[dknightd]

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.

Then the moderators might as well lock this thread.
If you think WAV sounds better than alac, then use wav. Obviously there is no point in us trying to change your mind if you are not interested. Have fun.

 

[geforcewong]

I'll take the blue pill please.

 

[Brent Hutto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geforcewong I'll take the blue pill please.

I forget, is it the blue one that turns you into a mirror or the red one that plays the AB/HR test?

 

[geforcewong]

I'm talking about the Matrix

.

 

[vapman]

ALAC is smaller and supports ID3 tags and album artwork and all that. I blind tested it with my iPod Video and PX100's, no difference in quality to me. But lossless is lossless, right?

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch 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?

In the thread he started with an identical post at Audio Asylum, gdg explained that one of the reasons that he posted was "to allow further examination by someone who is more knowledgeable":

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg I understand that one can use Foobar to compare files bit for bit. I don't know how to do it myself but, as I've mentioned over at Headfi, I suspect that computer based encoding from one format to another is truly lossless. There may be something going on in the Ipod's algorith (when the compressed files are reexpanded) that is causing a problem. Who knows? It is highly puzzling and one of the reasons I bothered to post. Maybe a further examination by someone who is more knowledgeable may yield a solution. It is also possible I am uterly deluded but, in the past, I've found my perceptions to be quite accurate.

 

[Febs]

double post.

 

[ya8282]

Well, mystery solved on AudioAsylum, soundcheck was enabled

For the full thread:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pc...ges/14276.html

I am not discounting the possibility that he also may have a defective processor or defective firmware in his ipod. There are many things I would like to say in response to what he has written on both boards, but apparently you guys were already too hard on him as he claimed on AA.

 

[Nospam]

Well, having Soundcheck enabled definitely isn't good for sound quality in general, but wouldn't it have affected both ALAC and WAV files? Or does it only affect ALAC? Anyone?

BTW, I agree that we were a bit hard on him, but it wasn't anything more than what I've seen in other threads like this. When you make grandiose statements that contradict widely accepted facts, you have to realize that people will call you on it. He took everything as a personal attack, and you can see what resulted.

 

[gdg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nospam Well, having Soundcheck enabled definitely isn't good for sound quality in general, but wouldn't it have affected both ALAC and WAV files? Or does it only affect ALAC? Anyone? BTW, I agree that we were a bit hard on him, but it wasn't anything more than what I've seen in other threads like this. When you make grandiose statements that contradict widely accepted facts, you have to realize that people will call you on it. He took everything as a personal attack, and you can see what resulted.

Point taken, and I appreciate your comments. No harm no foul.

 

[K2Grey]

Well, let's say SoundCheck only affected ALAC. In that case the volume would be lower (perceived as worse) and also I think SC has problems ReplayGain does not. So that would definitely explain it.

 

[Nospam]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdg Point taken, and I appreciate your comments. No harm no foul.

Glad you feel that way. I totally see how you would feel people were ganging up on you, but it really wasn't because we wanted to "run the heretic out of town" or anything like that... At least I don't think so

Your posts in the other site show that you are more than capable of having a mature discussion without resorting to attacks (I'm still working on that myself

), so I hope you won't refrain from other topics because of how this one went.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K2Grey Well, let's say SoundCheck only affected ALAC. In that case the volume would be lower (perceived as worse) and also I think SC has problems ReplayGain does not. So that would definitely explain it.

Sounds plausible, but we don't know for certain. There's too much speculation about various things already, so it would be really helpful if someone knew where we could find the answer to this. Or maybe someone with better ears (and equipment) than I could test this somehow?

 

[gdg]

To tell you the truth I was seriously tempted to book out for good but there's way to much good stuff here.

 

[dknightd]

Soundcheck works by reading the tag named 'iTunNORM' in the song, and
adjusting the volume accordingly. Since WAV does not support tags, there is no
tag named 'iTunNORM', so no volume adjustment is made.

gdg, for the record, did you find that alac and wav sound the same if you
turn off soundcheck on your ipod? Or is there still a difference?

 

[gdg]

Hi D,
From what you are saying I had soundcheck essentially turned off because all my files start off as WAV (ripped to my Slimserver library using EAC). I then transfer into Itunes, add artist/title info manually for each CD, and convert to a different format there . That means the tag info you speak of isn't encoded and soundcheck can't work.
Gerry