HDX rip better than iTunes rip?

I saw that article last night and wondered how long it would be before it came up here. Should be interesting to follow the discussions...

I've known about it for quite a while - wasn't prepared to cut and paste everything over. Remember "links" are not allowed.

What amused me most was the comparison between EAC and simply dragging the files from the CD

maybe Paul can clarify the statement he made on that site about an HDX rip on a random CD sounding better than an iTunes rip. Same format? Same replay device? Have NAIM performed a bit-wise comparison of the two files. Sound better is subjective. Comparing bits is not. Two identical files all things being equal cannot in any universe sound different. As I have posted before I have compared rips from iTunes and a "better" ripper and they were identical.

Interesting articles. I am aware that the Naim paper does say that equivalent rips can be done with other sources and Paul even mentioned that somewhere on the forum when the HDX first came out.

I am going to stay away from the technical stuff since I have no expertise in this area at all and leave that to others.

However, despite what the article says about bit perfect copying and all the other data given I have listened to the many of the different file types (wav, aiff, etc...)using different software, of the same music, played back through the same system and they sounded different. My hearing isn't special, but I could hear a difference. This wasn't any wishful thinking and in fact I thought both HDX rips and EAC sounded much better than itunes. I liked the presentation of the music with the HDX rips slightly better than the EAC, but they were very good, but their was a little musical difference.

Others will comment on the technical stuff and as the thread continues there may be some holes that can be poked and maybe not. I'll have to wait and see.

Harry, as we have found in all things audio its never straight forward or black anf white. Even though its noughts and ones, we can take and demo a rip on a random pc/laptop via itunes and a hdx rip and are sure our rip 9/10 from the tests we have tried sounds better subjectively. Subjectively is important as with all test at naim we do the engineering but also listen so its our view in the end, people may wish to agree or not.
We have found the control of and specific loaders have a huge influence on the sound quality, with the hdx combo of our excellent ripping software and our loader choice and control, it does a fine job.
The eac site contains some really good info on loader variability and consequences.

Would still be interesting to know if Naim have performed bitwise comparisons of HDX rips with those of iTunes and other ripping products and, if so, what the result was.

Paul thx but an identical same format file cannot soy d different. The implication is that the files are different. But how are they different? Surely NAIM have done a comparison. When I did files were the same. Maybe I and others have messed up somehow.

Since Adam edited out the link (forum rules) can someone post some key search words for Google so that we can access the mentioned site and read the articles?

Gregg

Gregg - To find the Kent Poon article (which is quite thought provoking), try these search keywords in Google:

Kent Poon Is EAC really better than iTunes

It should be easy to find it from there - it appears in the top 4 links or so.


Michael

Good article and very interesting thread , thanx

now just make sure " use error correction when reading discs.. " is switched on in iTunes prefs ( if you are using itunes ) and enjoy.

cheers

Computer audio is full of these kind of difficult to explain findings...
But as far as I know it is possible to check if the resulting audio files from two different methods of extracting digital audio from the same CDA are identical or not. I mean this shouldn't be subjective, if files are not exactly the same (EAC rip vs. HDX rip, for instance)then you can explain objectively why they sound different,

I think it is impossible to bring more light to this issue without technical data,

thank you for the Link to this basic articles.
very interessting stuff

The good thing about EAC and dbPowerAmp is that they use the AccurateRip db. With that, you KNOW when you have a good rip, 6 or 8 times out of ten, depending on how eccentric your tastes are. This ensures good sound, but more important, no clicks etc. With itunes, you wouldn't know of a problem until you played it. When you're ripping many per day, that's not good enough. And dbPowerAmp rips straight to Alac, no conversion required.

Are there any Mac rippers that use AccurateRip yet?

Eric,

quote:

Originally posted by haroldbudd:


now just make sure " use error correction when reading discs.. " is switched on in iTunes prefs ( if you are using itunes ) and enjoy.

cheers

I've not had, or heard a problem once. Takes longer to rip but does not bother me. I do have a program that I downloaded a while back that is essentially the same as AccurateRip but have not used it in some time as I found I did not need it after comparing with regular error correction. I could find the name for you if you wish as I still have it installed.

cheers

Eric, it is called XLD , and does in fact use AccurateRip.

regards

This point here is not clicks etc (which also I have not heard) but that an HDX rip sounds better. It is worth considering what this means in terms of the ones and zeros. For a rip to sound better the 16-bit words must be consistently different between two rips over the entire length of the track under test. This would produce (clearly) significant differences between the files. This is straight and honest logic and cannot be escaped.

