[JAxB]

Hi guys,
I'm trying to rip my CDs as best as possible, using XLD on Mac, so far I've done it by setting in Flac, today I decided to do it on the same CD in WAV the first time using the original sampling (16-44.1) the next time in upsampling in 24-96 (can also reach 32-96)The difference between WAV and Flac is there, tried and tested, I'm not sure if it's worth using the 24-96 or if it's a waste of space in the HD. Does anyone have experience in this regard?

 

[Roseval]

CD audio is 2 channel PCM audio with a bit depth of 16 bits and a sample rate of 44.1 kHz.
This means the audio has a dynamic range of 96 dB max and the highest possible frequency is 22 kHz.
Ripping to 24 wont increase the dynamic range, likewise up-sampling to 96 won't help as you can't restore any frequency above 22 kHz.
What ain't there in the recording won't al of a sudden be restored by choosing a higher bit depth or sampling rate.
A waist of space indeed.

The difference between WAV and Flac is there, tried and tested

Really? You mean you can hear the difference between two bit identical streams?

 

[tjl5709]

And remember, WAV files do not have a consistent format for tagging the file info for your DAP or PC software to read. I'd stick with FLAC if you are going to have a large lossless library that can be managed. Some claim they do but the inconsistencies and lack of standards mean for all practical purposes, WAV tags are useless.

 

[bogi]

The difference between WAV and Flac is there, tried and tested, I'm not sure if it's worth using the 24-96 or if it's a waste of space in the HD.

If you perceive any difference between FLAC and WAV of the same content, it can be attributed only to different EMI noise profiles spreading through a digital cable from computer to DAC in analog way and influencing DAC in some extent. Both FLAC and WAV of the same content are decoded in software player to the same raw PCM audio data stream. WAV files are not compressed and thus they require less processing in software player. With other words, processing of WAV files may produce less computer generated noise. Time to time I'm reading user reports that 'WAV sounds better than FLAC' and that's the rationale behind it. Adding some level of isolation between computer and DAC may diminish these small differences and may improve sound regardless on source file format.

Encoding CD content into higher sample rate or bit depth does not help, since CD media contains only 16 bits of resolution at 44.1k sample rate. That's like inserting the same content into bigger box. The content will not groove with the box. So it would be only waste of HD space.

 

[JAxB]

I agree with you about oversampling.
On the subject of noise, I'll tell you my chain, Mac with Audirvana connected to Fiio K6 via 50cm Fiio USB-C cable.
Tell me how you think I can possibly reduce this noise

 

[bogi]

Tell me how you think I can possibly reduce this noise

For example Topping HS02 galvanic isolator has USB C input and output. ifi iSilencer is able to remove EMI interference and USB C to USB C version exists too. No additional power supply is needed for them with your self powered DAC/amp. Similar effect brings Intona isolator.

Effects of isolators/noise removers are system dependent and also different people are more or less sensible to different aspects of sound. Better to buy such things from a store where you can return them if you would consider the effect to be non existing or not worth the investment.

 

[Sonic Defender]

....


Really? You mean you can hear the difference between two bit identical streams?

No, the poster is most not certainly hearing a difference. It is impossible and ridiculous to propose. I know you weren't agreeing with that idea, clearly. Incredible how with all the information available about such things that misunderstanding like this still flourishes.