Skip to main content

Topic: Level 5 to uncompressed (Read 3827 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • allhifi
  • [*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #50
Quote
I've heard the benefits of Uncompressed FLAC with my own ears...
Yeah! He heard it straight from the voices on his head. :D


Haaha, too funny ?

Right.

pj
Archiving in wav? That is also a nice way to give "bit rot" a free pass to your sound data without noticing it at first.
Flac uses checksums to ensure data is OK, and it has tagging and embedding functionality. It also mutes when a bad block is fed into the decoder.
Throwing that away without any gain, even giving up space for really no reason whatsoever.

Flac compression-decompression is many times faster than realtime, even on very slow pc's. With a slow harddrive you can even GAIN speed when using compression.

I would settle for nothing other than Flac -8 when using a computer that is younger than 15 years old :)

About: https://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=18382

That is just utter bullshit. There is NO audible difference between FLAC -8 and Uncompressed because exactly the same data is fed to the soundcard.
If there is, you have a really bad computer where calculations by the CPU and traffic through the North- and Southbridge are audible. Then Uncompressed VS FLAC is the last thing you should worry about. Or a very shitty implementation of FLAC, but I cannot mention any, maybe because they do not yet exist.
A computer (even a dedicated one) is litterally doing millions of things at the time you play music. Adding FLAC decoding will not make a difference. If it does, toss away that player, because it's junk! If that Linn player on that forum has audible artifacts during flac playback it's a player fault, not the file format.
People claiming audible difference because the computer has to decode the file have no clue about how a computer works. Data is fed into a large buffer (uncompressed). This is the same for wav as for FLAC, because the signal from wav also has to pass through the software that controls the sound card. Timing errors, jitter etc. plain nonsense.

Sorry for the language. I hate it when people without knowledge (not the TopicStarter, but that site) claim things that are just really not true.
I have even heard people saying that music from a SSD sounded more analytical and from a HDD it was more analog, and even the price of the SATA cables did matter. Gimme a break!

PS. FLAC is always lossless. Not to make things more complicated, but there does exist a way to losslessly archive into FLAC, that is lossywav as a preprocessor, but the FLAC part is always lossless. If you put a MP3 into the FLAC encoder it will create a lossless FLAC file, but the MP3 already has a lot removed so it does not make sense. It's the same as saving a JPG to 10% quality, creating a small file and then convert it to PNG. The PNG could theoretically be as big or even bigger than the original, but all the details in the original photo is gone forever.

Do you realize that people are simply claiming/stating audible distinctions ?
Would there be no basis in authenticity if it was found/verified that sound quality distinctions (of enough merit) were indeed not only discernible but selected "pick-out" repeatedly -as clearly distinctive (from the other) ?

I need not know the science/mathematics (or even care necessarily) would I/one ?

Impressing upon with learned (incomplete) knowledge is quite different from/than that of being a trail-blazer opening doors to new understandings.

Early hi-fi buffoons that eschewed premium equipment/cables were soon made the laughing stock of their own making. How appropriate.             

Be careful to blurt out that which one has very little insight/expertise -for plausible explanations.

pj


  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #51
At least now it makes sense that MQA makes no sense. It is flac compressed so can't sound right :(
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #52
Early hi-fi buffoons that eschewed premium equipment/cables were soon made the laughing stock of their own making. How appropriate. 
You've got that right, with one exception.

Be careful to blurt out that which one has very little insight/expertise -for plausible explanations.
Now that you have have right.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #53
H]Quote
Quote
I've heard the benefits of Uncompressed FLAC with my own ears...
Yeah! He heard it straight from the voices on his head. :D


Haaha, too funny ?

Right.

Too bad a timing. Next time I need your assessment of any joke I'll PM you.
Listen to the music, not the media.

Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #54
Do you realize that people are simply claiming/stating audible distinctions ?
[...]
I need not know the science/mathematics (or even care necessarily) would I/one ?
Do you realize that elsewhere people are, right now, "simply claiming" the earth is flat... or that Elvis is alive... and if you perchance found yourself in the position of challenging such claims (like we usually do over here), you wouldn't bat and eyelid about demanding similar scientific proof?  Unless you also concur with said "distinctive" claims, that is.
  • Last Edit: 31 October, 2017, 06:02:35 PM by includemeout
Listen to the music, not the media.

  • bennetng
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #55
Quote
I recently converted everything from wav to flac and fixed/added all the missing metadata. Even on my UnitiQute i can hear a difference. Flac is quieter and more smooth, just as you have reported. I still have some wav albums in parallel with their newer flac cousins.
...you gotta be shitting me!

Quote
I rip to flac but convert, in my server software, to wav on the fly. To me this sounded more 'musical' than flac straight into Naim.
That mental cancer must be out of this world.
If a product has audible difference in playing compressed vs uncompressed lossless content, ask for a refund since the the product is either defective or deceptive.

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #56
If a product has audible difference in playing compressed vs uncompressed lossless content
then maybe it simply fails to recognize ReplayGain tags in the wav files?  ;-)  

Don't expect audiophool "testing" to include any volume matching ...

  • bennetng
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #57
Don't expect audiophool "testing" to include any volume matching ...
...and double blind

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Level 5 to uncompressed
Reply #58
Don't expect audiophool "testing" to include any volume matching ...
...and double blind
Isn't it good enough to have the blind leading the blind?