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 3

post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

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.  

 

Honestly, you're worrying about all the wrong things. Instead of reading up on things to buy, do a little googling about how digital audio works. It will help you sort out the hoodoo from the things that make a real difference better.

post #32 of 48
Oh lord…
If the OP have a grain of scepticism left in him, he'll perform a null-test as xnor suggested and be done with this nonsense.
I find it hard to fathom that this can even be thought of as an area of debate, when empirical truth is only five minutes away.

Edited by limpidglitch - 11/3/13 at 4:52pm
post #33 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatmap View Post
 

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.

 Yes my Mac has no internal drive and I`m ripping from a cheapo external reader/writer.  I totally agree that the gear will expose the weaknesses in the source.  I`m hearing differences between the methods of ripping.  

post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

I`m hearing differences between the methods of ripping.  

 

Really? Please show us the differences.

post #35 of 48
Thread Starter 
Show you?
That's almost as puzzling as empirical truth is only five minutes away"
post #36 of 48

Show: Blind ABX

 

Empirical truth: Null-test.

 

There, I actually spelled it out for you.

post #37 of 48
Thread Starter 

I know what the words mean.  What`s puzzling is:  

 

- why someone would seek `empirical truth` in a purely subjective experience

- how the eff I`m supposed to show anyone my subjective experience, and why anyone would demand it

 

I started this thread to get advice and I got, a lot.  And the problem is now solved, it seems.  Now there is another problem: being expected to prove quantitatively what I am hearing.  So, playing it out, I analyze two rips that sound different to my ears and the resulting graphs show they are identical.   Then, what?  I try to convince myself that they are identical, and that the placebo effect is coloring my perception?  And that would accomplish what?  Peace of mind?  

 

I feel like I`m in an odd position here because I am basically the most skeptical person I know, about other, larger issues in life/society.  But here, in this context, this forum, I feel no desire to doubt my perceptions.  

post #38 of 48
The realities of digital audio are not subjective. But if you actively refuse to understand what you're doing, I suggest everyone save their breath.
post #39 of 48

I asked you kindly to post a comparison using a hex editor or even better: upload the supposedly different files and send me the links to them.

 

I don't see anything odd about that.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

- why someone would seek `empirical truth` in a purely subjective experience

You have two weights, exactly 1 kg each. You put one in the left and one in the right hand and insist the left one is heavier.

Just because you experience that way doesn't make one weight heavier.

 

To some people the moon looks like it's made of cheese...

 

Quote:
- how the eff I`m supposed to show anyone my subjective experience, and why anyone would demand it

With an ABX log, and because that's the logical next step for anyone with a bit of skepticism. It would be interesting to see if XLD or the Mac Finder have problems ripping files, and if so, what exactly is happening. Do you not agree?

 

Quote:

I started this thread to get advice and I got, a lot.  And the problem is now solved, it seems.  Now there is another problem: being expected to prove quantitatively what I am hearing.  So, playing it out, I analyze two rips that sound different to my ears and the resulting graphs show they are identical.   Then, what?  I try to convince myself that they are identical, and that the placebo effect is coloring my perception?  And that would accomplish what?  Peace of mind?  

 

I feel like I`m in an odd position here because I am basically the most skeptical person I know, about other, larger issues in life/society. 

Yes, the new problem is a claim that files ripped with Finder vs. XLD sound differently.

 

Realizing that they are identical should make you rethink this:

Quote:
 But here, in this context, this forum, I feel no desire to doubt my perceptions.

 

 

There's nothing shameful about hearing differences where there are none. Happens to everyone, like tuning the knobs on an EQ only to notice later that bypass was enabled all the time..

post #40 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skamp View Post

The realities of digital audio are not subjective. But if you actively refuse to understand what you're doing, I suggest everyone save their breath.

 

More fun with language:  realities of digital music ; refuse to understand what I am doing

 

You should have taken your own advice and saved your breath.   

post #41 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post
 

I asked you kindly to post a comparison using a hex editor or even better: upload the supposedly different files and send me the links to them.

 

I don't see anything odd about that.

 

 

There's nothing shameful about hearing differences where there are none. Happens to everyone, like tuning the knobs on an EQ only to notice later that bypass was enabled all the time..

Instead of asking me to justify my claims with data for you to analyze, thereby assuming a judging roll, perhaps you should just try it out yourself, and then refute my claim if feel the need.

 

And where did you come up with the word `shameful`?  Are you implying I should be ashamed of my supposedly ridiculous perceptions?  

post #42 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

Instead of asking me to justify my claims with data for you to analyze, thereby assuming a judging roll, perhaps you should just try it out yourself, and then refute my claim if feel the need.

I don't have your Mac model, external CD drive, exact same scratched or scratch-free CDs. How am I supposed to perfectly reproduce what you're doing, let alone experiencing?

 

Therefore, all I can do is assume that the files are identical and reject your claim that one method produces better sounding FLACs until you're willing to provide some data. (Arguing what and why probably took more time by now than just uploading two files...)

 

 

Quote:
And where did you come up with the word `shameful`?  Are you implying I should be ashamed of my supposedly ridiculous perceptions?  

Look, I just wanted to point out that you won't be ridiculed if the files turn out to be identical.

The thing is that I've seen many people that have this "I completely trust my perception" attitude but fail badly in simple blind tests, heck even trivial optical illusions. Instead of admitting that their (my, our) senses are not 100% reliable because of that big gray chunk in our heads they just vanish and do not post their results. I am assuming that this has something to do with shame and not wanting to be wrong.

 

 

I don't want to be wrong either and care a great deal for the truth, hence my skeptical attitude towards claims. If you really are skeptical like you say, I'm certain that you want to know why you heard differences, what caused them etc. !


Edited by xnor - 11/4/13 at 8:49am
post #43 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

 Yes my Mac has no internal drive and I`m ripping from a cheapo external reader/writer.  I totally agree that the gear will expose the weaknesses in the source.  I`m hearing differences between the methods of ripping.  

 

I have a Mac and I use a cheap external drive and my rips are perfect. You're doing something wrong I guess.

post #44 of 48

Rips using the same codec should be identical, given that the CD was being read properly. If the rips sound different, either you were using a different codec, or there is data missing, either because the CD skipped or your computer was too slow.

post #45 of 48
The "Finder" is almost certainly doing a worse job at ripping CDs than XLD.
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