Let's Talk Computer Audio

[rbbert]

~400 MB / disc (FLAC) x 12,000 = 4,800,000 MB isn't going to fit on any 4 TB hard drive, even if you would want to use one (I notice a significant difference in access speed between 3 TB and 2 TB drives, and that's for much smaller files than a typical music file). Just sayin'

 

[edorr]

~400 MB / disc (FLAC) x 12,000 = 4,800,000 MB isn't going to fit on any 4 TB hard drive, even if you would want to use one (I notice a significant difference in access speed between 3 TB and 2 TB drives, and that's for much smaller files than a typical music file). Just sayin'

Let's get real here. If each CD is 50 minutes of music, you would need to listen for 4 hours a day, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year for the next 10 years to make it through your collection. Why on earth would you want to rip all this?

 

[asiufy]

It's not about listening to it all, but having easy access to everything, without leaving your chair.

I'm up to almost 9000 CDs, and I'm ripping them all. Not done yet, as it's taking forever (of course), but as it is, it's very enjoyable to just sit down, put iTunes on "random" and enjoy the selection


alexandre

 

[edorr]

It's not about listening to it all, but having easy access to everything, without leaving your chair.

I'm up to almost 9000 CDs, and I'm ripping them all. Not done yet, as it's taking forever (of course), but as it is, it's very enjoyable to just sit down, put iTunes on "random" and enjoy the selection


alexandre

I'm with you. Although I never use random play, I always put together custom playlist picking individual tracks from various albums based on my mood. Obviously, not possible with physical media.

 

[FrantzM]

rbbert

Most CDs are less than 400 MB ... in FLAC .. The point you want to miss is that storage is inexpensive and gettig more so by the day ... So have your collection on multiple HDD or a larger NAS, .. but again if you don't want to ... well fine ... again Kudos to your storage a retrieval skills: they are exceptional ...

 

[mauidan]

Empirical Audio(EA) exhibited at Newport Beach in room 206 at the Atrium.

System: Mac Minis running Amarra 4318/19 driving an EA Off-Ramp 5 with OTL mod and then EA BNC-BNC cable to a fully optioned EA Overdrive SE DAC. The EA OR5 will be powered by a Hynes supply as well as the Mac Mini. Balanced cables will run from the Overdrive SE to an Ea Final Drive transformer buffer and SE cables to Arte Forma tube monoblocks at 40WPC each powering Vapor Audio Nimbus speakers.

They did a demo of .wav versus AIFF files.

Did anyone hear this demo, if so, which format did you prefer?

 

[Julf]

They did a demo of .wav versus AIFF files.

Did they tell which was which as/before you heard them, or only after you had given your verdict?

 

[rbbert]

According to posts elsewhere, it was single-blind and listeners overwhelmingly preferred WAV

 

[Julf]

According to posts elsewhere, it was single-blind and listeners overwhelmingly preferred WAV

So either the people conducting the test were really bad at hiding their expectations, or the real-time AIFF decoder they were using was not very good...

 

[Bruce B]

So either the people conducting the test were really bad at hiding their expectations, or the real-time AIFF decoder they were using was not very good...

I suspect the latter. I have done this hundereds of times and have not heard a difference on proper systems.

 

[Andre Marc]

I suspect the latter. I have done this hundereds of times and have not heard a difference on proper systems.

Bruce, I am very curious if you have heard a difference with FLAC/ALAC vs WAV/AIFF.

 

[Bruce B]

Bruce, I am very curious if you have heard a difference with FLAC/ALAC vs WAV/AIFF.

I have done comparisons with FLAC vs. WAV and AIFF vs. WAV. I have not done ALAC vs. AIFF.

On a properly set up computer using approved divers and standard software players, there is no difference. The only difference between them is how some players work. I have tested a few players that made them sound different. This was not the fault of the format. Instead, the software drivers/engines were making them different.

Using DAW software (ie: Pyramix, Sonar, Sequoia/Samplitude, SoundForge, Pro Tools), these formats sound identical.

 

[microstrip]

(...) On a properly set up computer using approved divers and standard software players, there is no difference. (...)

Bruce,
I hope that if I ask what is a properly set up computer you will not answer that it is one that makes these formats sound identical?

 

[Andre Marc]

I have done comparisons with FLAC vs. WAV and AIFF vs. WAV. I have not done ALAC vs. AIFF.

On a properly set up computer using approved divers and standard software players, there is no difference. The only difference between them is how some players work. I have tested a few players that made them sound different. This was not the fault of the format. Instead, the software drivers/engines were making them different.

Using DAW software (ie: Pyramix, Sonar, Sequoia/Samplitude, SoundForge, Pro Tools), these formats sound identical.

That has been my experience as well. On streamers I can hear zero difference between formats.

With files being played from memory, I really don't know why there would be.

Audiophiles exaggerate differences between most things, and computer audio is hog heaven for this scenario
because of the endless variables. I'd still love to know how hard drives can "sound" different.

 

[Andre Marc]

Bruce,
I hope that if I ask what is a properly set up computer you will not answer that it is one that makes these formats sound identical?

So what is a "properly" set up computer?

 

[mauidan]

So what is a "properly" set up computer?

Here's Empirical Audio's MAC OS and hardware tweaks:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=105944.0

 

[rbbert]

Here's Empirical Audio's MAC OS and hardware tweaks:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=105944.0

So this would be an example of a not properly set up computer?

 

[JackD201]

That has been my experience as well. On streamers I can hear zero difference between formats.

With files being played from memory, I really don't know why there would be.

Audiophiles exaggerate differences between most things, and computer audio is hog heaven for this scenario
because of the endless variables. I'd still love to know how hard drives can "sound" different.

A decade ago latency was a big problem. Native computing power was insufficient and you needed external boxes from Digi and higher rpm drives. The first Protools LE would crap out on a Powerbook Black and Titanium.

I wonder if that could be true today with domestic players and hi-sampling rate files since there is more data spread out through more sectors.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Bruce,
I hope that if I ask what is a properly set up computer you will not answer that it is one that makes these formats sound identical?

I think he already did.

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

So what is a "properly" set up computer?

A "not" properly set up computer is a computer that is used for everything from gaming to video processing and internet. It is also full of malware, improper drivers, drives that are not defragged, not enough memory, music files on the same drive as the OS, cards using the same bus and everything else you can think of. You'd be surprised at what I've seen.

The best computers are dedicated music players, preferably not connected to the net, plenty of RAM, updated OS and drivers, separate drives for music files and limited connections.