iBasso DX100:24 bit for bit, PG 1> Reviews & Impressions, Downloads, VIDEO, NEW Firmware 1.4.2. - Page 406

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pudu 

I'm at a loss here. I thought lossless meant no information is lost. How can one form of lossless differ from another form of lossless. Shouldn't all the 1's and 0's be identical?

FLAC creates another process to be concerned with and there are all sorts of issues with how data is processed, compiled, uncompiled in real time w/ multiple tasks.  Various software algorithms can have an effect.  The audio engineers working w/ Apple can't even get a reliable prediction of how the iTunes algorithm will react w/ their masters, they still have to subjectively listen to and compare multiple samples.  It's rather complicated as everything digital actually is and not something that can be commented on in a universal sense.  Do you have a means to verify those 1s/0s at your ear?  There is but few if any who comment here would use it.  I suspect the background processes and tasks causing interference/problems.  Yeah, it's 1's and 0's, but they've been run through the cement mixer, dishwasher, laundry and possibly enhanced interrogation techniques by the time you get to them.  Don't mistake what's on your storage media w/ being the same with what comes out your driver.  

I know that there are audiophiles who stand by the difference between flac and wav. Personally, I have heard some slight difference between the two, so slight that I will only identify when doing close comparison back and forth between the two tracks. If you randomly play me either a flac files, I won't be able to tell you whether it is a flac and not a wav.

A good way to test whether flac processing is the culprit for them sounding different is to first rip two formats of the same track from a CD - flac and wav. Listen to see if there is any different. Then, convert the flac file to wav. Listens to the two wav files to see if the difference still exists.

There are also further claims made on how a CD should be ripped but I won't mention them here. Too contentious a matter.

Unfortunately, there is also the decode problem. Generally, WAV is simpler to decode than FLAC is. If the decode engine isn't perfect, then errors will be pronounced in the final decode of a player. So hearing differences isn't the best way to conclude one being better than another. A better way might be to then inflate the flac back to WAV, rename it, and play it back to back with the original WAV. Assuming the blow up process went well, it should be as easy to decode as the WAV is.

That is a better methodology. I've encountered many players that natively play OGG vorbis and FLAC and APE that have problems doing so and are generally useless because of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by uelover 

I know that there are audiophiles who stand by the difference between flac and wav. Personally, I have heard some slight difference between the two, so slight that I will only identify when doing close comparison back and forth between the two tracks. If you randomly play me either a flac files, I won't be able to tell you whether it is a flac and not a wav.

 

A good way to test whether flac processing is the culprit for them sounding different is to first rip two formats of the same track from a CD - flac and wav. Listen to see if there is any different. Then, convert the flac file to wav. Listens to the two wav files to see if the difference still exists.

 

There are also further claims made on how a CD should be ripped but I won't mention them here. Too contentious a matter.

anyone tried this for their microsd?

http://www.gskill.com/products.php?index=500

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus 

FLAC creates another process to be concerned with and there are all sorts of issues with how data is processed, compiled, uncompiled in real time w/ multiple tasks.  Various software algorithms can have an effect.  The audio engineers working w/ Apple can't even get a reliable prediction of how the iTunes algorithm will react w/ their masters, they still have to subjectively listen to and compare multiple samples.  It's rather complicated as everything digital actually is and not something that can be commented on in a universal sense.  Do you have a means to verify those 1s/0s at your ear?  There is but few if any who comment here would use it.  I suspect the background processes and tasks causing interference/problems.  Yeah, it's 1's and 0's, but they've been run through the cement mixer, dishwasher, laundry and possibly enhanced interrogation techniques by the time you get to them.  Don't mistake what's on your storage media w/ being the same with what comes out your driver.  

With my Studio V and Rocoo BA I have issues with certain FLAC files where the dynamics of the songs are high and seem to clip the amp section. Expanding those files back to WAV eliminates this issue altogether.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyaems 

anyone tried this for their microsd?

 

http://www.gskill.com/products.php?index=500

Nope, but I did get this:

http://www.amazon.com/Silicon-Power-SP032GBSTH010V10-SP-Class-Adapter/dp/B007VPHWVC/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1337743748&sr=8-16

Dunno why the Amazon site says 30-days warranty, I got this locally in Singapore. The Silicon Power site says it has lifetime warranty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HiFlight 


Despite both .wav and .flac being lossless, it seems as the compression of .flac files does have an audible effect. Listening to side-by-side comparisions of the the same file in both wav and flac, it is apparent to me that the .wav files have noticeably better imaging and small details have more of a "you are there" feeling. Going back to my .flac files and high-bitrate mp3's, they now sound flat and lifeless. This is not only apparent to me with my DX100 but with my HM-602 and H120 as well.

 

I did an A/b between ape,flac wave and Atraclossless, guess which came the closest to wave? 

After a six weeks of DX-100 through CIEMs, which I have thoroughly enjoyed, I'm into day three of full size headphones.

The audio experience is completely different. OK so I knew this in principle, but that's not the same as actually listening... After trying a range of headphones, scanning the fora and PMing a few headfiers (thanks for all your replies), I decided to go for the LCD-2s. 

I already love them. I'm using them unamped, hi gain at about 230 volume setting. Listening to high resolution FLACs from Linn, orchestral music (Mendelssohn Symphony No 3), the sound is nicely detailed (you can pick every instrument if you want to) but it remains nicely balanced, with nothing drowning anything else out. If I close my eyes, I'm there in the concert hall, but at the same time if I want to get on with my work, I can drop it down a bit and it's like the orchestra is urging me on from the back of the room. 

If I want to block out background (or even foreground) noise I'll put the ACS T1s back in. But I wanted something completely different for home listening and I think I've found what I was looking for... the best hifi system I've ever had (admittedly that's not saying much) in my pocket.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdiddypdler 

Nice! Do you think the dx100 powers the LCD-2's adequately?
Do you plan on adding another amp?

For me personally NO, the DX100 is inadequate in powering the LCD-2s but it is very pleasant sounding combination...........