Ripping - quality

Posted by: PBenny1066 on 12 March 2010

Have just joined the Naim club with a Supernait, which I am thrilled with. Feeeding Proac D28s which I also love. Am now dipping my toes into the digital world. For the immediate future I will be happy with CD quality but intend to move to a MacMini based system, with CDs ripped uncompressed in AIFF format, feeding S/N via optical output. My question is this - can anybody explain what is going on in the ripping process, and in turn in the playback process from hard disk ? I have seen much written about different ripping software apparently sounding different, but I struggle to understand how it could be different. In uncompressed format, I would thought that everything upstream of the DAC in the S/N would sound the same. I guess I am trying to understand a bit more about the science - or alternatively put the myth to rest.

Cheers, Paul

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by Guido Fawkes

Some software packages correct errors better than others; have a read of the two, very helpful, Naim white papers explaining this Naim CD Ripping Engine and Naim Server Sound Rip Technology.

In my experience, Naim CD players are quite exceptional and any Naim CD player I've heard playing through the analogue inputs of the SuperNait sounds better than a MacBook playing through the DAC; by better I mean there was a grainy quality that I didn't like when using the MacBook. I believe this is probably because of the mediocre power supplies that Apple uses and the quality (or lack thereof) of it's S/PDIF interface. However, I understand if you use a quality USB or Firewire to S/PDIF convertor these problems are overcome, and with a MacBook you can disconnect the power while listening. However I've not heard this enhanced combination.

Unless you go for HDX/nDAC as your computer front-end or something commensurate then I doubt you'll hear an improvement over CD and, if your experience matches mine, it won't be as good. However, computer audio can sound as good as CD - try a USB stick in the Naim DAC and the sound quality is far better than I'd ever thought it would be.

Enjoy your current set-up and don't rush in to Computer Audio would be my advice - for I think there are some more exciting products on the horizon than those currently on offer. The nDAC is the first ingredient.

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by Harry H. Wombat

quote:
AIFF format

quote:
My question is this - can anybody explain what is going on in the ripping process, and in turn in the playback process from hard disk ?

Apologies if this answer is too simplistic or too patronising - but you did ask

CDs store music as a series of ones and zeros, each one or zero is called a bit. These bits are stored on a CD in a particular CD specific format. These bits need to be stored in a different format on a computer. The process of ripping can simply be viewed as reading the bits from the CD and then converting them to the format required by the computer.

These formats on the computer can hold any of the following: compressed/lossy, compressed/lossless, uncompressed/lossless. Compressed means the file size is shorter and lossy means that data has been lost in the process and can never ever be recovered. With compressed/lossless, the computer can run the file through some maths to produce an identical file to the uncompressed/lossless.

During playback, the computer reads the file and converts it to another format to stream to the DAC. This is always the same forat regardless of whether the source file is compressed, lossy or not.

A compressed file will require more cpu to process before the result is sent to the DAC.

An uncompressed files will require less CPU to convert it to the required format before sending to the DAC.

Some people can hear a difference between compressed and uncompressed files even if both are lossless. You will find discussions on this on this forum.

Now - if two ripping engines both ripping to the same format produce identical files they cannot sound different (although I should point out some people claim to hear a difference. I do not believe this). Consequently, if two files sound different they MUST be different.

This is a very simple(istic) explanation, there are other issues to contend with such as track lead in etc. Also some rippers will check your rip against a database of rips and tell you where and when errors have occurred.

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by paremus

PBenny,

Pretty much agree with Harry here. If your CD's are in good condition - any solution with error correction enabled will be just fine. No need to get paranoid

w.r.t. A Mac front end - get your self something like a HiFace, invest in Amarra Mini or PV - and you'll have a front end that is up there with the best CD players.

Cheers

Richard

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by james n

quote:
However, computer audio can sound as good as CD

Computer audio, done properly, can sound better than a CD player.

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by paremus

James - only if you are open minded ;-)

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by rich46

quote:
Originally posted by Harry H. Wombat:
quote:
AIFF format

quote:
My question is this - can anybody explain what is going on in the ripping process, and in turn in the playback process from hard disk ?

