the dithering issue. It's only useful if the data is different because it converts everything to PCM beforehand.


So then I guess the only way to test it would be using a spectrum analyzer or oscilliscope attached to the USB connection from the computer, if that's even possible. Or maybe I could load up a software based one?

And it may not even be that Foobar is playing it differently. It could just be that the DAC in the Opera is responding better to the 32-bit file than the 16-bit file.
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 10:32 PM Post #40 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
So then I guess the only way to test it would be using a spectrum analyzer or oscilliscope attached to the USB connection from the computer, if that's even possible. Or maybe I could load up a software based one?

And it may not even be that Foobar is playing it differently. It could just be that the DAC in the Opera is responding better to the 32-bit file than the 16-bit file.


Would it be possible for you to post clips of the tunes you're comparing somewhere for others to test?
 
Nov 5, 2007 at 10:47 PM Post #41 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
And it may not even be that Foobar is playing it differently. It could just be that the DAC in the Opera is responding better to the 32-bit file than the 16-bit file.


But the Opera isn't getting the 32-bit file. It's getting a 16-bit representation of that isn't it? If the Opera is getting something different, it's probably because of the dithering (or lack thereof if I've got it backwards).
 
Nov 6, 2007 at 12:20 AM Post #43 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Would it be possible for you to post clips of the tunes you're comparing somewhere for others to test?


Yes, if you have a file storage site I can use, I will be happy to upload them for you when I get home. If you do happen to do an analysis yourself, the details really come out in the upper mids and all of the treble. Just for kicks, I tried these files with my iPod and Go-Vibe and I could not hear a difference at all. Only when using the Opera was I able to hear the difference.
 
Nov 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM Post #45 of 168
Quote:

Originally Posted by HFat /img/forum/go_quote.gif
But, like we said, it won't work except perhaps for the dithering issue. It's only useful if the data is different because it converts everything to PCM beforehand.


It will work, Foobar writes to the WAV for comparison precisely what it would normally send to the audio pipeline. It will even process any DSPs etc.

But of course, because WAVs all sound the same but are different to anything lossless, that won't satisfy our fantasist.

Agnostic: I see no reason to be polite. This sort of thing is a complete waste of everyone's time, is confusing for the newbies, and I feel the world needs a lot less respect for morons and other politically correct nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top