John Duncan
Well-known member
- Jan 8, 2008
- 2,034
- 30
- 19,720
-
Is OLED burn-in a problem? We want your input on one of TV’s hottest topics!
The Linn DS system has no inherent advantage over a SB as both are capable of sourcing music data from a NAS. The SB can then feed a good quality DAC. The SB totally bypasses a PC.
Manicm, you have to remember that whatever lossless format you use it has to be uncompressed to a WAV file containing PCM. This conversion will take place before the OS has a chance to interfere with it, therefore all lossless formats will sound the same on any given PC/OS. It was not that long ago that I seem to remember you tried to argue that you could hear a difference between the various lossless formats through the line out on your dell laptop 😛.
Manicm, you have to remember that whatever lossless format you use it has to be uncompressed to a WAV file containing PCM. This conversion will take place before the OS has a chance to interfere with it, therefore all lossless formats will sound the same on any given PC/OS. It was not that long ago that I seem to remember you tried to argue that you could hear a difference between the various lossless formats through the line out on your dell laptop 😛.
Ok, here goes - I'm sure I'll get some flack (no pun intended) for this, but what's new? Okay, to set this up - I used a piece of music which I love and am very familiar with, Mozart's Clarinet Concerto, 1st Movement. I have a dozen or so different recordings of this work on CD and LP, and have heard it numerous times live. I'm am currently away from home, in Moscow, and used my girlfriend's MacBook (1st or 2nd generation, not sure). To listen I used my trusty pair of Sennheiser HD-25 headphones plugged into the headphone socket of the MacBook. The recording used was the Karl Bohm/VPO version on the DG Originals label. All listening was done in a single session.
Rip 1 was done with AIFF (settings were 44.1kHz, 16 bit, Stereo). Didn't sound too bad playing it back from the HDD, not great, but not awful, the tempo was a bit sluggish. I deleted that then Rip 2 was done via Apple Lossless (settings are auto only). Listening to it via the HDD was much better, the tempo was much more, how shall I put it?... 'excitable'? But with that came a certain lack of control to the music. Overall though a much more enjoyable experience. I deleted Rip 2, then Rip 3 was done via WAV (settings were same as AIFF). This was the best yet, tempo was far more 'correct' and instruments had a more natural timbre and presence. This is the Clarinet Concerto I know and love!!
These results somewhat surprised me given that lossless is supposed to be the same quality, regardless, and also because the major differences between all 3 were to do with tempo and timing, rather than out and out 'sound quality'. Finally, I deleted Rip 3 and just listened direct from the CD. This was marginally better than the WAV rip, tempo was right on the money again but detail and presence were noticeably, but not drastically, improved.
Make of this what you will. If there is anything wrong with my method or you think I have got anything wrong at all, please discuss - politely! - I will try again. I am very interested in feedback on this issue. I will also try the same test some time in the near future listening to tracks transferred to my iPod from rips via the different lossless formats to see if any further differences exist.
Rip 1 was done with AIFF (settings were 44.1kHz, 16 bit, Stereo). Didn't sound too bad playing it back from the HDD, not great, but not awful, the tempo was a bit sluggish. I deleted that then Rip 2 was done via Apple Lossless (settings are auto only). Listening to it via the HDD was much better, the tempo was much more, how shall I put it?... 'excitable'? But with that came a certain lack of control to the music. Overall though a much more enjoyable experience. I deleted Rip 2, then Rip 3 was done via WAV (settings were same as AIFF). This was the best yet, tempo was far more 'correct' and instruments had a more natural timbre and presence. This is the Clarinet Concerto I know and love!!
These results somewhat surprised me given that lossless is supposed to be the same quality, regardless, and also because the major differences between all 3 were to do with tempo and timing, rather than out and out 'sound quality'. Finally, I deleted Rip 3 and just listened direct from the CD. This was marginally better than the WAV rip, tempo was right on the money again but detail and presence were noticeably, but not drastically, improved.
Make of this what you will. If there is anything wrong with my method or you think I have got anything wrong at all, please discuss - politely! - I will try again. I am very interested in feedback on this issue. I will also try the same test some time in the near future listening to tracks transferred to my iPod from rips via the different lossless formats to see if any further differences exist.
