Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Help/advice with ripping from the deeply dissatisfied
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help/advice with ripping from the deeply dissatisfied - Page 2

post #16 of 48
There really isn't a lot of reason to spend a bunch of money on high end equipment if you don't listen to genres of music that are rarely well recorded. I'd think about upgrading my music collection if it was me.
post #17 of 48

I just downloaded a FLAC version of the album in question, and to me it sounds pretty much the same as any other mid 90's trip-hop, production wise.
Do you have a more exact time code for a particularly problematic section? I could cut out a 30s segment and post it here if you wish to compare.

post #18 of 48
Thread Starter 

 

The crumbling bass distortion starts right at 5:15 of the first track, right when it transitions into the high bpm drum `n bass section.  And interestingly, it`s not the lowest frequencies that are the problem; it`s the syncopated snare hit that is clearly overloading in my rip.  It`s unlistenable.   .   .   .   

post #19 of 48

I took a listen to that section of the track, and I can't really find any fault. The only distortion I can detect is an electronically distorted kick-drum, but that must have been done on purpose. I also took a listen with a high pass filter at 1kHz, and again everything seemed fine.
Here's a 28s snippet of the section I listened to.

 

 


Edited by limpidglitch - 9/27/13 at 1:39pm
post #20 of 48
Thread Starter 

Limpidglitch,

 

That was very cool; thank you.  It sounds exactly like my rip, the same crumbly, ****ty distortion on the snare hits.  Which is both bad and great: bad because the recording must be the problem; and great, because I guess my ripping is not the problem !  

 

Thanks again,

 

David

post #21 of 48

Yeah that actually looks pretty good; there's actually some dynamic range there. A lot of graphs of the music I listen to would look almost like a solid block.

post #22 of 48
Thread Starter 

Just an update in case anyone stumbles on this thread.  


I realized, after a strong cup of coffee, that I was making a crucial, bone-headed mistake in my ripping:  I was ripping directly from the CD transport (a loud, vibrating external superdrive USB-connected to my Apple Macbook Pro).  Today I remembered that with mac, you can open a CD like an external drive and copy its contents directly to the desktop (aiff files).  Then eject the CD and unplug the superdrive and work with the digital data off the SSD in my Macbook Pro.  

 

Noticeably better sound quality, when A/B-ing with my previous lossless files made directly from the spinning disk.  

 

Now I am re-ripping everything again, so lots of time to ponder how slow my brain works, and how many other, potentially much more important, opportunities in life I`ve wandered past...  

 

Need more caffeine,

 

d


Edited by Dopaminer - 11/2/13 at 8:26pm
post #23 of 48

Eh what? Instead of ripping with an extra tool you now rip with the Mac finder by copying the audio tracks to your hard drive?

In both cases you rip to the hard drive, so I really have a hard time understanding your post.


Edited by xnor - 11/2/13 at 9:43pm
post #24 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post
 

Eh what? Instead of ripping with an extra tool you now rip with the Mac finder by copying the audio tracks to your hard drive?

In both cases you rip to the hard drive, so I really have a hard time understanding your post.

It`s possible I have no idea what I`m talking about !  

 

Previously I was using XLD or Max to rip the cds to flack.  I opened the CD from the ripping app, meaning the app was managing the data from external spinning drive.  Now, I transfer the audio files to the Mac`s ssd hard drive as aiff, then convert to FLAC from there using XLD or Max.  I suspect the cheap external CD drive was not behaving well with the software, introducing a ton of noise/distortion, screwing up the 010101010s as they were being compressed to FLAC files.  Now the compression process is happening with no moving parts.  So I believe that is why I am finding an SQ improvement.  

 

d

post #25 of 48

When you copy files off a CD rather than ripping it, the disk still spins and vibrates. It's no different than ripping. Actually, when you rip, there might be more error correction than just grabbing the files in the finder that way.

post #26 of 48

Indeed, in the best case the results will be identical bit by bit. In the worst case (for example scratched CD), copying with finder will include a lot of reading errors.

It doesn't matter if you first rip AIFF files onto your hard drive and encode to FLAC later, or rip and encode directly.

 

To be certain if there even is a difference you could just compare the two differently created FLAC files.


Edited by xnor - 11/3/13 at 9:52am
post #27 of 48
Thread Starter 

Believe me, I have been comparing a lot of ripped files:  FLAC at various settings, various versions, with various rippers; mp3s..   

Everything has sucked until now.  I`ve re-ripped several albums now with the new process and compared them with my direct-from-CD rips, playing alongside in Amarra: there is clearly a difference.  

 

I think the issue is that Mac OS is taking the data from the CD and somehow doing a better job than XLD and the others.  Then the aiff-to-FLAC conversion takes place in a matter of seconds from the Mac`s SSD, and somehow produces a much better-sounding FLAC file, indistinguishable, to my ears, from the aiff version which is around 40% larger.  

 

I have always been skeptical of some of the voodoo in audiophileland , but this is huge. . . . 

I may have to start buying fifteen hundred dollar headphone cables ! 

post #28 of 48
Thread Starter 

Actually, in all seriousness, I think I may purchase a CD transport.  I`ve been reading page after page, and I never even realized there was a difference between a cd player and a transport, never bothered to think about it.  

This is garnering great reviews here in japan: 

 

http://www.olasonic.jp/nanocompo/nanocd1.html

post #29 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

Believe me, I have been comparing a lot of ripped files:  FLAC at various settings, various versions, with various rippers; mp3s..   

Everything has sucked until now.  I`ve re-ripped several albums now with the new process and compared them with my direct-from-CD rips, playing alongside in Amarra: there is clearly a difference. 

Please take one track ripped both ways and compare the files using something like http://ridiculousfish.com/hexfiend/. (Make sure you choose the same FLAC compression options and same encoder.)

 

Or, upload the two supposedly different files and send me the link. I'll analyze them and post results here.

 

Quote:
I think the issue is that Mac OS is taking the data from the CD and somehow doing a better job than XLD and the others.  Then the aiff-to-FLAC conversion takes place in a matter of seconds from the Mac`s SSD, and somehow produces a much better-sounding FLAC file, indistinguishable, to my ears, from the aiff version which is around 40% larger. 

I doubt that dedicated ripping tools fail at extracting audio data accurately. And it doesn't matter where you read data from. It could be a floppy disc, a data CD, some network drive etc.

 

Quote:

I have always been skeptical of some of the voodoo in audiophileland , but this is huge. . . . 

I may have to start buying fifteen hundred dollar headphone cables !

I sincerely hope you're not serious.

post #30 of 48

Once your files are ripped to the hard drive, you'll play directly from the file.  So no need for a special purpose CD transport IMO.  Just rip from your Mac's combo drive -- or if computers don't ship with such anymore , then just use a USB peripheral CD/DVD drive.  I think that is the simplest route, if I'm following your issue properly.

 

Also from what I've read above, it does seem that distortion is added to this particular track as part of the desired sound.  While I like EDM, this is common in that genre and I find that my high resolution gear is not the best match for this type of production.  Sadly.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Help/advice with ripping from the deeply dissatisfied