[Kizza]

Of Course it Can.. and what's better is you can have all your tunes in one easy to reach spot!

 

[sejarzo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioengr /img/forum/go_quote.gif I tried some of these. The quality was not great IMO. I like the highdeftapetransfers oldies much better. Steve N.

I tried just one, Scottish Chamber Orchestra performing Mendelssohn's "Hebrides Overture" at 24 bit/96 kHz, and I'm not terribly impressed, either.

I somehow don't get the point of going to hi-rez for some of the jazz albums sold there. The info about those shown to the left of the sample clips reveals that they were tracked and mixed months apart.....and even in the lo-fi-ish sample clips, it's obvious that there is reverb added to the voice. To me, all hi-rez will do is make that sound more obviously artificial.

The highdeftapetransfers have way too much tape hiss for me.

 

[fordgtlover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wavelength /img/forum/go_quote.gif Snip On the PC & Mac each player seems to have it's own personallity and sound associated with it. I think this is basically due to the interpretation of the file type and then passing that data down the line. Snip

I don't understand this comment. Can you expand on what you have said and how this might be explained. I woudl have thought - perhaps incorrectly - that a digital data stream would be identical from a Mac & a PC (or any other device for that matter).

 

[sejarzo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't understand this comment. Can you expand on what you have said and how this might be explained. I woudl have thought - perhaps incorrectly - that a digital data stream would be identical from a Mac & a PC (or any other device for that matter).

x2. Kinda hard to believe that there should be any difference, but hey, hearing differences is all that this hobby is about (but some of us try to separate the, ummm.....sort of differences that we truly do hear, perhaps?)

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Can a computer be a decent audiophile source?

It sure can!
Not just a decent audiophile source, but even an excellent one.

 

[poo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't understand this comment. Can you expand on what you have said and how this might be explained. I woudl have thought - perhaps incorrectly - that a digital data stream would be identical from a Mac & a PC (or any other device for that matter).

Would be interested to know more on this also. I have often wondered if I can hear subtle differences in sound between media players (VLC player VS media player VS winamp for example). Have never come to a conclusion on the matter, and figured if I had to concentrate so hard to decide on any difference, it must be very minimal if it were there. Those I have discussed it with have ended up being of the opinion that there would be no difference - it is a digital file which is read in a particular way regardless of the program reading it. I am not convinced.

In digital photography when processing RAW files (yes I understand this is an apples and oranges comparison to some degree), the software used to read the file will have a slight impact on how the file looks as an end product. I understand this is not the same as digital audio being output, but it bears many similarities from a processing point of view.

Another comparison I would make is that of encoding from CD to other lossless audio formats (FLAC or Apple Lossless for example), and the difference that software can make in doing so. EAC (amongst others) has long been a trusted program for MP3 encoding, and can also be used to encode FLAC files. I have read many times from a variety of sources that the program (and settings of course) that one uses to encode an audio file can have an impact on the quality of the produced file. Again, I understand the apples and oranges comparison here aswell, but there are many processing similarities...

Perhaps this should have been a new thread...

 

[zirgated]

Bit perfect is bit perfect

Programs *can* be made to produce identical data streams, but some might not. Common gremlins include resampling, software volume control, equalization (bad algorithms might touch the data even if you have all bands at 0db - many outboard DSP are guilty of this, too).

Lossless encoding is guaranteed to produce perfect files; if it doesn't, it's not lossless. FLAC has a very good record of being truly lossless, and if your really paranoid, keep a PCM version of it, decompress the FLAC file and compare them (digitally). They should be identical. If not, you've found a bug; tell the developers about it.

 

[jriihi]

Computer(FLAC) -> DAC -> AMP -> HEADPHONES = EXCELLENT

Sound differences: how your computer is configured, what program you use, what operating system you use, what dac you use, what amp you use, what headphones you use and what cables you use

 

[fordgtlover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jriihi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Computer(FLAC) -> DAC -> AMP -> HEADPHONES = EXCELLENT Sound differences: how your computer is configured, what program you use, what operating system you use, what dac you use, what amp you use, what headphones you use and what cables you use

This is getting interesting.

While I don't think that anyone would question the potential impacts of DAC, amp, an dheadphones - cables remains somewhat disputed, I am curious that the computer, its configuration and operating system can have a noticable bearing on the audio stream.

I know that the Kmixer in Windows is not well regarded, but once you bypass that and use ASIO to bypass the Windows audio drivers, shouldn't most of these variables be negated.

Has anyone come to any specific conclusions on these matters through testing?

 

[poo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zirgated /img/forum/go_quote.gif They should be identical.

Indeed they should, thought there seems to be much debate at present in regards to FLAC producing a brighter sound... so it seems even 'lossless' files may not be the 'perfect' copy they presume to be.

 

[fordgtlover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by poo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Indeed they should, thought there seems to be much debate at present in regards to FLAC producing a brighter sound... so it seems even 'lossless' files may not be the 'perfect' copy they presume to be.

Sorry man, the 'debate' is Patrick82 hearing things that in all likelihood don't exist, and a few others jumping on the crazy train.

Check the last dozen or so posts; people asking for the insanity to stop.

I'm not trying to dismiss you input in trying to add to the discussion and explain whay there might be differences, but the 'FLAC is different to WAV' discussion has been done, and should be put to bed. There's just too much support for the fact that the output is identical. Reading through the whole 15 pages, there's nothing to support the contention.

Perhaps one day I'll stand corrected, but not today.

 

[poo]

Appreciate the honest response Mr Ford... and as I am a BA XR8 owner, will trust your opinion

 

[fordgtlover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by poo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Appreciate the honest response Mr Ford... and as I am a BA XR8 owner, will trust your opinion

As I said, and as I'm sure you appreciate, I wasn't trying to dismiss the issue you raised. There are some odd discussions on this forum, and that one is a classic.

I hope one day to own an XR8 or another GT. Nothing beats the growl of a Ford V8.

But, that's not really on topic.

Maybe I should spend less on hi-fi gear and start saving for a car..

Cheers

 

[ecclesand]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is getting interesting. While I don't think that anyone would question the potential impacts of DAC, amp, an dheadphones - cables remains somewhat disputed, I am curious that the computer, its configuration and operating system can have a noticable bearing on the audio stream. I know that the Kmixer in Windows is not well regarded, but once you bypass that and use ASIO to bypass the Windows audio drivers, shouldn't most of these variables be negated. Has anyone come to any specific conclusions on these matters through testing?

I have done some testing with my computer as source setup. I currently use the AV-710 soundcard's optical out to a dac then to an amp and then to the headphones. I initally used the Windows Kmixer, but then switched to ASIO4ALL. There was an immediate and very noticeable improvement, however, occasionally, I would hear a break in the playback. I switched to Kernel Streaming and the sound was identical (to my ears) to ASIO4ALL, but without the skipping. I use Foobar2k for playback with no DSPs. IMHO, if you are using no DSPs, you are using ASIO or KS, and your soundcard is simply serving as a digital transport, the computer configuration, operating system, and hardware have no impact on the audio stream.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith /img/forum/go_quote.gif The question needs to be reversed: can anything other than a computer match its fidelity and flexibility? It is already a given that a computer is a BETTER source than any CD-based system (due to the inaccuracy of reading CDs in realtime). Any vinyl, while its limitations may be pleasing to some ears and the care put into creating the version of a recording put on vinyl is sometimes better than that put on CD, is known to have lower fidelity than the digital formats a computer is capable of playing.

And what is SACD? Chopped liver?


That said computers can achieve excellent sound... and more important be far more flexible / easier to manage. I have no complaints.