How do I play FLAC without a PC?

[StanleyB]

I need a stand alone FLAC player with a digital output. Right now I am using a laptop with a X-FI card. The card itself only supports digital audio up to 96KHz, which means that I can't play anything above 96KHz at the moment. So I am looking for something that can play FLAC and hopefully support 192KHz as well.

[Krisbee]

Not a stand alone player, but the M2 Tech 'Hi-Face' dongle claims to do 192KHz/24bit and seems to have been designed with laptops in mind ( http://www.m2tech.biz/products.html ).

Something like the QA-550--SD Card WAV Digital Audio Player only does wav and is limited to 44.1kHz 16-bit. Perhpas this should be your next product, a digital transport with optical out and capable of playing hirez files of various formats. Or this that just a squeeze box?

[Peter Galbavy]

The Squeezebox Touch spring to mind but it's £250 which seems excessive just for that. Only goes up to 96KHz too.

There are a number of MP3-type players that support FLAC but I am at a loss to recall any that have a digital output - some of the Sony's do, like their MD players, but Sony would go Chapter 11 before supporting a free Codec.

Will keep an eye out.

[Ali Tait]

I'd vote for the Touch.Yes,only does up to 24/94 (only!) And is a great sounding bit of kit.

[horace]

I need a stand alone FLAC player with a digital output. Right now I am using a laptop with a X-FI card. The card itself only supports digital audio up to 96KHz, which means that I can't play anything above 96KHz at the moment. So I am looking for something that can play FLAC and hopefully support 192KHz as well.

I use an Iriver H120 - one of the only MP3 players to feature an optical output (and an optical input!). It has a 20GB hard drive, can be Rockboxed (which adds heaps of features including support for just about every known format, including FLAC), will record direct to WAV (from line, optical input or microphone) and sounds great.
No 192KHz support, but you can't have everything ;).

You can pick these up on ebay (or the 40GB version - the H140) for less than £100 (sometimes considerably less than £100 - prices vary). Well worth a look.

I reckon ah H120/H140 playing FLAC via optical out into one of your DACs might be quite special....

Cheers

Martin

[The Vinyl Adventure]

Linn Sneaky/majik/akurate/klimax ds do 24/192

then when you want a to build a dac for either a sneaky or majik (akurate and klimax don't have digital outputs) il buy one too

[StanleyB]

192KHz is 'the' important aspect. It's for my lab to do research into 192KHz decoding and reproduction. I have about five 192KHz FLAC albums, and would dearly like to compare the decoded data against its 96KHz and 44.1KHz equivalent to see if it is worth the extra cost and effort in terms of SQ.


Linn Sneaky/majik/akurate/klimax ds do 24/192

then when you want a to build a dac for either a sneaky or majik (akurate and klimax don't have digital outputs) il buy one too
I am not a fan of Linn. The last Linn amp I had I used as a foot warmer in the winter.

[Ali Tait]

Chris (Stratmangler) here has compared both (96 and 192) with an album.Very little,if anything,in it was the verdict I think.

As far as the difference between 44.1 and 96,a large jump in SQ subjectively IMO.

[StanleyB]

Very interesting. I don't want to sink valuable funds into R&D if the outcome is expensive and, of use to a mere few, and of very little benefit.

[Stratmangler]

I have two ways of playing 24/192 music.

First is my Pioneer DV-656A - at 24/192 you are forced to use the player's analogue outputs, as the S/PDIF downsamples the material to 24/96. Unfortunately the analogue outputs, while making a pleasant enough sound, aren't exactly the highest of fi.

Second is using my EMU0202 with my laptop.
Which sounds very nice.
Better than the Pioneer.

And as Ali has pointed out, from what I've heard so far the leap from 16/44.1 to 24/96 is immense.
The step from 24/96 to 24/192 not so great.

I only have two albums done in 24/192 on DVD-Audio, "Hotel California" by the Eagles, and "If I Could Only Remember My Name" by David Crosby.
There is a possibilty that ADC transfer was not the best quality, and this has clouded the issue.

As far as I know the recent remastering of The Beatles catalogue was also done in 24/192, although all commercial releases have been of lesser resolution, and these will have been done with state of the art 2009 ADC's, not state of the art 2001 ADC's - the difference might be subtle, but equally the difference might be quite profound.
I suppose the only folk qualified to make an educated comment would be mastering engineers who have worked at those resolutions in the intervening years.

From what I've seen so far the M2Tech USB interface is the only publicly available S/PDIF interface that supports 24/192.

[Peter Galbavy]

I have/had a Samsung DVD player that also played DVD-A and SACD. now on loan to friend for DVD duties. I do however remember it playing the Fleetwood Mac Rumours DVD-A 2-channel track in 192KHz while my far more expensive Denon 3930 will only play a 96KHz stream for the same selection. Anyone know if the Rumours DVD-A is actually 192KHz ? (This was on SPDIF)

[Stratmangler]

I have/had a Samsung DVD player that also played DVD-A and SACD. now on loan to friend for DVD duties. I do however remember it playing the Fleetwood Mac Rumours DVD-A 2-channel track in 192KHz while my far more expensive Denon 3930 will only play a 96KHz stream for the same selection. Anyone know if the Rumours DVD-A is actually 192KHz ? (This was on SPDIF)

Rumours was 24/96.
What indication did you have that it was playing at 24/192 on the Samsung ?

[StanleyB]

I require a solution that does not involve a PC. So the M2Tech is out.
But I am genuinely surprised at the lack of 192KHz source players, and non-classical 192KHz audio files. Considering the amount of emails I have received over the years, and topics on forums, I would have expected a far wider choice of hardware and software by now.

[Ali Tait]

I'd have hoped so too,and indeed was chatting to Chris about this very subject the other night.It is a worry that cd will disappear and we might just be left with MP3 downloads.There's not a lot of 24/92 stuff about and even less 192.I just hope the record companies see a market for hi rez,otherwise it might disappear altogether,apart from some tiny labels releasing the crap played at hi fi shows

[Peter Galbavy]

Rumours was 24/96.
What indication did you have that it was playing at 24/192 on the Samsung ?

24/192 came up on my AVR at the time - which shocked me as it was AFAICR my ancient Denon 3802 - or it could have been the 4306 while I was waiting the two weeks for the 3930 to be in stock/replaced.

[Stratmangler]

24/192 came up on my AVR at the time - which shocked me as it was AFAICR my ancient Denon 3802 - or it could have been the 4306 while I was waiting the two weeks for the 3930 to be in stock/replaced.

The Samsung must be upsampling then.
What indication does it give with ordinary music DVD titles - the majority of them are 16/48.
I have just one which is 24/48 - Jethro Tull live from Montreaux 2003.

[Stratmangler]

I'd have hoped so too,and indeed was chatting to Chris about this very subject the other night.It is a worry that cd will disappear and we might just be left with MP3 downloads.There's not a lot of 24/92 stuff about and even less 192.I just hope the record companies see a market for hi rez,otherwise it might disappear altogether,apart from some tiny labels releasing the crap played at hi fi shows

The only comment I could add to our chat Ali is that there is an increasing number of artists who are taking control over their artistic output - I would hope that they are fully aware of the demand for high quality recorded output.

[Ali Tait]

Indeed,but how many really care about SQ? I suppose one good thing is a lot of new stuff must be recorded at these resolutions anyway,so hopefully fairly easy for the recordings to be released as such.

[Stratmangler]

Indeed,but how many really care about SQ? I suppose one good thing is a lot of new stuff must be recorded at these resolutions anyway,so hopefully fairly easy for the recordings to be released as such.

Agreed !

[StanleyB]

There are only a handful of genuine and good 192KHz DACs out there. I don't regard 192 upsamplers as genuine. Maybe 96KHz is just about all that we need. With most DAC chips now supporting 192KHz, maybe technology has outpaced the need for a higher resolution format. Even 32 bit audio has suffered a setback with the lack of uptake of SACD.