Apologies if this answer is too simplistic or too patronising - but you did ask

CDs store music as a series of ones and zeros, each one or zero is called a bit. These bits are stored on a CD in a particular CD specific format. These bits need to be stored in a different format on a computer. The process of ripping can simply be viewed as reading the bits from the CD and then converting them to the format required by the computer.

These formats on the computer can hold any of the following: compressed/lossy, compressed/lossless, uncompressed/lossless. Compressed means the file size is shorter and lossy means that data has been lost in the process and can never ever be recovered. With compressed/lossless, the computer can run the file through some maths to produce an identical file to the uncompressed/lossless.

During playback, the computer reads the file and converts it to another format to stream to the DAC. This is always the same forat regardless of whether the source file is compressed, lossy or not.

A compressed file will require more cpu to process before the result is sent to the DAC.

An uncompressed files will require less CPU to convert it to the required format before sending to the DAC.

Some people can hear a difference between compressed and uncompressed files even if both are lossless. You will find discussions on this on this forum.

Now - if two ripping engines both ripping to the same format produce identical files they cannot sound different (although I should point out some people claim to hear a difference. I do not believe this). Consequently, if two files sound different they MUST be different.

This is a very simple(istic) explanation, there are other issues to contend with such as track lead in etc. Also some rippers will check your rip against a database of rips and tell you where and when errors have occurred.

sensible quote . and i agree. two idential wav/flax produced and replayed through the same system should be the same. i experimented with ripnas with wav/flac and several of us could not tell any differences. may be subjective but decided to rip 2500 cds in flac and happy with the convience of select/play . ripping that many was a bore

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by PBenny1066

Harry,

thanks for the reply, no offence taken, I am a Forum virgin after all ! Still don't uqite get it though. The files on a CD are in aiff format. So if you "rip" these uncompressed, you move these aiff files from the CD to the hard disk. Assuming the CD is in good condition (no scratches etc), there shouldn't be any difference between the files on the CD and on the hard disk ??

Cheers, Paul

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by Aleg

quote:
Originally posted by PBenny1066:
Harry,

thanks for the reply, no offence taken, I am a Forum virgin after all ! Still don't uqite get it though. The files on a CD are in aiff format. So if you "rip" these uncompressed, you move these aiff files from the CD to the hard disk. Assuming the CD is in good condition (no scratches etc), there shouldn't be any difference between the files on the CD and on the hard disk ??

Cheers, Paul

Hi Paul

I sense a slight misunderstanding.

The audio on a CD is not in AIFF format, nor in WAV for that matter.

The data on a CD is 2 channels of PCM audio, each signed 16-bit values sampled at 44100 Hz. So it is in PCM-format. The so-called RedBook format.

The audio-data on an audio CD is also not exactly the same as bits of data on a data-CD. The audio has to be read more as a continuous stream-of-data instead of seperate blocks-of-data.

When audio is read from CD and stored on a computer it is converted to AIFF, WAV or any other format. So when storing in AIFF there is already a conversion taking place.

Also when ripping audio there is a lot to do in terms of error correction because a CD-reader will not always read the audio bit without faults and will have to do re-reads and corrections to get it right. Depending on the settings of the ripping software, it will spend more or less time to "get-it-right". Nowadays there is also a facility called AcurateRip where the 'digital fingerprints' are stored from different rips by different people on different CD-readers. The best ripper software will compare its rip with the fingerprints on the AcurateRip database and determine if the rip was done accurately. dBPoweramp, EAC and probably some more are good rippers that check with AcurateRip database.

This is a difficult and wide ranging subject. So take it easy, a step at a time.
So lets keep your questions coming gently.

-
aleg

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by PBenny1066

Aleg,

many thanks, a really useful response. Clearly not as straightforward as i thought.

I guess I'll have to trust my ears rather than my brain and listen to some of the suggestions on this post - HiFace, Amarra etc.

I'm sure I'm not the first to have asked these questions, and I won't be the last. Would be really nice to have an idiots guide to what's going on in digital audio.

Thanks to those who have posted, what a great Forum this is !

Best, Paul

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by PBenny1066

Richard (Paremus ?)

thanks - silly question perhaps, does Amarra rip CDs too, and if so is it better than the iTunes ?

Am ankle deep in CDs right now, ripping using iTunes....on hold right now.

Cheers, Paul

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by Aleg

quote:
Originally posted by PBenny1066:
Richard (Paremus ?)

thanks - silly question perhaps, does Amarra rip CDs too, and if so is it better than the iTunes ?

Am ankle deep in CDs right now, ripping using iTunes....on hold right now.

Cheers, Paul

Hi Paul

It's me again

.

iTunes is said to be not the best tool for ripping on Mac.

Best is to check out XLD (X Lossless Decoder)for the Mac and use it in "secure ripping" mode.
XLD also supports the use of the AccurateRip technology.

Check here for the software and here for a screenshot or Google for "X Lossless Decoder".

-
aleg

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by PBenny1066

Aleg,

many thanks. Downloaded XLD which seems simple enough. Ripping (via iTunes) on hold. Marriage also on hold.

Proost, Paul

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by Aleg

quote:
Originally posted by PBenny1066:
Aleg,

many thanks. Downloaded XLD which seems simple enough. Ripping (via iTunes) on hold. Marriage also on hold.

Proost, Paul

Hey Paul

Are you Dutch?

And take care, this is just a hobby. The wife's more important

-
aleg

Posted on: 13 March 2010 by MontyMusic

Hi

When using XLD, how do you set up the prefs to get it to auto import into iTunes with album, artist, title info instead of it splittig by track number etc?

Cheers

Posted on: 14 March 2010 by PureHifi

Wikipedia is the source for the following...and I know I am repeating a little of what has already been covered.

"Audio CDs do not use WAV as their sound format, using instead Red Book audio. The commonality is that both audio CDs and WAV files have the audio data encoded in PCM. WAV is a data file format for a computer to use that can't be understood by CD players directly. To record WAV files to an Audio CD the file headers must be stripped and the remaining PCM data written directly to the disc as individual tracks with zero-padding added to match the CD's sector size"

AIFF is very similar to WAV, in that it stores uncompressed PCM data...although since MAC OSX there is some changes to the AIFF format (also see AIFF in wiki).

So WAV and AIFF are the closet in real terms to what is encoded on the original CD and other formats require encoders and decoders to rip, convert and play...therein lies the gotcha - various rippers and decoders will do a better or worse job in some cases. That is evident in the HDX software upgrade, which included a revised FLAC decoder, said to improve the playback quality.

Posted on: 14 March 2010 by MontyMusic

I've worked out the ripping process to attach the files properly into iTunes. A bit clunky but it seems worth the hassle.....

All I need now is a streamer and a DAC !!

Posted on: 14 March 2010 by Guido Fawkes

quote:
Originally posted by james n:
quote:
However, computer audio can sound as good as CD
Computer audio, done properly, can sound better than a CD player.

I've never heard it done properly then - all I say it what I hear and a CD5i or Rega Apollo still sounds better than any computer audio set-up I've heard - unless you count Naim DAC + USB stick as Computer Audio: this really was an ear opener.

Posted on: 15 March 2010 by Joe Bibb

quote:
Originally posted by ROTF:
I've never heard it done properly then -

Would seem a fair assessment.

Posted on: 15 March 2010 by PBenny1066

Hi Aleg,

no,British, not Dutch but I did live in Nederland for 9 years, some of it has obviously rubbed off. Had a quick listen to XLD vs iTunes and honestly couldn't hear any difference.

I think I'll have to investigate HiFace etc.. next.

Posted on: 15 March 2010 by Joe Bibb

quote:
Originally posted by PBenny1066:
Had a quick listen to XLD vs iTunes and honestly couldn't hear any difference.

I think I'll have to investigate HiFace etc.. next.

A difference you might find useful is that XLD produces a log that tells you what errors were found on the disc you have just ripped - if it matters to you. The price you pay is speed. The iTunes rips (lossless with correction) are quicker.

Joe