Why do CDs sound better than loss less audio files?

Mar 13, 2013 at 3:42 PM Post #61 of 168
Quote:
I download those APE and WAV files online, didn't have much FLAC experience because didn't favour by the place where i pay to download.

I think we can stop discussing here. Do a proper lossless rip of a CD you bought and compare the two. You'll find they sound identical because they are identical.
 
Use the same application to play the audio CD and the lossless file. Preferrably FLAC.
 
Mar 13, 2013 at 9:40 PM Post #62 of 168
Quote:
I am here to look for answers, not to prove anything to anyone. Even you guys believe in me so what? I still didn't get the answer. By the way what's your theory behind ABX check and how will it help, please clarify


You won't find an answer though, as the case in point is, if you are using the same audio DAC, and outputs, then FLAC and CD Audio will sound exactly the same!
You need someone to blindfold you, and play random flacs and CD's from the source.
Then give your results.
 
If you don't do that, there is no reason at all to believe you.
 
Maybe possibly in a different room too so you can't hear the CD spinning up.
 
Heck, I'd be tempted to simply play FLAC's constantly to you, and hope that you notice a difference between 2 identical FLAC files
 
Mar 14, 2013 at 4:38 AM Post #63 of 168
Quote:
You won't find an answer though, as the case in point is, if you are using the same audio DAC, and outputs, then FLAC and CD Audio will sound exactly the same!
You need someone to blindfold you, and play random flacs and CD's from the source.
Then give your results.
 
If you don't do that, there is no reason at all to believe you.
 
Maybe possibly in a different room too so you can't hear the CD spinning up.
 
Heck, I'd be tempted to simply play FLAC's constantly to you, and hope that you notice a difference between 2 identical FLAC files

 
I don't think i may able to notice a difference between 2 identical FLAC, if its using the same system and source. If you burnt it into CD-R and playing one from there that's another case. I would like to know what audio system you're using and will it differ or not..
 
Anyway, like I said, the difference its obvious like you're listening 320kbps MP3 compare to CD quality music. furthermore, I usually blindfold my friend and they prefer CD-R than harddisk too...
 
Okie... hmmm... I don't know what's your experience in CD audio... when listening to CD, you guys ever notice that playing the same track again and again makes it sound better? and usually it will maintain the same from the third time onwards. Now don't tell me its a mind thing, many of my known audiophile knows about this. In fact I didn't notice it until they tell me to try it on my system. Yes, i mean playing the same CD, using the same player, and repeat the same track, the third time onwards it sound the best out of the CD. Find it bazaar? can't believe it? but it does sound difference. FYI on this matter my system didn't sound much different, just noticable. but on my friend system its quite obvious, he is using macintosh player with premium amps and speakers.
 
Mar 14, 2013 at 5:35 AM Post #64 of 168
Quote:
I think we can stop discussing here. Do a proper lossless rip of a CD you bought and compare the two. You'll find they sound identical because they are identical.
 
Use the same application to play the audio CD and the lossless file. Preferrably FLAC.

 
I think I'll do that when I am free, recently quite busy even reply this forum need to sqeeze some time out for it... I want to now how's the result too.. will update you after trying that.
 
Mar 14, 2013 at 7:49 AM Post #65 of 168
Quote:
 
 
Okie... hmmm... I don't know what's your experience in CD audio... when listening to CD, you guys ever notice that playing the same track again and again makes it sound better? and usually it will maintain the same from the third time onwards. Now don't tell me its a mind thing, many of my known audiophile knows about this. In fact I didn't notice it until they tell me to try it on my system. Yes, i mean playing the same CD, using the same player, and repeat the same track, the third time onwards it sound the best out of the CD. Find it bazaar? can't believe it? but it does sound difference. FYI on this matter my system didn't sound much different, just noticable. but on my friend system its quite obvious, he is using macintosh player with premium amps and speakers.

Who are these "known audiophiles"? 
 
And the fact that you only noticed it after these "known audiophiles" told you about it shows that it's a psychological thing!
 
I'm sorry but that is just absolutely ridiculous. I find it hard to believe you aren't just messing with us now.
 
