Hi Tony,
1. Did anybody compare SSD with a rotating hard drive in the same PC and what were the differences in sound?
I think at some stage, everybody in here did. Might you have found this :
My SSD install ... this is NOT the representative of it all.
I can't find my post or topic where I very explicitly talked about the SSD being a wrong/filtering device, but around two years later than this referred to topic was born, I could refer to the very first post in there, where I actually decsribed the sound as wrong or "can't be". Anyway, if you'll receive answers to this question at all, it is almost to difficult to answer it to begin with. Here is an *example* of things which play a role :
Re: 0.9z-4-0. So mind you, the SSD is mentioned in there, but it is not about it. It *is* about all the various variables playing a role to the sound though, and the SSD was right in the middle of that. Back then !
Also, SSDs were different back then, and this too matters.
As you can see in the last link, I tend to (and started to do that at some stage) see those kind of things as a filter. Same could be happening with USB3 right now (see alive topic elsewhere). So, filters may work out for the better, but don't attack the source of problems. Think inherent noise somewhere, which now is nicely smeared because of more high frequency noise. Something like that. Btw, how this gets into your DACs is another story and at leat I won't go into that one.
Lead by me, so to speak, many started to shovle out their SSDs. I am sure not everybody did, but the least what happened is that the subject died. Not in the remainder of the world, but here it did. The contrary, that remainder kept on talking about the SSD being better for SQ, which in here is very doubtful to say the least.
I think if you just search for SSD you will get everybody's sigs and in there it for sure will be mentioned if used. You can alsoo look for "spinning disk" (or "spinning disc") and you will find those just the same. And, you can bet that people denoting it like that do it explicitly (like in : better than SSD).
So now you can see it for yourself ...
Having the SSD on the OS (which is generally where XXHighEnd is installed as well) vs. having the Gallery data on an SSD which is in the PC somewhere, is another matter again. Personally I still have the SSD in, knowing that using it not for the OS is for the better (SQ), but I honestly never tried to remove it at all. Bad thing ? I don't want to know, because the speed with Galleries is too much preferrable in my case (having thousands and thousands of albums in there). It is really maybe 10 times faster on this subject.
One thing is 100% sure : I live so, so much more in ease with the OS being on a spinning disc. The data won't disappear at random times, it's never out of space, and it's just normal. The SSD never is. It's always tiptoeing, if not having problems like you talked about yourself.
Ok, I hope others will jump in; As I said, it hasn't been a subject for a very long time (1.5 - 2 years). But maybe people have opinions ...
Peter
PS: Might you not have gotten it from the first link I referred to, the SSD differs very much per OS (version). This, while afterwards was proven that this OS itself was wrong. So, the SSD solved things which were wrong in the first place. This is where W7 SP1 comes in, because that seems to be right (and for example W7 without SP1 is not at all). Think about this foremost ...
