You can't compare an MP3 converted back to a proper FLAC ripped from a CD. The actual KBPS varies based on the music complexity I think. 1000-1400 is what I see on foobar most of the time.
guys can we start a baseline fact here to help me and others reading this post.
what is the single best way to get digital music from a computer to a dac?
maudio revo 7.1 set to digital out through a coaxial or via usb.
or does it matter?
why is there so many versions from $70 ebay to $5000 consumer brand dacs all stating usb first?
what is the single best way to get digital music from a computer to a dac?
maudio revo 7.1 set to digital out through a coaxial or via usb.
or does it matter?
why is there so many versions from $70 ebay to $5000 consumer brand dacs all stating usb first?
Last edited:
your questions are pretty much impossible to answer with certainty in a forum full of opinions and you will just get a heap of conflicting opinions. most will use USB->i2s/DSD convertors these days vs spdif and a good one is IMO the way to go. Others still swear by spdif (but they would be wrong... Ha!) USB used to be inferior a looooooooong time ago.
the question about cost from $70-$5000 how can that question be answered? you can spend $50-$15000 on a pushbike too, $50->$20000 on a camera, $10-$100,000,000 for some scribbles on paper, $1->150 for a hamburger etc.
because the market will bare it...
didnt we just cover this and then julf linked those xiph.org links?
the question about cost from $70-$5000 how can that question be answered? you can spend $50-$15000 on a pushbike too, $50->$20000 on a camera, $10-$100,000,000 for some scribbles on paper, $1->150 for a hamburger etc.
because the market will bare it...
didnt we just cover this and then julf linked those xiph.org links?
no question is impossible to answer. this is what a forum is for. 5 years ago when i bought a ebay cheap assembled dac there was no mention at all of usb just optical and coaxial.
when i searched what was out there now all i saw was usb usb usb usb everywhere.
my question about 70 to 5000 had nothing about the cost and everything about all of them have usb listed first in there inputs, which makes it look like that is the most used.
one time everyone claimed svideo was the best video connection till a better one came
along.
as far as the link goes , it was very interesting but left me with more questions.
see the number one issue now i'm having is i'm reading post that say usb can only support 16bit. if that is true why one you want that?
when i searched what was out there now all i saw was usb usb usb usb everywhere.
my question about 70 to 5000 had nothing about the cost and everything about all of them have usb listed first in there inputs, which makes it look like that is the most used.
one time everyone claimed svideo was the best video connection till a better one came
along.
as far as the link goes , it was very interesting but left me with more questions.
see the number one issue now i'm having is i'm reading post that say usb can only support 16bit. if that is true why one you want that?
you didnt catch the detail... I said these questions are impossible to answer with the certainty that you are asking for, because they are a matter of opinion and to ask this forum or others like it to agree on what is the best is an operation doomed to fail.
of course most have USB, its name gives a hint as to its ubiquity; Universal Serial Bus its the most pervasive digital data connection on the planet for every industry that leverages computing power. Even if it wasnt the best it would be likely to be the most popular, or at least popular enough to not be ignored.
who says USB can only support 16bit? whoever said that is wrong wrong wrong... and hasnt used a USB audio device made in the last several years (more like 5-6 minimum). USB supports more than 32bit, it doesnt have a limit at all really as far as the physical connection for audio, but for example my USB->i2s convertors support 8 x 32bit/192kHz 4 x 32bit/384kHz multichannel PCM, as well as up to DSD256.
the limits of USB itself are waaaay beyond what is even theoretically audible, beyond our power to record, reproduce, or hear. there simply isnt any extra musical information there that can be represented by higher than 24bit (arguably 16bit) USB so any change from here will be a practical one. If USB has an Achilles heal, it would be that in standard form it requires a ground connection between the DAC and the Computer, which can transmit noise in bad or old designs, but that is mostly solved for any reasonably high quality audio device.
24bit audio as opposed to 16bit audio playback on 24 or 32bit dacs is really pretty different too. 24bit was mainly added to give flexibility in the audio production process.
with a high quality design DAC these days, the connection type is mostly irrelevant to the output quality; dacs are much more agnostic than they used to be
of course most have USB, its name gives a hint as to its ubiquity; Universal Serial Bus its the most pervasive digital data connection on the planet for every industry that leverages computing power. Even if it wasnt the best it would be likely to be the most popular, or at least popular enough to not be ignored.
who says USB can only support 16bit? whoever said that is wrong wrong wrong... and hasnt used a USB audio device made in the last several years (more like 5-6 minimum). USB supports more than 32bit, it doesnt have a limit at all really as far as the physical connection for audio, but for example my USB->i2s convertors support 8 x 32bit/192kHz 4 x 32bit/384kHz multichannel PCM, as well as up to DSD256.
the limits of USB itself are waaaay beyond what is even theoretically audible, beyond our power to record, reproduce, or hear. there simply isnt any extra musical information there that can be represented by higher than 24bit (arguably 16bit) USB so any change from here will be a practical one. If USB has an Achilles heal, it would be that in standard form it requires a ground connection between the DAC and the Computer, which can transmit noise in bad or old designs, but that is mostly solved for any reasonably high quality audio device.
24bit audio as opposed to 16bit audio playback on 24 or 32bit dacs is really pretty different too. 24bit was mainly added to give flexibility in the audio production process.
with a high quality design DAC these days, the connection type is mostly irrelevant to the output quality; dacs are much more agnostic than they used to be
Last edited:
I haven't read much/any of this thread, apologies if I'm repeating something here.
One other point is that ubiquity of USB may well be as much about market demand for computer audio as anything else too. Any observation on the popularity of any one transport over another may not be a good indicator of it's performance.
As a follow up on qusp's last statement, my opinion is that the connection type/transport should be selected for user convenience and the DAC can be made such that it is a non-issue, though you may not be able to achieve that with a $70 ebay DAC.
One other point is that ubiquity of USB may well be as much about market demand for computer audio as anything else too. Any observation on the popularity of any one transport over another may not be a good indicator of it's performance.
As a follow up on qusp's last statement, my opinion is that the connection type/transport should be selected for user convenience and the DAC can be made such that it is a non-issue, though you may not be able to achieve that with a $70 ebay DAC.
In my experience you have to spend more on a usb DAC for it to sound anything near a spdif input device. If you have a digital out on your computer, then I'd use that as a DAC input. This then frees up your choice of DAC. The only reason most DACs have a USB input is because not many computers have a digital out.
I've been trying a few second hand in the £1-200 range from ebay, and modding a few. The differences are huge. My current fave is a modified QED Digit (with external power supply). This and a modified muse nos DAC I've found to be better sounding for me than a beresford 7520 with upgraded op amps. The beresford improved massively when not using the USB input.
All I would advise is to try a few and see how they compare. I think I might try a build with this :
http://hifimediy.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=62&product_id=60 and see how it compares.
In my opinion, the only way to find the best solution is to try a few and see how it sounds to you. Try swapping between USB and digital out etc. Sometimes what should theoretically sound best doesn't..
I've been trying a few second hand in the £1-200 range from ebay, and modding a few. The differences are huge. My current fave is a modified QED Digit (with external power supply). This and a modified muse nos DAC I've found to be better sounding for me than a beresford 7520 with upgraded op amps. The beresford improved massively when not using the USB input.
All I would advise is to try a few and see how they compare. I think I might try a build with this :
http://hifimediy.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=62&product_id=60 and see how it compares.
In my opinion, the only way to find the best solution is to try a few and see how it sounds to you. Try swapping between USB and digital out etc. Sometimes what should theoretically sound best doesn't..
Last edited:
Yes, size on the hard disk, but also size in amount of bits that have to be transferred over the network etc.
So looking at the size of a FLAC file, there are two measures - one is the actual file size (on the disk), and the other is the data rate of the file - the amount of bits per second.
Not same. But similar. 🙂
Let's try an analogy, with all the dangers and shortcomings of any analogy...
Let's talk about pieces of fruit - let's make it peaches, so we don't favour any computer manufacturers 🙂
You can just chuck the peach slices in a jar, with a lot of empty space. That would be the "raw" PCM that you get off the CD. Putting them in a vacuum bag, without any air, is a more effective method of packing them, but when you open the bag, it is still the same peach slices. That would be FLAC - the data is more densely packed (approximately by a factor of 2), but still the same data.
MP3 (and other perceptual codecs) are like freeze-drying the fruit. Takes much less space (a factor of between 4 and 40, depending on quality), but you are throwing something away. When you add water and reconstitute the peach slices, they again take up their original space, and might taste perfectly OK (to the extent that you couldn't taste any difference in a blind tasting), but it is not a perfect reconstruction any more.
So taking the peach slices, freeze-drying them, reconstituting them by soaking them in water, and then putting them in the jar is not the same as putting the original slices in the jar without freeze-drying and reconstitution.
This is why it doesn't make any sense to rip a CD to mp3, and then convert the mp3 file to FLAC. Either you are happy with the mp3 (and 320 kbit/s mp3 is very good), or you re-rip all your CDs directly to FLAC without any mp3 conversion.
Until you get stuff like this sorted out, looking at USB vs. spdif and various expensive DACs doesn't make sense.
Another aspect is the fact that unlike amps, speakers and other more traditional audio stuff, DACs trends are still changing rather rapidly. First USB was very rare on a DAC, then they got isynchronous USB, now the latest rage is asynchronous USB. Some people want DSD capability. And as the technology becomes more common, it becomes better and cheaper. So if you buy a very expensive DAC now, there will be something better (and cheaper) in 6 months. So don't go overboard, and if you are happy with what you have now, waiting for the Next Big Thing is always a good idea.
guys i must try to make you understand, you folks have way more understanding than i do.
you seem to know everything about the subject.
up untill i started this thread, i have not heard of terms lossy, lossless, codec, jitter, dither or even flac or now alac.
when i first asked about a dac never did i think the talk would lead here.
i need a dumbed down version if you will .
this has done nothing but trouble me more now that i know i have no idea what's going on .
is the best audio there is cd?
what format is a cd bought from a music store?
you seem to know everything about the subject.
up untill i started this thread, i have not heard of terms lossy, lossless, codec, jitter, dither or even flac or now alac.
when i first asked about a dac never did i think the talk would lead here.
i need a dumbed down version if you will .
this has done nothing but trouble me more now that i know i have no idea what's going on .
is the best audio there is cd?
what format is a cd bought from a music store?
I guess all those years doing EE and CS at university weren't entirely wasted, and I am OK as long as you don't ask specific questions about Windows or Mac software - I am a Linux guy 🙂
Did the fruit freeze-drying analogy help at all?
A CD is in a format called "red book" (named after the original standards document defining the format). It is 44.1 kHz sample rate, 16 bit linear PCM audio (so has a data rate of 1411.2 kbit/s).
The problem with a CD is the mechanical part. As the bits are read off the CD, it is easy to get both timing and data errors. A modern CD player or computer can buffer away the timing variations (jitter), but the error correction capabilities of the CD system are somewhat limited (if a normal CD player encounters data errors, it just "fakes" it by filling in the gaps so that you don't really hear it - but you don't want that fill to be played every time you play the file you copied off the CD).
As to the data format, you will get endless heated debates about "hi-res" formats. "Hi-res" usually means either more bits per sample (24 instead of 16), theoretically giving more resolution and lower noise floor (but the best possible recordings achieve maybe 20 bits anyway), or higher sample rate (48, 96, or even 192 kbit/s).
Signal processing theory states that you only need twice the sample rate of the highest frequency signal you want to reproduce, so as the upper limit of human hearing is around 20 kHz, a 40 kHz sample rate would be sufficient. The problem is that that assumes a perfectly steep low pass filter (as you can not let any frequencies higher than half the sample rate enter the ADC), so you have to allow for a less-than-perfect filter. Thus a higher sample rate allows you to use filters that are less steep and better behaved, but beyond 96 kHz it gets pretty pointless - sort of like making sure your TV can do infra-red and ultra violet just in case...
Unfortunately it seems that some of the "hi-res" stuff sold by places like HDTracks isn't - we have come across cases where it is pretty clear that the original material was red book CD material, but upsampled and zero-filled (basically adding empty air) to produce something that superficially seems like a hi-res file.
I know there will be people who will comment on this stating that hi-res formats sound much better than CD, but I haven't seen too many clear, unambiguous and repeatable listening tests confirming that.
By the way, did you watch the videos at xiph.org?
There are a couple of good reference sites. One is The Well Tempered Computer, another is The HydrogenAudio Knowledgebase (especially on foobar2000).
thanks julf
yes the analogy was understood but you all must remember that all the terms and operations are not visible . so with no reference showing on a monitor as in what bit rate is now playing , how do i know that what i'm listening to? other then the normal mp3 at 320kbs, flac at 1590kbs . i see some dac's have a bit stream led to show when 48k or 96k are seen.
why on a monitor is no bit rate shown? or is there a program to allow that?
yes i watched that guy in the 2 vids about 4 times. he talks about general digital overview. i need no bs to the point factual learning or even better teaching ideas.
i don't really care who claims what about blind test and other related mumbo jumbo.
my most critical hard to please listener is me. i know what sounds best.
you really need to know that.
just to be sure , last night i asked my next door friend to come over for a listen. i didn't tell him why or give him a clue as to why. he has never seen my room or audio gear.
i at first put on some classical mp3 320 music. he thought it was fantastic which lead him to tons of questions as to what was playing , the 2 elliot p101 mono amps and the 3 way 6 driver speakers i use.
the very next track to play was hdtracks 24bit 96khz karrin allyson send in the clowns.
his face changed , he raised his eyebrows and blurted out holy f.
he asked why that was so much better then the other music.
so you can't get more blind test then that.
so now you see i know what sounds good. when i started the first post about a dac, it was for a total other reason . untill the thead to this path i never heard of flac or the other formats , or new what 16bit and 24 bit was. i never really gave a computer the respect as a true high end quality player. i used the mp3 format for 6 years all the while i never thought it quality sound enough just easy to store .
my best news from this is you have opened my eyes and i now respect a computer as a contender in the high end world.
since then my dac is perfect the way it is, my p101 amps have never performed better.
the simplest way to see what i'm hearing in my room is mp2 seems 2d and flac 24bit is 3d.
the room is filed with non directional music and dead center vocals.
even vinyl is not as good, even after $1000 of upgrades to rb300 arm , cart and phono preamp. in a 30 year old 100's of thousands uses turntable that one 24bit track download beat.
for the first time digital music has beaten a true world class preformer of the analog time line.
yes the analogy was understood but you all must remember that all the terms and operations are not visible . so with no reference showing on a monitor as in what bit rate is now playing , how do i know that what i'm listening to? other then the normal mp3 at 320kbs, flac at 1590kbs . i see some dac's have a bit stream led to show when 48k or 96k are seen.
why on a monitor is no bit rate shown? or is there a program to allow that?
yes i watched that guy in the 2 vids about 4 times. he talks about general digital overview. i need no bs to the point factual learning or even better teaching ideas.
i don't really care who claims what about blind test and other related mumbo jumbo.
my most critical hard to please listener is me. i know what sounds best.
you really need to know that.
just to be sure , last night i asked my next door friend to come over for a listen. i didn't tell him why or give him a clue as to why. he has never seen my room or audio gear.
i at first put on some classical mp3 320 music. he thought it was fantastic which lead him to tons of questions as to what was playing , the 2 elliot p101 mono amps and the 3 way 6 driver speakers i use.
the very next track to play was hdtracks 24bit 96khz karrin allyson send in the clowns.
his face changed , he raised his eyebrows and blurted out holy f.
he asked why that was so much better then the other music.
so you can't get more blind test then that.
so now you see i know what sounds good. when i started the first post about a dac, it was for a total other reason . untill the thead to this path i never heard of flac or the other formats , or new what 16bit and 24 bit was. i never really gave a computer the respect as a true high end quality player. i used the mp3 format for 6 years all the while i never thought it quality sound enough just easy to store .
my best news from this is you have opened my eyes and i now respect a computer as a contender in the high end world.
since then my dac is perfect the way it is, my p101 amps have never performed better.
the simplest way to see what i'm hearing in my room is mp2 seems 2d and flac 24bit is 3d.
the room is filed with non directional music and dead center vocals.
even vinyl is not as good, even after $1000 of upgrades to rb300 arm , cart and phono preamp. in a 30 year old 100's of thousands uses turntable that one 24bit track download beat.
for the first time digital music has beaten a true world class preformer of the analog time line.
Last edited:
Most player programs have options to show what sample rate and bit depth the music currently playing has. As I am not a windows guy, I don't know how to enable that option in foobar.
At the same time, all the player program can show is the sample rate and bit depth of the file it is playing - it has no way of telling what quality the original source material was.