I totally buy the reasoning that for many people having a simple, integrated ripping solution (such as the HDX) where NAIM have done the hard miles to ensure maximum fidelity is valuable. I also buy the reasoning that clicks bumps and drop outs would be reduced to a minimum. I cannot, though, believe that iTunes or any other ripper for that matter consistently gets a huge number of words "wrong" over the entire length of a track.

Hi-Fi is totally subjective because what you hear is what you hear and nobody else hears it. Here, though, we can be totally objective. The files are the same or the files are not the same. If the files are the same they will sound the same. If two files sound different they will have differences between them throughout the whole file.

He said

This point here is not clicks etc (which also I have not heard) but that an HDX rip sounds better. It is worth considering what this means in terms of the ones and zeros. For a rip to sound better the 16-bit words must be consistently different between two rips over the entire length of the track under test. This would produce (clearly) significant differences between the files. This is straight and honest logic and cannot be escaped.

I totally buy the reasoning that for many people having a simple, integrated ripping solution (such as the HDX) where NAIM have done the hard miles to ensure maximum fidelity is valuable. I also buy the reasoning that clicks bumps and drop outs would be reduced to a minimum. I cannot, though, believe that iTunes or any other ripper for that matter consistently gets a huge number of words "wrong" over the entire length of a track.

Hi-Fi is totally subjective because what you hear is what you hear and nobody else hears it. Here, though, we can be totally objective. The files are the same or the files are not the same. If the files are the same they will sound the same. If two files sound different they will have differences between them throughout the whole file.

I think I would only bother to rip if I couldn't play the original. I see distributed audio as useful for playing tracks that are already in soft form - i.e. downloads of internet streams; not for playing my CDs or god forbid ripping vinyl - can't be bothered with EAC and its friends, just to play a bit of Basia Bulat.

ROTF,

How did the 1's and 0's get on your CD's ? And from were did they come from ?

quote:

Are there any Mac rippers that use AccurateRip yet?

Yes, there are two:

1. XLD
2. Rip - written by the same author as "Max"; is currently in beta; uses AccurateRip; does not use cdparanoia.

Mark

this may also help some people,

http://jungle.sk/XLD_Tutorial/

quote:

Originally posted by haroldbudd:
this may also help some people,

http://jungle.sk/XLD_Tutorial/

That link is not working for me at the moment.

Here's a, presumably similar, link that may also be of use:

XLD Ripper for Mac

quote:

Originally posted by Harry H. Wombat:
Paul thx but an identical same format file cannot soy d different. The implication is that the files are different. But how are they different? Surely NAIM have done a comparison. When I did files were the same. Maybe I and others have messed up somehow.

I am curious about this too. I have heard what I feel is a very significant musical and sonic difference between an iTunes ripped WAV and an HDX ripped wave. I can hear the difference on my etymotic headphones on my iPhone and I can hear the difference through a reference rig and even on my MacBook Pro speakers.

HDX WAV is great.

I am looking into trying different softwares to recommend to clients so they can get the best rips for themselves (if they aren't buying an HDX) but it looks like it is hardware dependent as well.

I don't know how you compared the files, but, you know, I bet if I compared the files of the European pressing of Radiohead's Amnesiac to the US produced version, they would be "identical". But they sound very different. Same with my "promotional copy" (I have two, both great) of Rickie Lee Jones Ghostyhead album vs. the regular production version.

It is a wonder.

Connon hi --

I ripped the same song, same format in iTunes and XLD I think. Don't have exact details with me. Then I imported both files into a sound wave editor. You then align both waveforms (different rippers have longer or shorter periods of silence at start of track). You then invert one wave form and at it to the other. If the waves are identical the result is silence. On about four tracks I tried it on the resulting waveform was flat. No wave. This means the waveforms are identical. Either file played through any system will sound identical. I would love for someone to do this with an HDX rip against iTunes. If I messed up then I messed up but would love to know.

quote:

I would love for someone to do this with an HDX rip against iTunes. If I messed up then I messed up but would love to know.

You haven't messed up. Bits are bits - in the world of data storage there are no 'extra special great-sounding bits', only ordinary bits. iTunes (with error correction on) has been proven to match EAC bit-for-bit, so long as the disc is not damaged.

Mr Tibbs

Harry,

You have more patience than I have

I've tried XLD v.s. iTunes on numerous occasions through my system - various CD's.

Ears only - but to me the sound was identical. Nice to know that impression has been backed up in a real quantitative manner.

Thanks.

Richard