+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45

Thread: In the process of converting Flac files to Wav..have I gone mad!? Well, no actually..

  1. #11
    Join Date: Feb 2008

    Location: Down South

    Posts: 2,413
    I'm Neal.

    Default

    Lets reiterate whats been said up thread it's not the file format itself but the on-the-fly transcoding that seems to bring about the apparent audible difference some peopple detect. Personally I've not noticed it and IVe done the Foobar ABX thing. What mechanism is at play here is anybody's guess.

    On the file type itself, If you take a Wav file, create a duplicate, encode the duplicate, manually decode the Flac back to Wav and compare the duplicate to the original you will not find a difference. Perform a binary compare between the two and they will be identical.
    Listening in a Foo free Zone...

    Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

  2. #12
    Join Date: Nov 2010

    Location: Coventry

    Posts: 3,039
    I'm Will.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clive View Post
    It seems that most dacs do very little internal buffering (even though they often claim differently).
    I'm not sure what size the M-DAC's buffer is, however it's very obvious that the DAC is drawing it's data source from there, and there alone...so asynchronous, and subject to it's own timing constraints, which should theoretically remove jitter.

    It's quite easy to see that the buffer is the soul source, there is a buffer level meter. Whenever there is a dropout in the buffer there is a dropout in the sound. If you try to use an SBTouch with an M-DAC without a USB hub you'll get plenty of these

    With a hub it's solid at 50%
    Cheers, Will

  3. #13
    Join Date: Nov 2008

    Location: Valley of the Hazels

    Posts: 9,139
    I'm AMusicFanNotAnAudiophile.

    Default

    I can't be arsed with all this mucking about with formats lark - I just play music these days
    Chris



    Common sense isn't anymore!

  4. #14
    Join Date: Apr 2008

    Location: Cheshire, UK

    Posts: 2,829
    I'm Clive.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WAD62 View Post
    I'm not sure what size the M-DAC's buffer is, however it's very obvious that the DAC is drawing it's data source from there, and there alone...so asynchronous, and subject to it's own timing constraints, which should theoretically remove jitter.

    It's quite easy to see that the buffer is the soul source, there is a buffer level meter. Whenever there is a dropout in the buffer there is a dropout in the sound. If you try to use an SBTouch with an M-DAC without a USB hub you'll get plenty of these

    With a hub it's solid at 50%
    I can't speak for the M-DAC as I've not played with one. What I do know it that JPLAY users report gains in sound quality due to reductions in buffers on the PC side even with async DACs using their own internal buffers. It's one of those things that is strange; you'd think that once the data is lined up in a DAC's buffer the manner in which it arrived should not matter, therefore Foobar, Jriver, JPLAY etc should all sound 100% identical if setup bitperfect. But they don't.
    TT 1 Trans-Fi Salvation with magnetic bearing + Trans-Fi Terminator T3Pro + London Reference
    TT 2 Garrard 301 with NWA main bearing + Audiomods Series Six 10.5" + Ortofon 2M Mono SE
    Digital Lindemann Bridge + Gustard R26 with LB external clock
    Pre and Power Amp EWA M40P + M40A
    Bass Amp & DSP Behringer iNuke NU3000DSP x 2
    Speakers 1 Bastanis Sagarmatha Duo with twin baffleless 15" bass drivers per side
    Speakers 2 MarkaudioSota Viotti Tower

  5. #15
    Join Date: Apr 2011

    Location: Kingston, Surrey, UK

    Posts: 774
    I'm Alex.

    Default

    I did some testing with a squeezebox touch and server transcoding from FLAC to WAV a while back. I found that transcoding FLAC files to WAVs on the server rather than the Squeezebox Touch it increased CPU utilisation of the SBT about 25%. I presume this is the overhead of managing the network interface and buffer management within the Touch.

    I thought that this was interesting as the rationale of using the touch toolbox 3.0 etc was to eliminate extra processing and allow the CPU to idle more, but this theory didn't appear to be bourne out in practice.

    I couldn't tell the difference in a randomised play of WAV and FLAC versions of the same file either at all, despite listening hard for the increased openness etc. It sounds great either way to me, so I am pleased not to be suffering from format anxiety any more - am sticking with FLAC.

    Cheers,
    Alex
    Technics SL1210| Jelco SA-750| Benz Micro ACE SM MC| Squeezebox Touch/MCRU linear PSU | Cambridge Audio 851C | High Resolution Music Streamer II+ / Linestreamer+ | Raspberry Pi 2/IQ-Audio DAC+ / Max2Play | Conrad-Johnson ET3 Control Amplifier| Conrad-Johnson LP125sa KT120 Power Amplifier| Avalon NP Evo 2.0 Speakers| Cardas Audio Quadlink-5C Speaker Cables and Interconnects| Finite Elemente Pagode Signature E-14 equipment support

  6. #16
    Join Date: Nov 2008

    Location: Valley of the Hazels

    Posts: 9,139
    I'm AMusicFanNotAnAudiophile.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexM View Post
    I couldn't tell the difference in a randomised play of WAV and FLAC versions of the same file either at all, despite listening hard for the increased openness etc. It sounds great either way to me, so I am pleased not to be suffering from format anxiety any more - am sticking with FLAC.

