A Morning With Graham

Posted by: Mr Underhill on 17 April 2010

Thank you to Graham Russell who kindly hosted me this morning ...which was an interesting three hours for me!

Graham has a top line Naim system, and one that sounds excellent; topped with a dual PSU CD555. I won't mention all the supports and cabling Graham uses, suffice it to say that his HiLines are far from the most expensive interconnects he uses!

Working in the IT industry with a background in programming and hardware configuration Graham's home network is well thought through and gives him the functionality to stream both Audio and DVDs.

Graham has built the full CMP2 front end, including Julia soundcard, this streams WAV files from his remote NAS, via MPD.

To add to this hardware behemoth I added ......a DELL laptop, HiFace and a stereovox digital cable!

Rather than run through each front end I'll start by stating that within Graham's system the order of playback quality was, IMO:

CD555 (2psu) > CD555 (1psu) > Graham's CMP2 front end (WAV) > [Grahams CMP2 (flac) = My Laptop (flac)]

None of these front ends disgraced themselves, and I could happily live with any of them; but back to back this order was clear to my ears.


What really surprised me was the difference between flac files and WAV files within Graham's system.

Flac files sounded less dynamic, the bass was softer and the top end was not as extended. This was the difference I noted between listening to my laptop and the CMP2. So I decided to play a few of my HiRes files!


HiRes Stumbles!
We picked an album that Graham has ripped from CD, and compared that with HiRes on my laptop. The CD rip won.

We therefore moved the HiRes rip onto the CMP2. The CD rip won.

The HiRes rip was expanded to WAV. The HiRes and CD rips were of equal quality!!


Now the HiRes rip was taken from my DVDA using DVD-A Explorer, and it may be that that in some way compromised the sound quality. At least it confirms I am not bonkers when I have posted my reservations about just pronouncing HiRes better than CD as a default win.


Flac -vs- WAV
There is NO doubt that within Graham's system WAV was clearly better. Returning home I uncompressed some files and did the same comparison within my system. Now I KNOW I had done this and heard no difference, but I just had to redo this ....and? No difference. I even got my younger daughter down and subjected her to Annie Lenox, and askd her which she preffered ...' they're the same.'

All I can say is that if you are running Naim amplification I would strongly recommend doing the test.



Music
Graham has a wide ranging taste and played me a number of female vocalists whose CDs will be bought for my collection.


Final Thoughts
Do I think I could walk into a room and pick that I was listening to the 555 rather than my Laptop or the CMP2? I'm not sure. Back to back I could pick them. If I new the music well I think I might be able to. For me that makes the computer front ends BRILLIANT value for money. Graham has the priviledge of choosing whether he wants the best of quality, or to be able to sit back and browse his music collection.

The CMP2 turns in a fine performance, and with more services running than my laptop - including networking; good news as I will now experiment with opening up the networking on the laptop to stream Spotify through the HiFace into the nDAC.

I'm redecorating the back room of my house for my summer hols, and I will be redoing my structural wiring (Cat5 > Cat6). Graham has given me some good ideas about also ripping my DVD collection and streaming that in addition to my audio; and I will definitely setting up MPD once HiFace make the Linux driver available; I dropped them an email last week - not even a tentative delivery date I'm afraid.


A very profitable and enjoyable morning for me,

Thank you Graham.


M.
Posted on: 22 April 2010 by pcstockton
thanks dave. I was hoping to rope you in. You know more about computers, and Naim for that matter, than most here and your logic is always sound.

Meaning, if I could capture the decoded WAV in between the RAM and soundcard during playback, it will be different from the WAV? Because of buffer?

Does this mean I can jack the buffer WAY up in Foobar and get better playback?

Sincerely,
Proud New Owner of the Naim DAC.
Purely wondrous.
Posted on: 22 April 2010 by Hook
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
I am not disagreeing there is a difference for some of you. I do however find it completely bizarro that you are.

Forget FLAC compression for a moment.

FLAC converted back to WAV is identical to the original WAV. But there is some minimal time "t" between decoding the FLAC back to WAV and playback that can degrade sound.

This is very strange.

Doesn't anyone else find this odd?

If the PC decodes the FLAC just before sending the WAV to the soundcard, sound is degraded.

But if i do lengthen the time t to a an hour before, resulting in the EXACT same WAV file, they sound the same.

I cannot wrap my mind around how a WAV can sound different given the length of time between the conversion.

If the decoding process happening with a minimal t degrades the computer's performance to such a degree that despite bit perfection, something is added or removed from the signal that affect SQ well before the soundcard touches it, how do you avoid the slippery slope of looking at everything in the chain.

How does the motherboard, hard drive, mains supply of the PC etc, not affect SQ on par with shortest possible t?

I get flat earth and everything, but it can be clearly and empirically shown how PSUs, Hilines, Powerlines and Fraims work. But this WAV vs FLAC is just strange to me.

I can accept that WAVs sound better and convert my entire library just to be safe. But I will then have to assume everything else in the supply chain is suspect as well.

thanks for helping me understand this,
Patrick

PS - every single person outside of this Forum that I have discussed this with cannot find any reason why a minimal "t" could/would affect SQ.

Even if the PC was so badly spec'd that it took enormous resources to decode the FLAC, or even errored when doing so, it would either not play the FLACs or do so with buffering entailing drop-outs. Not SQ difference.

At least this is what the engineers, computer dorks, and DA experts are telling me (outside of this forum).

When I tell them the difference actually exists for some listeners they all simply shrug their shoulders. When pressed for an explanation they can only come up with 2 answers. WAVs play louder and therefor sound "better". Or people are imagining a difference.


I can only think of three areas to look at for explaining this difference in sound quality.

1) Flaky hardware - the additional processing load of decoding draws additional power from a marginal power supply, thus introducing noise. Seems unlikely with modern computers, but I guess it is possible.

2) Software settings - the decoder is applying some DSP to FLAC (and not WAV) by default, or the FLAC files were encoded with volume leveling. One would think that if volume leveling was not a selected as a rip option, then the decoder would ignore the FLAC file's replay gain tags, but who knows. And as we all know, louder is better.

3) Our ears - some of us hear it, others don't. Some of us have better ears or listen more critically. Or we are influenced by the placebo effect.

I have no doubt this difference in sound quality is real. Too many people have reported it. But I doubt we'll ever arrive at a single attributable cause.

Am glad that I cannot hear a difference in my system. If I had to move to WAV for better sound quality, then I would definitely miss the tag info.

Hook
Posted on: 22 April 2010 by Aleg
quote:
Originally posted by ghook2020:
...
Am glad that I cannot hear a difference in my system. If I had to move to WAV for better sound quality, then I would definitely miss the tag info.

Hook


Hook

I'm seriously considering converting to WAV and have tags added into those. There is a way of tagging WAVs that is becoming more and more widespread and accepted.

I have tried a few albums and my players can play wav's with tags just fine and will show the tag information as well.

I use:
- mpd with mPod & Minion control on my PopcornHour + NAS into nDAC + Naim
- cPlay with cue files on PC + NAS
- Foobar on PC

And all play and show wav with tags fine.

-
aleg
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by pcstockton
All i know is that if it can get better I will shit myself. The Naim DAC is so amazing with FLACs now, I cannot imagine it any better.

I will throw some WAVs in its direction over the weekend. See what i hear.
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by goldfinch
cmp/cplay proyect implies a heavily tweaked PC at both hardware and software level and for some reason (Bios setup, priority..) Flac playback could be suffering from this setup in comparison to WAV. What I mean is that WAV might not be superior, maybe FLAC doesn't work so well in that setup.
Or we all need Audiovector speakers...
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by Graham Russell
I'm running Linux with MPD at the moment so it's not a CPM/cPlay issue.

The same happens with Sonos too.

Perhaps it is the Audiovectors that are making it happen Smile
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by gone
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
All i know is that if it can get better I will shit myself. The Naim DAC is so amazing with FLACs now, I cannot imagine it any better.

That made me laugh. I think Naim should put quotes like this on their new website. Much better than magazine reviews.....
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by Hook
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
All i know is that if it can get better I will shit myself. The Naim DAC is so amazing with FLACs now, I cannot imagine it any better.

I will throw some WAVs in its direction over the weekend. See what i hear.


Normally I poo-poo all over posts that use foul language, but that would seem rather hypocritical given how hard this made me laugh.

Patrick - you should update your profile and add the DAC. And, I really hate to say this, because everytime someone says how good something sounds, some jerk comes along and suggests an upgrade, but...

Assuming you are running the DAC without a PS upgrade, you should at some point check out the XPS2. I ran the DAC naked for a couple of weeks before adding it in. Then removed it after a few more weeks and really missed it. Strong improvements in bass clarity, soundstage depth, etc. Overall, just a more energetic sound.

My only complaint about the DAC/XPS2 is that it has leapfrogged my P3-24/Exact 2, and given me the itch to upgrade my 'table.

Oh when will the madness end...

Hook
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by Hook
quote:
Originally posted by Aleg:
quote:
Originally posted by ghook2020:
...
Am glad that I cannot hear a difference in my system. If I had to move to WAV for better sound quality, then I would definitely miss the tag info.

Hook


Hook

I'm seriously considering converting to WAV and have tags added into those. There is a way of tagging WAVs that is becoming more and more widespread and accepted.

I have tried a few albums and my players can play wav's with tags just fine and will show the tag information as well.

I use:
- mpd with mPod & Minion control on my PopcornHour + NAS into nDAC + Naim
- cPlay with cue files on PC + NAS
- Foobar on PC

And all play and show wav with tags fine.

-
aleg


I will convert to WAV the day I can hear any sound quality improvement over FLAC level 0. Right now, cannot hear any difference in any WAV versus FLAC scenerio.

FLAC sent through my DIY music server (RME 9632) over BNC to the DAC sounds identical to WAV on a USB stick. Really tried to hear a difference but couldn't.

And this is from someone who swears he heard a difference between USB cables... Roll Eyes

Hook

PS - The wife is getting really tired of my endless "Can you hear any difference" requests. Her last comment was "Quit f-ing with it - it cannot get any better." Hah, I say - I'll show her!
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by js
Big Grin Don't ask the wife but try a wav file via the RME for kicks. That last line really did bring a smile.
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by Hook
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Big Grin Don't ask the wife but try a wav file via the RME for kicks. That last line really did bring a smile.


Did so - no difference to my ears.

Am not using any volume leveling with the FLAC files, so as far as I can tell, JRMC 14 played WAV and FLAC at the same volume. Not that it is the last word in accuracy, but also had my Radio Shack SPL meter on, and it stayed right around 88dB for both.

Hook
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by Aleg
quote:
Originally posted by ghook2020:
I will convert to WAV the day I can hear any sound quality improvement over FLAC level 0. Right now, cannot hear any difference in any WAV versus FLAC scenerio.

FLAC sent through my DIY music server (RME 9632) over BNC to the DAC sounds identical to WAV on a USB stick. Really tried to hear a difference but couldn't.

And this is from someone who swears he heard a difference between USB cables... Roll Eyes

Hook


I do hear a difference between WAV and FLAC (on any compression level) in my setup. WAV giving a more 'roomy' sound, more pleasant and FLAC is sounding a bit more flat in comparisson (not hughely different, but noticable).
But playing WAV from my source is still far from sounding as good as WAV from USB-stick.

I'm still waiting for a slimmed down, lean and mean HDX-type and HDX-level streamer from Naim.

-
aleg
Posted on: 23 April 2010 by likesmusic
quote:
Originally posted by David Dever:
You're assuming uniform increments of time, variations in which are more significant with shorter buffer tails than longer ones.


What's a 'short buffer tail' as opposed to a long one? In fact, could you explain what that whole sentence means, as I can't understand it. I've spent 30 years writing software for a living, and first implemented a ring buffer 40 years ago, but I'm happy to learn new things. I never knew a buffer tail had length.
Posted on: 24 April 2010 by Adam Meredith
quote:
Originally posted by likesmusic:
... first implemented a ring buffer 40 years ago


Happy, happy memories.
Posted on: 24 April 2010 by fatcat
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
quote:
Originally posted by likesmusic:
... first implemented a ring buffer 40 years ago


Happy, happy memories.


OOH ERR MISSUS
Posted on: 25 April 2010 by Roy T
How silly we were all those years ago when we thought their was only
quote:
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

but now we know better...