<sigh> Digital to Analogue

[Chops]

This may add to the debate...

I have applied soundcheck's mods (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com...oolbox-30.html) to my SB Touch. Part of the approach is to minimise the amount of processing the SBT has to carry out and this includes not decoding FLAC on the SBT but rather on the server delivering the files (in my case a small NAS). I'm happy with the mods like lots of folk and am comfortable that overall they provide something of an improvement in SQ.

By extrapolation (I know, a little tenious), could the same principle apply to DACs - the less work they've got to do, the better they sound?

Chris

[AlexM]

Best to start another thread on FLAC vs. WAV?

[Krisbee]

This may add to the debate...

I have applied soundcheck's mods (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com...oolbox-30.html) to my SB Touch. Part of the approach is to minimise the amount of processing the SBT has to carry out and this includes not decoding FLAC on the SBT but rather on the server delivering the files (in my case a small NAS). I'm happy with the mods like lots of folk and am comfortable that overall they provide something of an improvement in SQ.

Chris

But isn't the CPU of the SB underpowered in the frst case? Mind you, aren't logitech still using an ancient Linux kernel on the device as well, which cannot help matters.

Apart for blue tablets, in-memory players get a coulpe of mentions in this thread, Including: "Flacs have to be "exploded" back in a wav for an in-memory player to work."

That one puzzles me. Surely FLAC has to be decoded whether you use a so called "in-memory player" or not.

On the subject of "in-memory players". Skeptics, and others can always try a free experiement. Try a Linux LiveCD that has the boot option to "copy2ram" ( also called toram). If you're PC has plenty of memory not only will the ENTIRE operating system and apps be loaded into memory but you'll have enough memory to load entire CDs into memory too. FLAC or WAV, it will play from memory. Use htop and iotop to check what's going on. There should be zero disk access, in fact once Linux has booted in this way and you've got your audio files in memory, which is simply a case of copying them in an appropriate directory of the loaded Linux system, you could disconnect all optical and hard drives to prove the point.

Does it sound any better? You tell me, it's your ears.

[Vincent Kars]

Best to start another thread on FLAC vs. WAV?

Better start a thread "Lossless compression for dummies”

[bobbasrah]

Better start a thread "Lossless compression for dummies”

As this is already into the twilight zone, particularly with regard to the OP, Alex and Vincent are absolutely correct.

Would you care to kick that off Stan?

[Vincent Kars]

That one puzzles me. Surely FLAC has to be decoded whether you use a so called "in-memory player" or not.

There is a concept called software induced jitter (Cplay)
The assumption is that the more activity is going on (and in case of a computer this is software doing something) the more RFI, EMI, ripples on the power rail, etc.
This is supposed to disturb the clock driving the DA or the SPDIF header.

The idea behind memory playback is to minimize the activity so do everything needed before playback start
- Read the file from the HD first
- Decode it to lpcm
- Store it in a buffer in memory
Now you have a buffer with “DAC ready” output.

That is why memory playback is often used as an argument in the WAV-FLAC debate.
If the decoding of FLAC (requires a bit more CPU than the decoding of WAV but about 40% less I/O) is the culprit then doing all this before playback starts should eliminated differences caused by the processing

[StanleyB]

I already stated my findings. I'll leave the formulas to the mathematicians . No doubt the excuses for the differences will be disclosed soon.

[bobbasrah]

I already stated my findings. I'll leave the formulas to the mathematicians . No doubt the excuses for the differences will be disclosed soon.

Just to clarify the mathematics Stan - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC

[StanleyB]

I am quite aware what is claimed. But unlike text and numbers, audio and video don't do true lossless compression by algorithms. Data has to be discarded or lumped together in order to reduce size.
Try RAR on a video or audio file and see how much smaller the file is. In many cases it actually ends up larger. And the reason for that? Not much, if any, data that can be lumped together and discarded.
For a FLAC file to be so drastically reduced in size without any audio detail being disposed of is stretching the imagination. Just have a look at the source code of the encoding/decoding process to see how the data is handled in order to get an idea of things.

Of course, I am not here to re-educate the misguided souls who cling on to the believe that all is well in the lossless compression department. But a good degree in maths and knowledge of algorithms would be far more helpful than accepting the lossless claims as cast iron facts. Real audiophiles don't do things like that.

[AlexM]

Anyways...

I use DBPoweramp 12 for ripping and tagging, and my playback is via Squeebox touch and a CA 840C.

I have used Foobar and ASIO4All with USB Dacs, and felt that it sounded pretty good. w.r.t. the SB touch, I don't find there is any difference between server streaming FLAC to the SB Touch and streaming WAV files.

W.r.t. to players, I think you find one which best suits your needs in terms of media library handling, and go with that. Directplay will sound worst - anyting that provides bit-perfect output should sound similar!. to be honest working with a pc is a faff, so I went the NAS route with squeezebox media centre as the benefit of being able to access my library throughout the house is very desirable. The sb touch sounds great through my DAC on the main system and I use a couple of SB Booms elsewhere for casual listening.

Cheers,

Alex