[dknightd]

I just tried this comparison on my daughters 4th gen ipod, and my son's video ipod. Alas I do not own my own ipod yet. I could hear no difference between alac and wav. gdg are you sure you did not have any audio processing going on your ipod? Maybe soundcheck was on (which effects alac but not wav)? Maybe my ears are no good. . .

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg You must be joking. Who provoked who. First this guy Febs demands corroboration even though he has yet to explain how a AB test on a computer will prove anything about what I observed on an Ipod.

You yourself have acknowledged that "a blind test would be definitive," so this assertion really rings hollow. Nevertheless, I have explained many times in this thread why I think a blind test would be useful. In fact, my last post in this thread contained a lengthy explanation of where I am coming from on this issue.

The problem is that you seem to be stuck on one particular post of mine, to the exclusion of the others. (Apparently that post hit a nerve, considering that you have now quoted it four separate times.)

So, let me make this as clear as I possibly can:

If in fact you are hearing a difference between Apple Lossless and .wav, there are several potential explanations for that difference:

1. An audible difference inherent in the encoded file. You can use an ABX test in Foobar to confirm whether such an issue exists.
2. An audible difference resulting from playback on the iPod. An ABX test made on the iPod with the assistance of another person would confirm that you are hearing a difference on the iPod. (Note: ideally, the files would be named in such a way that the person administering the test does not know which file is which.) Unlike the Foobar test, a test done on the iPod itself would not be able to eliminate volume differences as a potential cause of the difference that you perceive, but if you could establish that you do hear the difference on the iPod but not on the computer, that would establish a useful data point that could narrow the likely causes for the difference you are hearing.
3. Expectation bias or some other external factor. If the first two tests do not demonstrate that you can hear a difference, that would suggest that whatever difference you perceive is due to something other than the codec itself or the way it is played back on the iPod.

In short, ABX testing can be used to evaluate the circumstances under which you perceive a difference between Apple Lossless and .wav and to narrow the potential causes for that difference. Moreover, as you yourself have acknowledged, a successful ABX test would definitively silence your detractors. You have been to busy attempting to insult to notice that I have been one of the few people in this entire, tortured thread who has not outright dismissed your claim that you can hear a difference.

 

[tyrion]

Anymore personal attacks or calling others opinions "silly" or blaming the title of the thread as the reason for peoples conduct will lead to the thread being locked.

 

[wanderman]

has anyone made recordings of the an ipod playing an alac file and an Ipod playing a wave file and stuck those in a wav comparator thingy. This could be put to rest really quickly if someone can record a 30 second sample.

 

[dknightd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyrion Anymore personal attacks or calling others opinions "silly" or blaming the title of the thread as the reason for peoples conduct will lead to the thread being locked.

Please do not lock the thread until we find out if the OP had any sound
processing active on his/her ipod. This would be an honest mistake that
perhaps they had not considered. To admit a mistake (if there is one) is a sign of strength.
To others, please be polite and not insult
each other - we all have the same goal, which I assume is to get the best
sound we can. If the ipod has problems decoding alac I want to know about it.
I don't expect the ipod DAC to compare well with a high end DAC, but
to be honest it comes A LOT closer than I would have thought (especially when using the line out, and all processing effects turned off).
If the OP finds the difference was due to iPod settings I want to know that as well. From my experience iTunes/iPod "sound check" leaves ALOT to be
desired. Using iVolume instead helps. But when I want to listen seriously
I have to turn off all effects in iTunes.

 

[Nospam]

OK, mods, I'm only trying to set something straight here, so I hope this won't get the thread locked...

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg Quote: Originally Posted by Nospam Reminds me of a thread last year where someone claimed WAV files didn't sound as good as playing off of the original CD What is clear is that you don't mind dishing out the snotty attitude but don't like it when it's fired back...

Yeah, I obviously didn't write that one too well. In that posting, I was only being dismissive about the other thread. This thread reminds me of the other one due to the similarity of the responses that occurred between that one and this one. I can see how you would take it more personally that it was intended. My bad.

BTW, you really need to go back and re-read what Febs wrote. He really wasn't being outright dismissive about your original post. He simply was (and still is) asking for something to verify whether or not it was the codec itself, the iPod, or something else that was causing you to hear the differences. This is something that we all could learn something from, if you would be willing to spend a bit of time doing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SH4RKY ...Surely listening to discover errors with the files or equipment isnt what this is all about... high end home equipment is there so you can maximise your enoyment with the music, its not made so you can pick the minute differences between one type of cable to another, or one type of compression to another. Be thankful you can hear at all and are in a postion to be at the 'hi end' of the audio market.

Something we all should think about.

 

[saint.panda]

gdg,

Regarding the perceived sound differences between wav and flac, even assuming they are existent, they shouldn't be so significant. Considering that you didn't "need to listen very hard to hear the difference", the problems most likely lie elsewhere. Ok, this reasoning is not proper logic and more like common sense on my part.

For instance, and this might be an obvious proposition, there could be changes in the gain / volume level when transferring from wav to alac.

Also, if you happen to have an USB dac, before conducting any serious sound quality tests on the itunes, I would install usb audio which bypasses all the crappy mixers in Windows. The demo can be found here: http://www.usb-audio.com. The demo will beep every 30 seconds but you can easily uninstall it later. Also, foobar isn't so difficult to set up; takes about 10-20 min to get it running with Asio.


With regards to the formal argument of "burden of proof", I think a short comparison between two versions of one or two songs using the Ipod isn't enough to establish a substantiated prima facie case for the difference between wav and alac. I realize that a scientific / formal discussion wasn't the purpose of this thread to begin with, but that's probably where all the agitation comes from. I see you have a degree in physics, so I think you will agree that a sample of one or two isn't really saying a lot, especially in light of the strong theoretical background stating the opposite.


In any case, due to the same reasons of ripping all my CDs, I've personally compared wav and alac quite extensively using itunes -> asio (usb-audio) -> microdac -> sr-71 -> Headphile Blacksilver V2 -> Hd 650, and couldn't detect any differences.


In your own interest of saving yourself lots of GBs of storage capacity, I'd just repeat the test under more controlled circumstances, and, as a bonus so to speak, in a way so that the people here can be satisfied as well. ; )

 

[wanderman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda Also, if you happen to have an USB dac, before conducting any serious sound quality tests on the itunes, I would install usb audio which bypasses all the crappy mixers in Windows. The demo can be found here: http://www.usb-audio.com. The demo will beep every 30 seconds but you can easily uninstall it later. Also, foobar isn't so difficult to set up; takes about 10-20 min to get it running with Asio

there is also kernel streaming

 

[Rempert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda For instance, and this might be an obvious proposition, there could be changes in the gain / volume level when transferring from wav to alac.

Since digitally changing volume is a lossy process, even that would be unacceptable for a lossless codec. Thus it would indicate either a buggy codec, or the encoder program is buggy, or some DSP is being applied during encoding (user error).

We consider those possibilities, and add in the similar ones for the player: player decoding is buggy, or some DSP is being applied only to the ALAC during playback (user error).

If the differences are only noticeable on the iPod specifically, then we could entertain the possibility that decoding has some affect on the hardware (power issues?).

The example of user error with foobar would be something like converting wav -> flac with the "apply replay gain" box checked. Now you have created a lossy file. I'm not that familiar with iTunes, but I imagine something like this is a possibility.

If someone really wanted to get to the bottom of this, the first thing would be to do the blind test and verify that the differences exist. The second thing would be to check setup of encoder and playback software and verify that no user error is causing the difference to exist. If we pass both of those checks, then a real problem is here that shouldn't be, and we could probably use deductive methods to pinpoint that problem.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Bit by bit (test it on Foobar2000) literally, the two files (ALAC and FLAC) are the same.

Lossless is lossless, and to tote that term w/o doing it is just plain lies.

Me too at first, thought FLAC was more open than ALAC, but as I tuned not my ears but my mind in the following days, I found out that it was all placebo.

When you sit through a day of ABX'ing, it feels like this crazy revelation thing that you know how badly your mind has been tricking you all along.

 

[K2Grey]

Okay. GDG. I want you to take a look at the following two threads, in order, started by the same poster (read through the entire threads):

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=63803
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=66150

Explain to me how your situation is different from his.

 

[gdg]

Not interested. I don't respond well to be "told" what to do and I have no intention of getting further involved in the petty foolishness I've encountered here.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg Not interested. I don't respond well to be "told" what to do and I have no intention of getting further involved in the petty foolishness I've encountered here.

Just curious... what was your purpose in starting this thread. Just to make the declaration and blow people's minds that five is really not equal to five? Or did you want to find out why you were perceiving something that doesn't really make sense. Or what? Maybe I've just read too much by now, but your point is lost on me.

P.S. did you check your iPod settings as people suggested? That seems to me to be the likely culprit, that it's treating .wav and apple lossless files differently.

 

[K2Grey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg Not interested. I don't respond well to be "told" what to do and I have no intention of getting further involved in the petty foolishness I've encountered here.

The two links are by the same poster. The first thread is where he talks about how WAV was clearly superior to various formats, both lossy and lossless, on the iPod. When confronted with the naysayers he engages in arguing with a great deal of emotion, just like you have been doing. The second thread is after he does about as good a blind test as possible with 1 person and the iPod, in which he was unable to differentiate between LAME alt-preset-standard mp3 (inferior to current v2) and WAV.

The resources are readily available to you to find that you are not unprecedented in these claims of lossless codecs possessing actual sound quality differences. The resources are also readily available to you to see how these claims have turned out in the past, and why people have grown tired of answering them at this point. The resources are also available to you to examine a previous case of this which is nearly identical to the one you are in right now. Not only have I found the links for you and posted them together for your viewing, I have also summarized them for you and anyone else who wishes to gain some kind of minor knowledge out of this.

If after all this you refuse to read the links when they have been placed right in front of you along with a well-meaning explanation of why you should read them, then that is just more or less a paragon example of willful ignorance which invites comparisons to Galileo thrusting a telescope in front of someone who claimed the moon was of perfect material and construction and that person refusing to look through it.

 

[mbd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ObiHuang Whoever invented audiophile adjectives should be shot.

Perhaps .

I found this glossary helpful in trying to figure out what people were talking about;