[Ali Tait]

I think it will also be the availability of cheap hard drives and solid-state technology that will be a big help in making hi rez a success.

[John]

I think you hit the nail on the head I think the investment and costs put companies off creating this and also the poor performance of sales for SACD Its a real shame as I would pay a premium for well recorded music if I could get the music I enjoyed

[Vincent Kars]

A couple of music servers play 24/192 like the Auraliti.
But I wonder if this answers the question as a music server is simply a PC with a sound card dressed up as audio gear
http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/HD_players.html

[Alex_UK]

The only comment I could add to our chat Ali is that there is an increasing number of artists who are taking control over their artistic output - I would hope that they are fully aware of the demand for high quality recorded output.

Do you think there is one? I bet (sadly) a very, very small percentage (i.e. us lot, and people like us) are interested in anyh
thing better than mp3...

[Themis]

I need a stand alone FLAC player with a digital output. Right now I am using a laptop with a X-FI card. The card itself only supports digital audio up to 96KHz, which means that I can't play anything above 96KHz at the moment. So I am looking for something that can play FLAC and hopefully support 192KHz as well.
The simplest would be to get a laptop with a 192 SPDIF output. Perhaps a second-hand Alienware.
Or a desktop.

[dave2010]

Very interesting. I don't want to sink valuable funds into R&D if the outcome is expensive and, of use to a mere few, and of very little benefit.If you can test using something like the M2Tech USB do you need to spend a lot of time and money on this?

Would it cost substantially more to develop equipment which uses higher rates - up to 192? Rather than limit the kit to (say) 96k, couldn't you implement up to 192 anyway, and leave it for users to decide? Obviously you'd have to check that things work OK, and hopefully the quality wouldn't be worse than at 96k.

I can see that you wouldn't want to produce something which might not enhance your reputatioin, but my point is that it might be a good idea to produce something which does allow users to try out hi-res files, even if we all decided in the end that there's no perceptible difference between 192k and 96k renditions. Of course if it added £00s to the cost it might not be worth it.

[StanleyB]

The simplest would be to get a laptop with a 192 SPDIF output. Perhaps a second-hand Alienware.
Or a desktop.
Those are all personal computers, and my question specifically asks for solutions that are not based on the use of any sort of computer.

[Ali Tait]

A Beresford streamer that supports up to 192 sounds like a good idea.I'd buy one!

[Themis]

Those are all personal computers, and my question specifically asks for solutions that are not based on the use of any sort of computer.
Sorry Stan, I misread your question. :(

The Olive HD Player, plays flacs up to 24/192, if I'm not mistaken.

[StanleyB]

A Beresford streamer that supports up to 192 sounds like a good idea.I'd buy one!
Would be nice, but I have no interest in developing such an item.

I have been going through numerous topics on various forums where people discuss 96KHz USB, 192KHz audio files, balanced audio outputs, etc. But on closer inspection, the associated hardware and software is really outside the price range of the largest part of the DAC buying public. It appears to me that playing high resolution audio files does not come cheap at all. Everything in the audio chain cost a lot more money:(.

[Vincent Kars]

The Olive HD Player, plays flacs up to 24/192, if I'm not mistaken.

It does but as pointed out above, it is a Linux box with a sound card so in the end a PC.
Nothing wrong with it but it makes me wonder what StanleyB wants.

[Vincent Kars]

It appears to me that playing high resolution audio files does not come cheap at all. Everything in the audio chain cost a lot more money

MUSILAND Monitor 01 US $82.00
Max Sampling rate: 24Bit/192khz over USB so they do supply their own drivers at the PC side.

[Themis]

It appears to me that playing high resolution audio files does not come cheap at all. Everything in the audio chain cost a lot more money:(.
In my opinion, there's not enough high-rez music material around at the moment.
There are a few 24/96 and still fewer 24/192, but not enough for investing a streamer and/or dac.

So, most of the buyers (me included) get a 24/96 streamer (for the rare existing material) and a 24/96 dac (or a 24/192, for being future-proof).

But that's all. Having a 24/192 streamer AND dac seems too much of an unnecessary expense.