rips are just rips?

Why not compare the files? There are tools available which enable you to compare the audio data in two files and/or compute checksums. If different rippers rip different data (allowing for drive offset) you have an issue to resolve. If the data is the same it is much harder to justify claiming an audible difference exists.

I believe Melco use Accuraterip software: this compares rips against a database of checksums. dbPoweramp also uses Accuraterip and does the same comparison. You can't do something better than right.

Years ago Paul Stephenson claimed that naim rips sounded better than dBpoweramp rips, but never produced the rips to justify his claims, despite being asked to several times.

 

French Rooster posted:

On the Nd555 impressions thread, Dark Bear found that 3 different rips from the same album, by 3 different softwares, sound different for him.

I hope i make no mistake here in resuming his idea.   Some members don’t agree with that, thinking or hearing no differences at all.

Dark Bear found that the rips made by the melco 100 ripper sound the best.

I am asking myself if the differences can be explained, if they really exist, by the quality of the cd drive mechanism.  The one in the melco must be better made than the cheap one in a pc or mac (?).

Rips are absolutely just rips... however you can encode the WAV file in different ways, and a less than ideal file reader may add noise to the playback. Loads on this on the forum if you go back a few years.

However when the file is streamed, the WAV file has become irrelevant at this point. However I have found different media servers can sound different on the older streamers based on the noise coupling from the inter frame timing over the Ethernet.

if you search back on the forum a few of compared files from different rippers, and the PCM was identical... and on blind playback through the same media server no one could determine any difference... and the tools and detailed analysis tools could determine no difference either. The use of the same media server removed the element of interframe timing from the equation to.

Well that is good to know - nothing to see here.

Just my 2p worth, with, it has to be said, no real understanding on my part, of the technical aspects of why the following should be true.

My HDX was sent off to Naim for a service, and all the music on it, 100% Naim WAV CD rips, were copied to my QNAP nas so that I would still have access to my music whilst the HDX was away.

Now that it has returned, with Naim having copied all the music to a new 2TB drive installed by them, I can hear a clear difference on playback between a track served over UPnP to my ND 555 by the HDX, and one using the nas, via Minimserver.

Now, since they are identical rips, how is this possible, as it would seem that the chosen UPnP server does indeed have an effect, identical files notwithstanding. 

French Rooster posted:

On the Nd555 impressions thread, Dark Bear found that 3 different rips from the same album, by 3 different softwares, sound different for him.

I hope i make no mistake here in resuming his idea.   Some members don’t agree with that, thinking or hearing no differences at all.

Dark Bear found that the rips made by the melco 100 ripper sound the best.

I am asking myself if the differences can be explained, if they really exist, by the quality of the cd drive mechanism.  The one in the melco must be better made than the cheap one in a pc or mac (?).

DB has observed that 3 rips of the same track sound different in his system but he has not checked whether the 3 rips are identical or not. In absence of this piece of information, the whole discussion is completely meaningless.

If the 3 rips turn out to be different, then the question is why allegedly rip-perfect ripping tools yield different results.

If the 3 rips turn out to be identical, DB might have to rethink his testing procedure.

dave marshall posted:

Just my 2p worth, with, it has to be said, no real understanding on my part, of the technical aspects of why the following should be true.

My HDX was sent off to Naim for a service, and all the music on it, 100% Naim WAV CD rips, were copied to my QNAP nas so that I would still have access to my music whilst the HDX was away.

Now that it has returned, with Naim having copied all the music to a new 2TB drive installed by them, I can hear a clear difference on playback between a track served over UPnP to my ND 555 by the HDX, and one using the nas, via Minimserver.

Now, since they are identical rips, how is this possible, as it would seem that the chosen UPnP server does indeed have an effect, identical files notwithstanding. 

The impact of UPnP servers and of the computing platforms on which they run has been discussed and well documented in this forum. Nothing new or particularly surprising. Perhaps just a bit disappointing.

I just ripped a new copy via Melco D100 of an early Linda Ronstadt album CD of that name and put it alongside the renamed folder containing the Rip I did a few days ago on my PC, so I have both sets of files on the same server in folders side by side and can select and play from each - and they sound different and the D100 version has better low-level detail and note-purity.

Don't know why, but I can hear it.

DB.

Darke Bear posted:

I just ripped a new copy via Melco D100 of an early Linda Ronstadt album CD of that name and put it alongside the renamed Rip I did a few days ago on my PC, so I have both sets of files on the same server in folders side by side and can select and play from each - and they sound different and the D100 version has better low-level detail and note-purity.

Don't know why, but I can hear it.

DB.

This is not surprising if the two rips are not identical and worrying if they are.

Well; i'm not here to stir any honey pot either but I ripped all my CDs via dBpoweramp onto my 6 year HP laptop. I bought a brand new HP laptop this year and re-ripped those same CDs again onto the new laptop. Both lots of rips were copied onto my QNAP. I can definitely hear a slightly better played back sound quality from the rips done off the newer laptop via the QNAP, the newer laptop to me does appear to have a better quality CD mech too. Both laptops using dBpoweramp ripped to FLAC.

It has convinced me enough (and i'm a green hornet with all this ripping malarkey) that the quality of the ripper or whatever the mechanical contraption there maybe in the mix, does make a difference.

nbpf posted:

French Rooster posted:

On the Nd555 impressions thread, Dark Bear found that 3 different rips from the same album, by 3 different softwares, sound different for him.

I hope i make no mistake here in resuming his idea.   Some members don’t agree with that, thinking or hearing no differences at all.

Dark Bear found that the rips made by the melco 100 ripper sound the best.

I am asking myself if the differences can be explained, if they really exist, by the quality of the cd drive mechanism.  The one in the melco must be better made than the cheap one in a pc or mac (?).

DB has observed that 3 rips of the same track sound different in his system but he has not checked whether the 3 rips are identical or not. In absence of this piece of information, the whole discussion is completely meaningless.

If the 3 rips turn out to be different, then the question is why allegedly rip-perfect ripping tools yield different results.

If the 3 rips turn out to be identical, DB might have to rethink his testing procedure.

it reminds me the discussions i was following about the differences between rips by the uniticore ( around december 2017 or january 2018) and rips by the serve.  I think to remember that the rips were not identical....

I ripper another CD and compared, 'Shooting Star' from Elkie Brooks and the same effect. The better rip via the D100 has far better low-level rendering - little bell instruments have more decay and a quiet guitar riff was better rendered into the composition.

For me at this level of replay I'll have all I can get, so my intent was to point out that there are differences possible and people can decide if they hear it or it matters to them. For me it seems pointless to scrimp on the source material quality - even if I don't have an answer for what is causing the effect.

DB.

Stephen Tate posted:

Well; i'm not here to stir any honey pot either but I ripped all my CDs via dBpoweramp onto my 6 year HP laptop. I bought a brand new HP laptop this year and re-ripped those same CDs again onto the new laptop. Both lots of rips were copied onto my QNAP. I can definitely hear a slightly better played back sound quality from the rips done off the newer laptop via the QNAP, the newer laptop to me does appear to have a better quality CD mech too. Both laptops using dBpoweramp ripped to FLAC.

It has convinced me enough (and i'm a green hornet with all this ripping malarkey) that the quality of the ripper or whatever the mechanical contraption there maybe in the mix, does make a difference.

interesting Stephen, perhaps as you said, the quality of the CD mech, drive?   

Darke Bear posted:

I ripper another CD and compared, 'Shooting Star' from Elkie Brooks and the same effect. The better rip via the D100 has far better low-level rendering - little bell instruments have more decay and a quiet guitar riff was better rendered into the composition.

For me at this level of replay I'll have all I can get, so my intent was to point out that there are differences possible and people can decide if they hear it or it matters to them. For me it seems pointless to scrimp on the source material quality - even if I don't have an answer for what is causing the effect.

DB.

it would be interesting to compare the rips via the core and via the melco 100.  I hesitate to buy in the future the melco 2na or uniticore....It can be one more aspect to consider.

Darke Bear posted:

I just ripped a new copy via Melco D100 of an early Linda Ronstadt album CD of that name and put it alongside the renamed folder containing the Rip I did a few days ago on my PC, so I have both sets of files on the same server in folders side by side and can select and play from each - and they sound different and the D100 version has better low-level detail and note-purity.

If you care to drop box, I can indeed confirm whether the ripped PCM and/or file formats are identical in bit value and time offset.... I suspect if you can hear audible differences they won’t be identical but only one way to find out. Further I can do spectrum and dynamic analysis of the files to see if the aggregated spectrum and dynamic summary is at all different ... which if occurs and the bit values are identical would be a first ever and challenge the current established theory of information entropy on which all modern data communication is based on ... but I always keep an open mind, just as I did a few years ago.

Well if they are bit perfect rips, ie true data rips, it would be concerning if they were different..other than perhaps a small time offset. but as I said only one way to find out... otherwise simply mindless supposition of cause and effect with nothing concludable.

Rdave marshall posted:

Just my 2p worth, with, it has to be said, no real understanding on my part, of the technical aspects of why the following should be true.

My HDX was sent off to Naim for a service, and all the music on it, 100% Naim WAV CD rips, were copied to my QNAP nas so that I would still have access to my music whilst the HDX was away.

Now that it has returned, with Naim having copied all the music to a new 2TB drive installed by them, I can hear a clear difference on playback between a track served over UPnP to my ND 555 by the HDX, and one using the nas, via Minimserver.

Now, since they are identical rips, how is this possible, as it would seem that the chosen UPnP server does indeed have an effect, identical files notwithstanding. 

You answered one of my most asked question, thanks Dave! That‘s an expensive answer for me now:-) I use qnap and synology roughly 3-4TB music...so I have to look for a dedicated server ...Core, Melco, Innuos.... what  interesting times. Few days ago I didn‘t know what difference a switch can do!. So I guess the ideal setup will be 1) wav perfect ripped 2) dedicated server 3) switch with isolation and psu 4) good LAN cable 

ralf

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Well if they are bit perfect rips, ie true data rips, it would be concerning if they were different..other than perhaps a small time offset. but as I said only one way to find out... otherwise simply mindless supposition of cause and effect with nothing concludable.

is it possible that the material or program is not precise or complete enough to show the minimal differences ?  they can appear identical but in fact are  not.  Like some aspects not detectable by the software....

Not really.. we are talking digitised analogue signals.. and so the resolution is defined by the discrete sample values.. there is no continuous analogue in the data itself.. therefore the analogue signal as reconstructed can only be derived from the discrete sample values... this will be an absolute and measurable series of data values that will be either be identical and measurable or not. The resolution of CD (44.1kHz/16/2) is relatively undemanding for contemporary consumer playback systems.

Now if we are talking signal reconstruction into a analogue signal (ie different DACs, and why DACs sound different with the same discrete sample data series), then other variables come into play, but if you like the ‘bit perfect’ sample data is a constant..

 if indeed it is truly a bit perfect rip, it  can be easily correlated or not with another bit perfect rip from the same optical disc by measuring and counting the discrete sample values.

And of course as described on the forum many times now I have measured and mused with Naim how different media servers can sound different transferring the same sampled data... and this has been down to the Ethernet interframe timing spacing consistency between media server and streamer... this is mitigated on the newer streamer architecture.. I discovered this difference very early on with Naim streaming.. and took me many months to discover and measure  the reason why.. it was quite a Eureka moment!

is noise can be injected into the rip and not be detectable ?

No, it can’t be injected and be not detectable in a static file (such as a rip)... however noise can be created on creating an analogue signal from the discrete samples, and noise can be added into the clock serialising the sample data values from a static array (file) of values, ie data timing jitter, and in both cases the sample values are unchanged.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

No, it can’t be injected and be not detectable in a static file (such as a rip)... however noise can be created on creating an analogue signal from the discrete samples, and noise can be added into the clock serialising the sample data values from a static array (file) of values, ie data timing jitter, and in both cases the sample values are unchanged.

so finally your conclusion would be that the 3 rips of Dark Bear sound different because the rips are different ?

Yes, I suspect the files formats  are different or less likely the ripped data... but it will almost certainly be one of those two that is interacting with his replay system 

The decoded audio data shouldn't be any different as the data on a CD are a unique encoding of a series of numbers.  The encoding is well known, so the process of ripping is simply the process of reading the data on the disk and mathematically decoding it to extract these number.  There's nothing here that's subject to any ambiguity, so the extracted numbers should always be the same.  Given that numbers these are simple 16 bit integers (i.e. from -32,768 to 32,767) there's also no uncertainty in the mathematical data contained in the file.  If the file format is uncompressed or compressed lossless, then if the decoded data are different from the decoded form of the data on the CD then this constitutes an error.

Differences in the electronics of the playback device can occur due to the work entailed in extracting the data from different file formates or compressed data stream encodings

Huge posted:

The decoded audio data shouldn't be any different as the data on a CD are a unique encoding of a series of numbers.  The encoding is well known, so the process of ripping is simply the process of reading the data on the disk and mathematically decoding it to extract these number.  There's nothing here that's subject to any ambiguity, so the extracted numbers should always be the same.  Given that numbers these are simple 16 bit integers (i.e. from -32,768 to 32,767) there's also no uncertainty in the mathematical data contained in the file.  If the file format is uncompressed or compressed lossless, then if the decoded data are different from the decoded form of the data on the CD then this constitutes an error.

Differences in the electronics of the playback device can occur due to the work entailed in extracting the data from different file formates or compressed data stream encodings

For you, how can you explain the experience of DB, preferring the sound of the rip made by the melco 100 vs dpoweramp and a third software ? 

French Rooster posted:

Huge posted:

...

Differences in the electronics of the playback device can occur due to the work entailed in extracting the data from different file formates or compressed data stream encodings

For you, how can you explain the experience of DB, preferring the sound of the rip made by the melco 100 vs dpoweramp and a third software ? 

Differences in the electronics of the playback device can occur due to the work entailed in extracting the data from different file formats or compressed data stream encodings...  This includes different version or variations of formats within the same nominal file type or data stream.