Monty is about as no-bs as you can get. Another good one is Ethan Winer, he has some good workshop videos on youtube.
Blind tests are not mumbo jumbo - they are one of the most important tools we use when we design digital systems and audio encoding formats.
Absolutely. And that is the only thing that counts in the end.
That is an interesting anecdote, but for the purposes of actually determining design parameters for digital gear and codecs, the listening tests have to be rather more rigorous and controlled. And that is fine - that is a different context.
Sorry to have to be so factual and nit-picking, but you know what you think sounds good. And, of course, for you, that is what counts.
Glad to hear!
Not for the first time - Digital technology got to that point somewhere around, oh, maybe 30 years ago, but at the time it was complicated and expensive.
It is a shame that while the technology has gotten so great and affordable, the listening habits of most people have gone towards extremely compressed music played over crappy headsets endorsed by people who are famous for being famous...
Monty is about as no-bs as you can get. Another good one is Ethan Winer, he has some good workshop videos on youtube.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i know that , and in no way was i commenting him or the vids were bs.
just the normal claims made buy producers of products that state there's is better.
blind tests are not mumbo jumbo - they are one of the most important tools we use when we design digital systems and audio encoding formats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i just meant any company claims of there blind test resulting in 8 ot of 10 vote in there favour. who cares!
one of the most talked about bits of mumbo jumbo is the claims on speaker wire. some say one thing while other say something else.
while others claim hog wash! wire is wire.
i have built over 200 pairs of speakers and as a result have been around the block on speaker wire.i have gone though a lot of brands and designs from 22 ga silver teflon covered to cat 5 data cable in a 56 pair braided cable.
this is where a companys blind tests are propaganda .
the cat 5 is highly regarded but due to low inductance and high capacitance which does sound great on tube amps, not so much on mosfet amps. some mosfet amps even sound like crap with such cables.
my currant cable system is bare copper wire solid strand. you know the gorund lead in 14/2 house wire? yes thats right that gound lead from a length of house wire . short 5 foot peices 2 for left and 2 for right.you have to bend these so they will never touch. lots of people say this will not work. but ha it does on my amps and in my room.
and thats what i mean by mumbo jumbo in a nut shell.people have to find what works for them.
all i care about is sound quality period. don't care about what takes place in making it sound good, just that when i press play it had better sound good or it's life will be short.
in the end the answer to my question (what is the best format for audiophile digital music on a computer) which for me is clearly 24bit96khz at 2099kbs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i know that , and in no way was i commenting him or the vids were bs.
just the normal claims made buy producers of products that state there's is better.
blind tests are not mumbo jumbo - they are one of the most important tools we use when we design digital systems and audio encoding formats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i just meant any company claims of there blind test resulting in 8 ot of 10 vote in there favour. who cares!
one of the most talked about bits of mumbo jumbo is the claims on speaker wire. some say one thing while other say something else.
while others claim hog wash! wire is wire.
i have built over 200 pairs of speakers and as a result have been around the block on speaker wire.i have gone though a lot of brands and designs from 22 ga silver teflon covered to cat 5 data cable in a 56 pair braided cable.
this is where a companys blind tests are propaganda .
the cat 5 is highly regarded but due to low inductance and high capacitance which does sound great on tube amps, not so much on mosfet amps. some mosfet amps even sound like crap with such cables.
my currant cable system is bare copper wire solid strand. you know the gorund lead in 14/2 house wire? yes thats right that gound lead from a length of house wire . short 5 foot peices 2 for left and 2 for right.you have to bend these so they will never touch. lots of people say this will not work. but ha it does on my amps and in my room.
and thats what i mean by mumbo jumbo in a nut shell.people have to find what works for them.
all i care about is sound quality period. don't care about what takes place in making it sound good, just that when i press play it had better sound good or it's life will be short.
in the end the answer to my question (what is the best format for audiophile digital music on a computer) which for me is clearly 24bit96khz at 2099kbs
Last edited:
Well, guess they have to sell their products somehow 🙂
Absolutely agree.
Reminds me of my corporate career days - I used to have an axe planted in a piece of wood on my meeting table in my office. People got the message 🙂
For me the best format is anything from 24/96 FLAC to 128 k MP3 depending on the music, the situation and where/how I play it. No point in having 24/96 on the car stereo... 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.