[JaZZ]

Just received my Chord Dave. Wow I am completely blown away at the sound. I was skeptical at the high price tag but it's completely justified.

Congrats, pjk1!

 

[Deftone]

I believe alot of people say WAV is better than FLAC☺

WAV and Flac are identical in quality, both lossless formats.

Choose whichever you like, i just went for WAV on all my CD rips, a bonus for Flac is it can be compressed without loosing any quality. People say WAV isnt good for holding tags but in my experience it can hold a lot of tags and artwork just a much as Flac.

 

[lovethatsound]

WAV and Flac are identical in quality, both lossless formats.

Choose whichever you like, i just went for WAV on all my CD rips, a bonus for Flac is it can be compressed without loosing any quality. People say WAV isnt good for holding tags but in my experience it can hold a lot of tags and artwork just a much as Flac.

Because Flac is compressed,that's why some people say WAV is better,their's a ongoing argument about it,just saying that's all.

 

[bmichels]

Because Flac is compressed,that's why some people say WAV is better,their's a ongoing argument about it,just saying that's all.

May be in the past, with little processing power, the DAC were strugeling to decompress + play the file, but now... with such powerful processor, I guess it is not a problem anymore to execute those 2 tasks at the same time. So, WAV better than FLAC was may be true in the past...

 

[lovethatsound]

May be in the past, with little processing power, the DAC were strugeling to decompress + play the file, but now... with such powerful processor, I guess it is not a problem anymore to execute those 2 tasks at the same time. So, WAV better than FLAC was may be true in the past...

I fully understand what your saying,but still if something is compressed, it's more work for the processor to do.Their was a big debate about this on the naim forum's a while ago . who's right?who's wrong? I don't know.

 

[ThatPhil]

DBPoweramp can rip CDs to FLAC with zero compression so you can have the best of both.

 

[x RELIC x]

CD rips are fine, great quality from CD can be had at 16/44.1. Personally, I would not look at lossless format debates like WAV vs compressed formats FLAC/ALAC when considering quality. Also, the DAC has nothing to to do with the processing of the format as it recieves a PCM bitstream from the source and pretty much any source is capable of decompressing lossless compressions seamlessly now.

More importantly is the quality of the Master. This is a great article with some fantastic examples for audible differences heard between poor and great mastered music regarding dynamic compression, all the more perceptible by the DAVE.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/ca-academy/dynamic-range-no-quiet-no-loud-r643/


Here's a clip referenced in the article that demonstrates how bad sound can be because of poor mastering dynamic compression, which sadly has become the norm:



Funny how computer processing has become so powerful today and yet many of our albums suffer at the hands of poor decisions.

 

[Deftone]

I can understand why compression is used in the likes of metal music for example it can make it sound aggressive with more bite, when it is done tastefully. But most of the time its not done like that and its starved for air and very distorted. I have a few low DR5/6 albums that sound incredibly clean and dynamic (i dont know how) which im happy with. Imo though HDR should always be a priority but sadly most artist think "loud is cool".

 

[Christer]

U

@Rob Watts DACs internally upsample the input music files, and so there is little point in spending a lot of money buying/streaming HiRes tracks.

Please clarify,
Until I get to hear the downsampled to 16/44.1 original master hi res file sounding as good as the master I very much doubt this with large scale acoustic music.
The lowest res I played via DAVE was 24/48 and it was audibly, less resolved and less realistic than 24/96 and higher rates to me.
Nothing is natively recorded recorded at 16/44.1 in the classical genre since MANY YEARS, and I don't see any logical reason to buy a downsampled 16/44.1version of a hi res recording, only to have it "upressed" again by a modern DAC, when you can get the original in the first place?
Why first involve downsampling of an original file and then upsampling in later steps?
What possible benefits would one get from going through those steps?

 

[Triode User]

U

Please clarify,
Until I get to hear the downsampled to 16/44.1 original master hi res file sounding as good as the master I very much doubt this with large scale acoustic music.
The lowest res I played via DAVE was 24/48 and it was audibly, less resolved and less realistic than 24/96 and higher rates to me.
Nothing is natively recorded recorded at 16/44.1 in the classical genre since MANY YEARS, and I don't see any logical reason to buy a downsampled 16/44.1version of a hi res recording, only to have it "upressed" again by a modern DAC, when you can get the original in the first place?
Why first involve downsampling of an original file and then upsampling in later steps?
What possible benefits would one get from going through those steps?

The trouble is knowing whether you are buying an original hi res master to download or merely an upsampled 16/44.1 file.

 

[gnomen]

This may be a bit off topic but wanted to hear from DAVE owners what music rips they listen to through through the DAVE. There appears to be much controversy over something rates in bed death all over the place with many believing that there are no perceptible differences. Having said that,
I rip all of my CDs to FLAC files and according to the dbpoweramp forums the sample rate is only 16kHz/44.1 but bit perfect. Is there a way to rip a CD using dbpoweramp at a higher resolution or is this the best you can get from any CD?

I can spend more money and download my favorite FLAC albums ripped at 96kHz/24bit from places like HDtracks but even on the most expensive DAP available or playing FLAC files through a CHORD DAC like Hugo2 or DAVE would there be any advantage in perceived sound quality with TOTL headphones like Utopias??

AFAIK 16/44 is all there is on the CD file because that is the Red Book standard. Getting more than that from a CD is just going to be upsampling and, as someone has said, Rob's DACs already upsample more effectively than any software you can use.

In my experience it is worth purchasing genuine 24/96 when it is available, but no higher than that, and only if the source material warrants it -- i.e. the content, the performance, the recording and engineering mix and so on are all of a really high standard. So I have only downloaded hi-res replacements for a handful of my ripped CDs.

Many 70s and 80s CDs were multi-tracked and manipulated at the recording stage so higher res does not give you any further clarity. OTOH I have Linda Ronstadt both from CDs and from HDTracks and the latter is definitely better. Some cynics say sites like HDTracks just upsample and charge you more, which I have not found to be the case, but I guess caveat emptor applies as usual!

 

[Christer]

The trouble is knowing whether you are buying an original hi res master to download or merely an upsampled 16/44.1 file.

Not a problem at all, with the reliable sites like Challenge Classics, eClassical, Highresaudio,and Qobuz, and several others I use.
For those who listen with their eyes instead of ears and need other proof than the audible one, of the authenticity their files there are even some that provide a frequency content screenshot of the files they sell.
And since almost everything in classical is recorded at 24/96 or higher pcm rates these days I see little reason to buy downsampled to rbcd standard versions of originally hi res recorded music.
I don't have the foggiest what goes on in the pop rock and electronic genres though with those I would probably agree with Rob's statement and even add that you don't need more than MP3 anyway with most of it, because the low level fine inner detail instrumental timbre and acoustic information and dynamic range so important with classical and acoustic music isn't there in the source material anyway.

 

[gintamafans]

Just realized hugo2 launched, so will dave2 be soon?

 

[Rob Watts]

Absolutely not!

Dave took over 2 man years, I am certainly not about to start doing that again! Got Davina and the Power Pulse Array amps to do and that will keep me busy for the next few years. Yes that's what the new power amp tech will be called - Power Pulse Array...

 

[lovethatsound]

Just realized hugo2 launched, so will dave2 be soon?

IF you add a blu mk 2 wouldn't you class that has a Dave 2?