Tear Drop:Ok, here goes - I'm sure I'll get some flack (no pun intended) for this, but what's new? Okay, to set this up - I used a piece of music which I love and am very familiar with, Mozart's Clarinet Concerto, 1st Movement. I have a dozen or so different recordings of this work on CD and LP, and have heard it numerous times live. I'm am currently away from home, in Moscow, and used my girlfriend's MacBook (1st or 2nd generation, not sure). To listen I used my trusty pair of Sennheiser HD-25 headphones plugged into the headphone socket of the MacBook. The recording used was the Karl Bohm/VPO version on the DG Originals label. All listening was done in a single session. Rip 1 was done with AIFF (settings were 44.1kHz, 16 bit, Stereo). Didn't sound too bad playing it back from the HDD, not great, but not awful, the tempo was a bit sluggish. I deleted that then Rip 2 was done via Apple Lossless (settings are auto only). Listening to it via the HDD was much better, the tempo was much more, how shall I put it?... 'excitable'? But with that came a certain lack of control to the music. Overall though a much more enjoyable experience. I deleted Rip 2, then Rip 3 was done via WAV (settings were same as AIFF). This was the best yet, tempo was far more 'correct' and instruments had a more natural timbre and presence. This is the Clarinet Concerto I know and love!! These results somewhat surprised me given that lossless is supposed to be the same quality, regardless, and also because the major differences between all 3 were to do with tempo and timing, rather than out and out 'sound quality'. Finally, I deleted Rip 3 and just listened direct from the CD. This was marginally better than the WAV rip, tempo was right on the money again but detail and presence were noticeably, but not drastically, improved. Make of this what you will. If there is anything wrong with my method or you think I have got anything wrong at all, please discuss - politely! - I will try again. I am very interested in feedback on this issue. I will also try the same test some time in the near future listening to tracks transferred to my iPod from rips via the different lossless formats to see if any further differences exist.
There are probably numerous factors here:
1. The media player - on Windows I find iTunes poor for playback, WMP always sounds better to me.
2. A PC requires some tweaking as an audio source, which brings me to...
3. Dedicated digital players like Linn DS (or Squeezebox) which handle lossless format decoding totally (think of them as alternatives to CD Players) and are ultimately a superior solution. Linn are adamant all lossless formats sound the same on their players.
There are probably numerous factors here:
1. The media player - on Windows I find iTunes poor for playback, WMP always sounds better to me.
2. A PC requires some tweaking as an audio source, which brings me to...
3. Dedicated digital players like Linn DS (or Squeezebox) which handle lossless format decoding totally (think of them as alternatives to CD Players) and are ultimately a superior solution. Linn are adamant all lossless formats sound the same on their players.
Grimaldi:The Linn DS system has no inherent advantage over a SB as both are capable of sourcing music data from a NAS. The SB can then feed a good quality DAC. The SB totally bypasses a PC. Manicm, you have to remember that whatever lossless format you use it has to be uncompressed to a WAV file containing PCM. This conversion will take place before the OS has a chance to interfere with it, therefore all lossless formats will sound the same on any given PC/OS. It was not that long ago that I seem to remember you tried to argue that you could hear a difference between the various lossless formats through the line out on your dell laptop 😛.
True, but Linn deliberately took the wired route - and I repeat that their players pull a file before playing it locally. AFAIK Squeezebox and Sonos audio quality can be affected by WLAN strength as by nature they are wireless systems - and I could be wrong but they don't pull a file and play it completely locally. Linn takes the approach that, wired being one reason, that as long as WLAN is stable audio quality is guaranteed. Also Sonos is certified to use NAS but not Squeezebox which is my one big gripe with it - it is possible but Logitech does not fully support it - this has to change.
True, but Linn deliberately took the wired route - and I repeat that their players pull a file before playing it locally. AFAIK Squeezebox and Sonos audio quality can be affected by WLAN strength as by nature they are wireless systems - and I could be wrong but they don't pull a file and play it completely locally. Linn takes the approach that, wired being one reason, that as long as WLAN is stable audio quality is guaranteed. Also Sonos is certified to use NAS but not Squeezebox which is my one big gripe with it - it is possible but Logitech does not fully support it - this has to change.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram