dvavc

Q. I mean among all players digital and analog. It's not hard to build a world class computer that will better physical disc spinners and analog playback of any kind. A. Hold on, aren't you people just lost that point by default, i mean by failure to produce "miracle rip file" which matching or betters CD? Chris, let me ask you this: 1. Have you ever been posting here under different login names? 2. Does "computer audiophile" and/or 2007-2011 Audiophile Style, LLC employes a stuff, and/or contracting freelancers/independent contractors who answering the posts under different names posing as an independent hobbyists?

Q. Hi dvavc, I totally agree Hi dvavc, I totally agree with your posts I have ripped a lot of CD in WAV ( no data compression) to my PC´s HD using more than 1 cd/dvd drive and the end result was always the same. Playing the same track from the HD and directly from the original CD(with the same dc/dvd drive used for ripping) sound quite different. Useless to say that the original CD sound much better than playing from the HD. The differences I always notice are the ones you've already described. The tracks on the HD usually sound a bit harsher, some lack of low frequency presence and detail which leads to some loss of stereo dimension. Once you compare to the original you realize that listening to the copy is a much poor musical experience. The D/A path is the same for both cases as I am always using the same sound card. The digital stream processed by the sound card seems to be the same in both cases, as the digital data coming out of the cd/dvd drive while playing the original CD has no special encryption for any copy protection. I have ripped audio CD´s using EAC and some others but the end result is always the same. I know that reading data from audio CD is not the same as reading from a CD-Rom and so it is prone to some errors. Usually those error should be heard as some kind of pops. Instead, this sound differences look more like some kind of jitter effect that is present while playing the copy ( some kind of out of clock sync). By the way the same think happens to me with the DVD sound track when I rip a DVD-video. And here we don´t have those error problems as with a CD-A, because data in a DVD-Video is stored as files like in a CD-Rom. Once you descramble the data with DVDRipper you must get the exact audio and video content. I haven´t found any reasonable explanation for this audio differences. I searched on the web, posted in some other forums... I suppose the only way is to get access to the data stream the sound card is processing in either cases and try to figure out what is going on. I live in Portugal, so sorry for my English. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/CD-v-ripped-CD-files-inferior-Sound-quality

My point is that may be the DAC for $20000 can match analog rig for $3500? I'm just speculating out-loud. Q. I also built the computer Larry is using for his complete project. That computer is capable of the best playback I've heard. A. Do you mean among computers or among all playbacks available including CD transport/players? :~)

Q. Also attending the session were Chris Connaker, editor of Computer Audiophile - who will be writing up his impressions of the two days ... http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?646-A-ADDAC-and-Server-for-... A. So, did it ever happened? I mean review.

Well, this might be interesting. May be this one is capable sound as "inaccurate" and bad as LP ;~), at least they claim it has a soul. ;~) http://pic4.audiogon.com/i/c/f/1295210199.jpg But then again $20000 used and no parts to replace so, what is the point? Convenience? A bit price for that. http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?646-A-ADDAC-and-Server-for-My-Vinyl

Q. Well come on, the guy has invested a lot of money in his TEAC T-1 VRDS. Of course his mind is conditioned to believe there is a difference between the rip and the CD. He has to believe in the physical medium for his own sanity. Don't bother sending him a rip because even the most pristine rip will be judged to be inferior. A. i actually bought it for $500 Probably less than many of you spent on you comps. Also very useful link for many "audiophiles" http://www.miracle-ear.com/

Q. dvavc Why don't YOU rip a .wav file from a CD that many members are likely to have copies of, using EAC to verify that your rip is accurate, and then upload it via a service such as Filemail so that interested members can request a link from you with a view to hearing just how bad your ripped .wav file sounds ? They can then play their copy from a CD/DVD ROM and compare it with your ripped copy ? SandyK " A. Because it does not make any sense. I know my rip is inferior to CD, i don't need anybody else to tell me that. But on the other hand, if somebody claims that his rip is identical (or better ) than the original, then I want to hear such a "miracle file", compare it to the original, and either confirm to myself what i already know, i.e. that rip is in deed inferior to CD, and numerous "audiophiles" here need professional hearing help, or, alternatively, surprise myself with the discovery of my life, publicly acknowledge my wrong, store all my CDs on one large hard and live happily ever after . Does that makes sense?

Q. NO, I'm not sending you a ripped file because it would prove nothing to someone like you A. Ok, i think we clear on this issue. Riped files clearly inferior to CD. Your refusal to provide any proof of your B.S. are self-explanatory. Q. "I tried to answer some of your questions in good faith..." A. My questions???!!! Do you really believe I was asking you questions??? Where are they?))). George, you've got it all wrong. I wasted almost two days of my time, on desperate attempt to teach you - deaf, ignorant troll, of some of the basics of sound which i learned for 20 years of my audiophile experience. Man, you are soooo full of s#!t

Q. RE: George, you really got caught You don't understand. This is not just some "other people's theory". This is fact. If you actually understood digital quantization, you would know how utterly ridiculous is your proposition that an uncompressed or losslessly compressed rip could be missing information. Now, an MP3 rip CERTAINLY IS missing information, and yes, that can be heard if one knows what to listen for. But that's because MP3 is a lossy compression scheme whereby actual information in the music is purposely "thrown away", based on some algorithm that "decides" what is supposedly audible and what isn't, in order to make the file size smaller. If this is what you are talking about, then we have no argument, but understand, that in this thread, I have repeatedly and deliberately said that I'M talking about either raw, uncompressed rips or lossless rips. Q. If you are hearing missing information compared to a source CD, then either your equipment is faulty which is unlikely due to how digital actually works, or it's in your head or you are hearing compression artifacts. If your ripping software/hardware were actually dropping bits from the samples, CIRC or in the case of uncorrectable errors, interpolation, would replace them. So, rather than hearing "missing information" you would, at worst hear increased distortion. My money is on the latter. You are probably ripping your discs to lossy MP3 without realizing it, and then you're hearing compression artifacts - which DO exist and which are most assuredly audible. A friendly word of advice here. Try to learn about how digital quantization actually works before coming here and telling people that it doesn't work, because believe me it does. It is as incontrovertible as the multiplication tables and for much the same reasons. George A. No, really i refused to understand what is going on here. Geoge!!! i don't need any more of your B.S.!!! All i need from you is a ripped file in whatever format you want, or acknowledgment that you was wrong and i'm right. I DON"T NEED THIS "FRIENDLY ADVICE" and other B.S.!!! THAT IS ALL CRAP.!!! DID you finally get it?!!! FYI, I NEVER USED ANY OTHER FORMAT IN MY LIFE BUT RAW WAV!!! DID YOU FINALY GET IT?!!! Are you sending me a rip file or not???!!!

Q. "Ok, i really got to run to buy Beirut "Gulag Orkestar" on LP. They have it in my local music store. Umm... ))) Wish you were here :~))))" A. Nope, turned to be terrible recording . Don't buy it.

Q. Hi dvavc - I believe there is an insurmountable language barrier that's preventing me from moving forward in this discussion with you. Here's why. You said: "I can't care less as to which one is more accurate to the original. There are millions of other factors, besides accuracy, which turns sound in to the music and gives the illusion of the live event. The "soul of the music" "musicality" etc." I said: "I guess that solves the issue for me at least. We are really discussing what your prefer not what is closer to the original. We are discussing what distortions and alterations to an accurate signal that you like, not what is closer to the original." You said: "Chris... 1. You twisted everything upside down." A. No Chris, there is no language barrier in this instance. But for me to untwist the fur-ball of all those theories and arguments, which been made here for 2 days, and answer to your post, will take me another day, which i'm not going to waste, unless we finished with the "rip v. CD inferior sound quality" arguments. Therefore, i'm silently waiting to receive the rip file, which will prove to me that rip is 100% identical (or better :~ )) to same CD/cut and i was just doing something wrong while ripping my CDs (for million + times), or, in alternative, an admittance that I was right from the very beginning and rip is inferior (whether its minor or substantial) to the same CD because some information was faded. If and when we done with that, we can move back to the "analog v. digital" arguments.

Q. "Hi dvavc - I'm really beginning to think you are just trolling." Really? Chris, I don't know what trolling means, however what i do know that all my links were working yesterday and today for some reason they are not working. You know what i think i've had enough of this B.S. Some cool pix for the road for all of you http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vaslt&1225733731

firedog, and others. I really can't believe the B.S. which is happening here for the second day in a row. I'm telling you that I PERSONALLY (not somebody told me), clearly hearing ( for a million+ times) that rip is missing some information compare to sourced CD. Instead of putting your headphones on your heads and do A-B test and try to hear what i'm talking about, and if it is not there just send me your file that i can also hear that it is not there, you giving me a bunch of B.S. theories which suppose to convince me that whatever i'm hearing is actually not exist, because this guy said this and that guy said that and those guys are respectful engineers therefore what ever you dvavc is hearing can not exist according to these theories and therefor does not exist. Wow, that is plainly stupid. Read my prior thread on this subject http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/CD-v-ripped-CD-files-inferior-.... There are two or three other people who confirmed what i'm saying. Its a long disposed issue to me!!!

Chris, what happened to this thread which i'm referencing all over? http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/CD-v-ripped-CD-files-inferior-....

Q. Which information is missing, is it the trombones? Keith. A. No the whole orchestra have gone. It just a silence now. ;~)