    Cheers,
    Alex
    It's a good place to be
    Chris



    Common sense isn't anymore!

  7. #17
    Join Date: Oct 2008

    Location: Glasgowshire

    Posts: 9,675
    I'm Gary.

    Default

    Agreed!

    Always happy to find cheap (i.e. free) things that can add to the enjoyment of my music.
    Its something I'll do once and forget about, its all automated in Jriver so not a drama.

    No anxiety just curiosity.

  8. #18
    Join Date: Apr 2011

    Location: Kingston, Surrey, UK

    Posts: 774
    I'm Alex.

    Default

    Gary,

    Just out of curiosity, have you ever tried or noticed this difference using SPDIF, or do you connect to the MDAC via USB only?. I am wondering if this is a PC-specific difference, and whether the Windows software/driver stack is affected by FLAC decoding and USB processing. I know you said that you said you saw an improvement on the SBT too, but maybe it is DAC specific (I presume you were using a DAC with the SBT - which one?).

    I have to say that in my system at least, I am not yet totally convinced that async USB is the panacea that it is cracked up to be. In fact, I am finding SPDIF to sound significantly better than USB with the SB Touch and my Cambridge Azur 851C. I have yet to try this via my laptop, but I think I may revisit this.

    Cheers,
    Alex
    Technics SL1210| Jelco SA-750| Benz Micro ACE SM MC| Squeezebox Touch/MCRU linear PSU | Cambridge Audio 851C | High Resolution Music Streamer II+ / Linestreamer+ | Raspberry Pi 2/IQ-Audio DAC+ / Max2Play | Conrad-Johnson ET3 Control Amplifier| Conrad-Johnson LP125sa KT120 Power Amplifier| Avalon NP Evo 2.0 Speakers| Cardas Audio Quadlink-5C Speaker Cables and Interconnects| Finite Elemente Pagode Signature E-14 equipment support

  9. #19
    Alex_UK's Avatar
    Alex_UK is offline Spotify + Facebook Moderator / Chilled-Out Wino and only here for the shilling
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Sunny Suffolk, UK

    Posts: 16,037
    I'm WrappingALilacCurtainAroundMyBobby.

    Default

    Gaz - do you use "Play Files From Memory Instead of Disk" in Jriver Media Center?

    I do - and I can't detect a difference between FLAC and WAV. My theory is that it unpacks the FLAC file to WAV before buffering in memory so by chosing this, so you are effectively playing WAV anyway... As I said MY theory, and not sure if it is how it works or not.

    I'm certainly not going to convert nearly 2TB of FLACs back to WAV though, as I just can't tell the difference.
    Alex

    Main System: Digital: HP Laptop/M2Tech Hiface/Logitech Media Server/FLAC; Marantz SA7001 KI Signature SACD Player and other digital stuff into Gatorised Beresford Caiman DAC Vinyl: Garrard 401/SME 3009 SII Improved/Sumiko HS/Nagaoka MP-30
    Amplifier: Rega Brio R. Speakers: Spendor SP1. Cables: Various, mainly Mark Grant.
    Please see "about me" for the rest of my cr@p! Gallery


    A.o.S. on Facebook - A.o.S. on Spotify - A.o.S. on Twitter

    There is only one way to avoid criticism: do nothing, say nothing and be nothing Aristotle

  10. #20
    Join Date: Oct 2008

    Location: Glasgowshire

    Posts: 9,675
    I'm Gary.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexM View Post
    Gary,

    Just out of curiosity, have you ever tried or noticed this difference using SPDIF, or do you connect to the MDAC via USB only?. I am wondering if this is a PC-specific difference, and whether the Windows software/driver stack is affected by FLAC decoding and USB processing. I know you said that you said you saw an improvement on the SBT too, but maybe it is DAC specific (I presume you were using a DAC with the SBT - which one?).

    I have to say that in my system at least, I am not yet totally convinced that async USB is the panacea that it is cracked up to be. In fact, I am finding SPDIF to sound significantly better than USB with the SB Touch and my Cambridge Azur 851C. I have yet to try this via my laptop, but I think I may revisit this.

    Cheers,
    Alex
    Hi Alex,
    I take USB out from my server into a Vlink 192.
    Its coax spdif from there into my Rega dac.
    The Rega doesn't do 24/96 over usb hence the Vlink converter.

    USB direct from the server doesn't sound as good as usb/spdif converted from the Vlink.

    I bypass the Windows audio subsystem completely by outputting audio with Jriver set to "Wasapi Event Style exclusive access" output.
    This enables the bitstream to pass to the Dac unaltered.

    With the Touch I felt the improvement came from minimising the strain on its limited resources by getting the server to do the Flac>PCM number crunching.
    The difference in the PC sound is similar but comes more from (imo) the additional on-the-fly processing rather than limited resources.

    What I feel I have maybe done is take an unnecessary step out the chain?
    Last edited by Gazjam; 01-11-2012 at 13:14.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •