marcoc1712 wrote: > > > 2. I'm not aware of any "science" actually saying flac and wav sound the > same (at the analog rca output of the dac), Archimago says the > difference is under 90db, so is inaudible. (2 is not really like 2 here, > but from his point of view it does not matter...sure?). >
The science is that all FLAC files are first converted to .wav files before they are fed to the DAC chip. To the best of my knowledge (and I constantly study these things) there are no DAC chips that can handle a FLAC file without that conversion being done first. > > 3. 90 db SNR is actually a not so good result for a dac, so what? > The maximum SNR that a 16 bit .wav file can deliver is 93 dB, so now you are arguing over 3 dB in a context that is 90+ dB down. The difference is generally inaudible in any reasonable listening comparison because the rule of the weakest link. The weakest link in this case is generally the recording and production process, not DACs or FLAC file converters. > > Does anybody could distinguish between a 90 db SNR dac and a 140 one? > Not sure, > I'm sure. Nobody ever has, and many have tried. > > but then why we admit there is a reason to look for a 140 db SNR DAC if > 90 db are enougth to be completely inaudible? Oh, sure, 140 is greater > than 90... > You have apparently stumbled onto truth - DACs with > 90 dB THD+N are generally not subjectively better. > > Some rumors is inaudible also at -30db, when others (related with the > signal) are nasty, so a difference 'could be' in place well over the > limit of a modern, well designed DAC. > The point where distingushing among DACs becomes very difficult is about 70 dB. At 30-40 dB it can be pretty easy. > > NOTE that nobody here is talking about difference in bit, sure the > contents in bit is (if not in broken systems) the same, but again, here > "bits are the same" is true only because we are figuring 'symbols' of > information, not the actual signal being moved from files to the dac and > then processed, in this case they are NEVER the same, is the way it > works. > > Your (and others) absolute certainty that "sound of wav files versus > flac files there are NO differences" come from where? Could you report > proofs that is always EXACTLY as 2 = 2 in every system? I don't think > so. > Asked and answered. > > I, by me, I could admit that in many systems the difference is inaudible > to me, but not in mine and some others I've listen to. No doubt you have done sighted evaluations which are grossly flawed for this purpose. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104227 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