Mar 14, 2013 at 12:46 PM Post #68 of 168
Quote:
 
I don't think i may able to notice a difference between 2 identical FLAC, if its using the same system and source. If you burnt it into CD-R and playing one from there that's another case. I would like to know what audio system you're using and will it differ or not..
 
Anyway, like I said, the difference its obvious like you're listening 320kbps MP3 compare to CD quality music. furthermore, I usually blindfold my friend and they prefer CD-R than harddisk too...

These results are based on non-scientific testing (I know you said "blindfold", but that's not sufficient).  They technically are subjective opinion, and may be the result of influence.  By the way, I never consider things like this "invalid" for the individual, just not scientifically and repeatably valid in general.  That means, if you hear something that makes you happy, go with it.
 
Quote:
Okie... hmmm... I don't know what's your experience in CD audio... when listening to CD, you guys ever notice that playing the same track again and again makes it sound better? and usually it will maintain the same from the third time onwards. Now don't tell me its a mind thing, many of my known audiophile knows about this.

Now, this may sound personal, I don't mean it that way. "Now don't tell me its a mind thing," indicates strong bias.  Bias strongly affects perception.  In order to test perception on it's own, you have to completely eliminate bias.  The test for the repeated CD playing effect is complex enough that it will probably never be done, which means this effect will always remain in its current status of unverifiable results.  
 
To test for the change in sound with repeated playings of the same CD you'd have to have a stack of identical, fresh CDs, and a group of test listeners.  There would be two identical players, probably the highest-end units possible.  The system would be a high resolution audiophile-accepted system in a well treated room.  They would be presented with the choices of A, B, and X.  In the test, A is a well-played CD.  B is a brand new unplayed CD, and X is randomly assigned to be either A or B, unknown to the listener.  Their task is to listen, as long as they like, then match X to A or B.  Each would have between 16 and 20 trials.  Then you'd need about 20 or 30 listeners.  Their scores are then compiled, and analyzed.  The degree to which the average score deviates from 50% (guessing) would indicate the degree of audibility of the effect.  The reason for all the trials and all the listeners is to improve the test resolution around the 50% point to be able to discern a real trend from guessing.  It may also be good to swap which player has the fresh vs well-played CD half way through to spot a player-specific bias.
 
Now the point is, not that the test would or could be done, but that any other test methodology will have its results skewed by bias.    
 
When someone presents you with a listening evaluation test of any kind, but tells you in advance what to expect to hear, you can stop right there.  The results are biased by expectations.  And, the person introducing the bias could be yourself, expecting the difference and fulfilling that expectation.  This is the same problem you're experiencing with your CD vs Lossless comparison.  The primary issue is pre-existing bias, and secondarily a somewhat different audio path.  If you could eliminate those two issues, then and only then will you be making a true comparison between CD and FLAC.  But, to actually prove the difference, it has to be a double-blind test with 20 trials, and hopefully, more than one listener.  
 
How about an intermediate step: make some audio measurements on each source all the way through to the output to your headphones or speakers?   FR and distortion measurements might just tell you something.
 
By the way, your susceptibility to bias doesn't in any way denigrate you.  It means you're human, and all humans are susceptible to bias, often especially the ones who believe they aren't, which is in itself a bias.
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 11:28 AM Post #69 of 168
Quote:
Now, this may sound personal, I don't mean it that way. "Now don't tell me its a mind thing," indicates strong bias.  Bias strongly affects perception.  In order to test perception on it's own, you have to completely eliminate bias.  The test for the repeated CD playing effect is complex enough that it will probably never be done, which means this effect will always remain in its current status of unverifiable results.  
 
To test for the change in sound with repeated playings of the same CD you'd have to have a stack of identical, fresh CDs, and a group of test listeners.  There would be two identical players, probably the highest-end units possible.  The system would be a high resolution audiophile-accepted system in a well treated room.  They would be presented with the choices of A, B, and X.  In the test, A is a well-played CD.  B is a brand new unplayed CD, and X is randomly assigned to be either A or B, unknown to the listener.  Their task is to listen, as long as they like, then match X to A or B.  Each would have between 16 and 20 trials.  Then you'd need about 20 or 30 listeners.  Their scores are then compiled, and analyzed.  The degree to which the average score deviates from 50% (guessing) would indicate the degree of audibility of the effect.  The reason for all the trials and all the listeners is to improve the test resolution around the 50% point to be able to discern a real trend from guessing.  It may also be good to swap which player has the fresh vs well-played CD half way through to spot a player-specific bias.
 
