![]() Wave/AIFF and any lossless codec provide unaltered quality. MC's secure ripping system doesn't do that. That has newer been an issue because the effect is inaudible.Ī read offset correction setting is only useful when a software process is used for comparing files that were ripped with various different readers. Also standalone Audio CD players have varied offsets. The offset is allowed to vary slightly in the manufacturing process (different manufacturing plants may produce Audio CDs with different offsets from the same source material) and in the reader device design. ![]() There is no "correct offset" in the Red Book Audio CD standard. Simply because this requires gear able to measure Pico seconds and this type of gear is very expensive.īy design PCM audio is a sample (the bits) and a time step (sample rate).Īny explanation focusing on the bits only leaves the other half of PCM (the timing) out of the equation. Unfortunately, you won’t find many reports testing the jitter. You can find many reports on testing bit perfect output. I do think this points to a problem with the system, especially the sound card. If this is true, the implication is that sound quality fluctuates with system load. ![]() This extra system load disturbs the clock of the sound card in some way, might be RFI, ripple on the power rails, etc. Small variations in the time step can become audible, this is known as jitter.Īn explanation why bit identical files can sound different is that uncompressing a file does requires more CPU. Not only should the DAC receive the right bits, they must also arrive at the right time. Like all other test comparing the bits, this test yielded zero differences on bit level.Īn often overlooked aspect of PCM audio is the time (sample rate) This is probably the best testing possible because this is what actually is send to the DAC. There are a lot of post on all kind of audio forums reporting audible differences between compressed and uncompressed formats like FLAC and WAVĪ nice one: play the same track in WAV and in FLAC and record the SPDIF out. WASAPI is bittransparent as well there can't be any differences, or can there be. And did you know that your WASAPI is simply gorgeous and that there is a huge difference to your ASIO plugin. ASIO is bittransparent, there can't be a differnce but there is on, a huge one. The sound is simply inferior to another media product that uses another plugin. Do you know that most of our clients are rejecting MC using the ASIO plugin for playout with the hardware we use (Lynx AES16). Instead, I give you another example of sound alteration that cannot be. But I really would like to use MC, it is a wonderful product. I do not really want to discuss further the differences of lossless audio compressions. Please understand that they do not accept any kind of compression. Our products are monitored with the most sophisticated equipment. snipped.We are building Audio Media Computers for the most exigent clients regarding audio quality. Quote from: Coolhighend on September 10, 2009, 09:08:27 am If you hit troubles (CD’s not found in the database) you might consider a ripper with better tagging support like dbPoweramp I’ am afraid this one of the very few weak spots of J River I would be surprised, as this type of experiment has been done by many, if you would find any difference at allĪdding meta information and art work to the songs. If the result is not 100% zero’s there is a difference between them. load the tracks in an audio editor, time align and subtract them rip a couple of tracks using a damaged CD However I do think that most media players today including MC15 (when set to ‘secure’) can make a bit perfect rip. The results of your rip are compared with the results of others. I do think the sentiment to day on audiophile forwards is dbPoweramp. 1 – a bit perfect copy of the content of the CDĮAC has a big reputation but dbPoweramp is catching up.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |