Naim HDX Ripping VS WAV lossless on computer

HDX rips at full wav and not lossless. Try ripping at full wav and compare. You may still be surprised.

I did, was not impressed. I thought flac files I downloaded from linn site where very good but not the computer ripped lossless WAV files from CD using windows media player.

Maybe just placebo effect but HDX ripped files sounded better to me.

There have been raging arguments about this on various fora. The general view seems to be that there should be no difference in the rips at all since all the various bits of software that have been tried (incidentally, the best ripping software seems to be EAC, provided it's setup correctly) all claim 'bit perfect' rips and so should in theory create exactly the same files.

Of course in your case, there is a very obvious difference. You are comparing the HDX's own disc against a similar file held on USB drive. You simply don't know what the differences could be that are caused by the different interfaces the USB and disc drive have to go through before reaching the DAC stage. It's well known for example that USB connections cause a significant amount of jitter, higher than S/PDIF. I don't know what connections are between the disc and the DAC stage, but they're bound to be different, and so have different effects.

That said, Malcolm Steward did manage to extract an HDX rip from its disc drive and place it on a USB stick to compare various ripped copies of a track and his view was that the HDX rip still sounded better - but couldn't account for the difference.

All this is done at full CD rate using WAV files of course.

its been well proven that all rip programs, EAC, iTunes all rip the same, no difference, they rip 'bit for bit'

The HDX does not have a superior ripping process than iTunes or EAC.

Search the forum and you will find a very long thread about this topic.

I really can't comment on the technology just what i heard but flac download or wav download seem to sound alot better than the computer ripped CD files of the same type off the same USB stick.

HDX ripped files sounded as good or better than downloads could not make a call on that.

Just wanted to check if I was going barmy or not

thinking about it, maybe it's the media player sycronisation process introduces errors into the file on the USB stick?

quote:

Originally posted by iiyama:
its been well proven that all rip programs, EAC, iTunes all rip the same, no difference, they rip 'bit for bit'

Proven??

Maybe they are all "bit-perfect", yes. But that does not make the rips equal.

For example, you cannot account for drive read off-set with iTunes, nor can you produce a log or cue file with iTunes.

And I am still not exactly sure how iTunes handles gap detection, but my understanding of it is that it is not "true" gap detection.

Same goes for gapless playback.

just a thought,
-p

quote:

Originally posted by JB76:
I did, was not impressed. I thought flac files I downloaded from linn site where very good but not the computer ripped lossless WAV files from CD using windows media player.

Maybe just placebo effect but HDX ripped files sounded better to me.

Too many varibles.

What version of the Windows Media Player? Sorry, what music was you comparing?

quote:

You simply don't know what the differences could be that are caused by the different interfaces the USB and disc drive have to go through before reaching the DAC stage. It's well known for example that USB connections cause a significant amount of jitter, higher than S/PDIF. I don't know what connections are between the disc and the DAC stage, but they're bound to be different, and so have different effects.

This is incorrect. There is no jitter difference between media, whether it is internal HD, external HD (whatever the interface), USB stick, SSD, ethernet. At that stage there is no clock, no timing, just numbers.

There is potentially interface jitter with a USB-connected DAC (or potentially, none at all with asynchronous transmission). But there is not and cannot be with USB media. It is only after the bits come off the storage media, and go to the soundcard buffer and then out of that buffer that the data is clocked into an s/pdif bitstream, so there can be no jitter until that point.

The drives themselves have buffers and data controllers so there's quite a # of places in the chain where things could possibly be affected but the data itself is not jittered as stored if intact.

The experiments I have done, same CD, various ripping devices and software including EAC and a Plextor CD Drive, the HDX still sounded the best. and it was all about the music. Don't ask me the technical reason.

Did you blind test?

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Murphy:
Don't ask me the technical reason.

Not being pejorative in the least but it is possibly better because you want it to be, and expect it to be. This effect of self-fulfilling prophecy when combined with an $8500 price tag can make anything possible.

Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Imagine how you would feel if you perceived the HDX rips to be inferior.

If they are identical rips, and technically should sound the same, but the HDX sounds better to you, CHEERS! No problems there. I see it as a confirmation that you have a very high quality product that is worth the money it costs and works very well.

Win, win, win.

-patrick

Pcstockton.

The rip may well sound better via the HDX, to some, but the ripping system isn't better than any other.
If it is why haven't Naim come out and told the world?
There was a thread that discussed a sound engineers scientific research into whether there is any difference between the major ripping software. He concluded they all ripped the same, which he proved, end of.

This subject has been argued to death, if you have any evidence, backed by scientific evidence , then please post it.

Naim has said that if you could assemble properly and pay attention to every detail with a computer, it can be done. They just say that their's is optimized and the guess work is removed. It seems for many this has proven to be the case as they're not getting the same results even with ripping programs. I'm not arguing the point, just restating what's been said. In audio, the end of the story is the resulting sound. Usually when things look the same but sound different, we're either looking at the wrong thing or looking at the same thing in the wrong way. End of story is telling some one that they can't hear what they say they do. That's as untenable as any other view.

These arguments constantly show up in audio. Digital in general has caused many. 16 bit is still argued by many very smart people to be as resolved as we can perceive for instance. When Naim did the first CDS and every other high end company were all about DACs, they had to devise a way to listen for jitter as it wasn't a problem until then because bits were bits.

quote:

Originally posted by iiyama:
Pcstockton.

The rip may well sound better via the HDX, to some, but the ripping system isn't better than any other.

This subject has been argued to death, if you have any evidence, backed by scientific evidence , then please post it.

iiyama,

read my post a little closer..... got it now?

I agree with you. My post suggests a "reason" for people thinking the rip "sounds" better than something else.

I suggest it sounds better because they want it to. And to that end it is better to them, which is all subjective anyway. I have never perceived a rip from one source to differ from another, unless one had errors of course.

I couldn't care less though. My system works wonderfully. The HDX sounds in-fucking-sanely good. So amazing. I would love one to pump my EAC rips through. But ill wait for the DAC.

Are you suggesting people who think an HDX rip sounds better than an Itunes rip, all other things being equal, are lying? Or delusional?

I certainly dont think that, and you shouldn't intimate that.

Perhaps there isnt a measurement yet for the differences we are hearing?

Im not suggesting that at all.

What im saying is the ripping process on the HDX isn't any better than EAC or iTunes, which some people believe.

How an item performs is subjective, simple as, some prefer 300 over the 500, some the 200 over the 250.2, others the CDX2 over the CDS3, or of course the Mac/Lavry to the HDX.

quote:

Originally posted by iiyama:

This subject has been argued to death, if you have any evidence, backed by scientific evidence , then please post it.

This is the comment I was referring to iiyama...

You are insinuating that I personally believe HDX ripping is better than something else. I never said that, don't think it, hence my satisfaction with EAC.

My post above, addressing Chris Murphy's experience, suggests a reason for people that do hear a difference between rips (all other things equal).

Thats all.

I would like to read why you think they are hearing a difference? How do you account for people experiences?

PC,

You listened to the HDX.

Did you listen to tracks/albums ripped to the HDX and then compared that to the same music which you ripped on your computer with EAC and then transferred to a USB thumbdrive and played into the HDX?

If you did, was there a difference?

There are all sort of theories, some are unsubstantiated and difficult to prove why, like FLAC Vs WAV. Most people claim WAV better than lossless since there is no decompression in the process. Strangely, my local Linn vendor swears that FLAC sounds better than WAV and he cannot explain why, they have been claiming that for over a year, and they are the ones with the mega bucks systems.

I personally believe that a lot of it is placebo effect.

Ripping however is another story, there are ways to rip a perfect copy from your CD, even if the CDs are slightly scratched. And there are many white papers explaining the technical methodologies. They are not rocket science, mostly just brute force approach of rereading the tracks until they read the correct data.

Old timers of computer based audio know about this and have been using Exact Audio Copy (EAC) for good measures. Whether it makes any difference is highly dependent on whether your CDs are damaged in the first place. People have experimented with various CDs and find most of the time there aren't that many errors to be fixed, in which case your iTune would rip just as perfectly. But it is good to have the insurance of a stubborn error correcting ripper like EAC.

Which brings us to the Naim ripper. I am sure Naim's implementation is well considered and rips a mean perfect copy almost all tie time. But I doubt if a Naim rip would better a properly set up EAC rip. After all both rips should be perfect. Aside from the fact that most CDs should not be that problematic in the first place and should sound the same with most rippers.

PC,

As i have said it is 'subjective' There are a lot of people who believe other combo's systems sound better than the HDX. What part of that don't you get?

How do you explain that? Lots of people have combos significantly cheaper than the HDX which to them sounds better? It's all subjective thats all, why do some prefer a Sony tv to a Panasonic? its subjective, a preference? Doesn't matter as long as they enjoy it.

There have been a lot of posts about the 282, some much prefer it to the 252, some don't! HiFi and music replay is a subjective matter, isn't it?

Im not saying people are right or wrong, it's what rocks your boat!

That's my take on it, yours?

Subjective differences are still differences and would go against the argument of sameness regardless of which was preferred. So far, I'm not aware of anyone that has heard a differnce not prefer the custom rip.

iiyama,

We are clearly talking right past each other.

My take on it is obvious above, in response to Chris' comment.

quote:

Chris Murphy:
"The experiments I have done, same CD, various ripping devices and software including EAC and a Plextor CD Drive, the HDX still sounded the best. and it was all about the music. Don't ask me the technical reason."

My comment on his last statement is in my post above. Not going to quote it, but I suggested a cocktail of expectations and wallet factor.

-p

Gary,

No i didn't. Even if I was lucky enough to have an HDX, I would still rip with EAC to FLAC.

I want my music tagged correctly, and I want it smaller than WAV, and I want Cue files and Log files, etc.

But I would use it to listen to CDs, so technically that is using it to rip.

Dont get me wrong. I want one badly. Well to be specific, I want a box that has a digital input and sounds like it.
-p