Now the point is, not that the test would or could be done, but that any other test methodology will have its results skewed by bias.    
 
When someone presents you with a listening evaluation test of any kind, but tells you in advance what to expect to hear, you can stop right there.  The results are biased by expectations.  And, the person introducing the bias could be yourself, expecting the difference and fulfilling that expectation.  This is the same problem you're experiencing with your CD vs Lossless comparison.  The primary issue is pre-existing bias, and secondarily a somewhat different audio path.  If you could eliminate those two issues, then and only then will you be making a true comparison between CD and FLAC.  But, to actually prove the difference, it has to be a double-blind test with 20 trials, and hopefully, more than one listener.  
 
How about an intermediate step: make some audio measurements on each source all the way through to the output to your headphones or speakers?   FR and distortion measurements might just tell you something.
 
By the way, your susceptibility to bias doesn't in any way denigrate you.  It means you're human, and all humans are susceptible to bias, often especially the ones who believe they aren't, which is in itself a bias.

 
You got the point, I would gladly participate if there's someone organise session like what you said. However, the CD vs Lossless thingy... I always believe CD will either be the same, or loss abit compare to the lossless. Until one day I realize my ear tell me different. That's why I go online and search for other listener opinion didn't I?
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 11:41 AM Post #70 of 168
Quote:
Who are these "known audiophiles"? 
 
And the fact that you only noticed it after these "known audiophiles" told you about it shows that it's a psychological thing!
 
I'm sorry but that is just absolutely ridiculous. I find it hard to believe you aren't just messing with us now.

 
Even i mention those audiophiles name you would not know them would you? He is a Phd in University Kebangsaan Malaysia. we call him Lim and I don't know his full name. Know this person at KF audio located at KL, malaysia. He is the one that told me that CD will sound better when you repeat the same track for several times. And I tried out my CD in his system. At KF audio many people know this, the boss Mr.Foon, and another audiophile Mr. Francis for example.
 
Well... I always listen to the CD from the beginning till the end, rarely repeat a song over and over again and like I said, my system is not obvious but noticeable...
 
Yes, its ridiculos. I can't think of a reason that's why I try to find answer over here didn't I ? well.. I am not a person that would spend so much time messing around, there's better things to do anyway... By the way.. try it on your CD player, you might notice a difference
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 11:45 AM Post #71 of 168
Quote:
It's as if there is a secret contest somewhere for the most idiotic claims about audio… There is some true creativity at work here.

Reminds me of this: Ripping CD's in Safemode sounds much better...

 
Well... I don't know what's good for you saying that. but its rude and no manner. Remind me of someone who disbelieve in god and call people that go to chruch is idiot
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 12:01 PM Post #73 of 168
Chewy4, I did ask Phd.Lim why playing the same track over and over again will sound better. He said he don't know, but he's guessing maybe when the CD get's warmer, its easier to read by the reader ?
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 12:41 PM Post #74 of 168
omegalau, please stop making these utter BS claims.
 
Mar 15, 2013 at 1:06 PM Post #75 of 168
Quote:
Chewy4, I did ask Phd.Lim why playing the same track over and over again will sound better. He said he don't know, but he's guessing maybe when the CD get's warmer, its easier to read by the reader ?

Easier to read? Its not going to be picking up extra bits of information as it gets warmer as to when its cold. Its picking up digital data. 0's and 1's.
 
The only possible way you can be telling a difference is psycological.
 
Unless you are using different DAC's, AMP's, Software from when playing a FLAC, than with playing a CD, it will sound exactly the same.
No point arguing differently.
 
Oh, and I'm not at all religious.
 
Isn't it funny though how all people that believe to hear a difference don't want to TEST their theories?
 
EDIT;
 
I actually read through all that SAFE MODE thread only to have it closed before Erin could post his results from the test posted. Nice.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top