I don't think he is claiming that the bits are getting changed en route to the SB2.
He is claiming that when the SB2 has to do the decoding itself, perhaps this results in some interference that is audible. However, I agree that a blind test is required in order to establish this. On 7/19/05, m1abrams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Timbo Wrote: > > Hi there - I hear what you say and agree that if space is an issue (or > > bandwidth if you are wireless) then FLAC certainly adds up to a good > > idea - but - in my case, in my system, with my ears, I don't *hear* > > EXACTLY the same quality (and I am not alone) - when it comes to audio > > quality a few extra quid spent on more HD space (under £70 for a 250gb > > HD!) is not an issue here. > > > > What goes in may be what comes out when you compare 'bits' - but I have > > played with this some more over the last few days (I don't take lightly > > the format I will choose to archive some hundreds of CDs) and on a well > > recorded CD track I can spot a FLAC decode instantly on the first few > > bars. This means for me it's a no-brainer. > > > > Just let me say obviously if your system isn't able to deliver the > > subtle nuances involved you will of course not hear any difference - > > and the system is only as good as it's weakest link - which might be > > our ears of course (I know mine aren't what they were after 35 years of > > interest in the hobby!). > > > > I am not sure what is going on here, but perhaps the analogue audio > > circuits in my pre-amp may be ultra sensitive to digital noise > > generated by the SB2 doing it's internal decoding of FLAC sat just > > above it (it would be interesting to measure this against the same > > noise generated by internal WAV decoding?). I know that Meridian all > > digital systems support the digital domain right up until the last > > moment, only converting to the delicate analogue domain (with all it's > > susceptibilities to outside interference) at the very last minute. I > > prefer the analogue sound however, so my Meridian system contains > > mostly analogue components. > > > > Who knows the exact reason why I can hear the difference between WAV > > and FLAC, I certainly don't, but it doesn't worry me or cause me > > anxiety. I am not one of those technical guys who can't envisage > > anything effecting sound other than that which can be measured - we are > > talking Hi-Fi here remember. Technical measurements are what design the > > goods and get us to the gate - but to go through the gate every hi-fi > > manufacturer understands you have to listen and then fine tune the > > product with your ears. > > > > If technical measurements were all that mattered in hi-fi then we > > wouldn't bother upgrading cables with exotic mixes (and even stranger - > > exotic cable insulating materials!). We wouldn't be discussing whether a > > CD sounds better if you don't pause it during replay (ok that's really > > weird but just ask Jimmy Hughes!), there wouldn't be such things as > > turntables with cartridge and arm combinations costing more than my car > > - and there wouldn't be those who still prefer glowing valves and a nice > > set of horn speakers! And I wouldn't be able to hear a better sounding > > system after running the Denson De Magic CD - but I can :-) > > > > But please let's not forget we are talking about a £150 box with an > > Ethernet adapter sat on top of my hi-fi, streaming digital data from > > my PC - and it wasn't long ago I would turn off my PC to listen to my > > hi-fi as the digital noise down the mains had a negative effect on the > > sound (this is common practice and if you have one of Russ Andrews > > mains sniffers you will actually 'hear' the noise yourself). > > > > No - this Squeezebox (V2) is unbelievably good and in every respects > > approaching audiophile quality (and not by accident either if I read > > the specs right!) so a little debate about file encoding preferences > > is to be expected in the audiophile forum. Oops, and I have just > > noticed how long this 'little debate' post is - please forgive my rants > > and I hope at least someone might find my remarks of interest :-) > > I am sorry but you have to be kidding me right, is this a troll? Cause > it is a good one if it is. > > Bits are Bits, either they make it or they dont. You would have to > have some serious amount of noise coming from that expensive equipment > of yours to cause the bits to be scambled, yet your equipment can still > sync on it AMAZING. I am not defending SB right now, just plain old > common sense. FLAC is a lossless compresion format and a very good one > at that. The author and community take great pride in making sure the > codecs for it are up to snuff. Lossless is just that NO LOSS, what > goes in comes out the same. It is just plain silly and wasteful to use > WAV when a solution like FLAC is available regardless of how much money > you can spend on gear. > > And my favorite you mention exotic cable, LMAO. Sorry its the engineer > in me. Not that this means anything on the Big internet, but I have a > degree in Electrical Engineering, currently a software developer, and > build my own speakers, and speakers for friends. I build my own > speakers not because I am cheap, but because I can. > > Do a true blind test and post the results. > > > -- > m1abrams > _______________________________________________ > audiophiles mailing list > audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com > http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles > _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
