Can a PC realy read the data accurately from CD?

[Flecko]

Hi all,
so I have some interesting findings. I upgraded my usb/spdif card and my CD-Transport with a new digital cabel with true 75 bnc connectors. Now I can use the BNC input of my DAC without adapter. Especially the sound from my CD-Transport improved significantly. After things has settled, I made some experiments  again which I made in the past. One of them was to compare sound from different EAC settings. I compared:
1 No Accurate Rip without C2;2 Accurate Rip without C2;3 Accurate Rip with C2.
Sound differences are rather small. Some time ago as I made the test the first time I prefered 1 and 2 to over 3 but could not realy tell if 1 or 2 should be better. After I checked the files with hexcompare it was clear they are identical. Now as I repeated the test I am not sure anymore if 1 and 2 is realy better than 3. Shouldn't 3 be better than 1 and 2 because of the error correction data that is read from the cd? What settings do you use?
And now to the more interesting part. Bevore the new cable and tests I thought CD's are read well be EAC but now I am not sure if that still holds. I compared riped files burned on a cd to the original. I do this because it sounds better (better resolution, less digital) than when played directly from pc. The files burned to cd sounds a little bit thin compared to the original. The original CD has a more full bodied sound which is much more involving. The soundsignature from the burned CD is the same thin sounding one I get when I blayback the files with my PC. So this thin sound should not come from the burning process.
Could it be, that we do not get the true Data from EAC? A hint is that the data differs if you use C2 to the case if you use it not. This can be shown by hexcompare. Is it possible that we listen to the correcting algorithm of EAC insted to the true data? I mention this because I made experiments with different drives that show there are no differents in the files if you use EAC with the same settings but different drives.
Greetings Adrian

[JohanZ]

What settings do you use?

See : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=580.msg4202#msg4202

Johan

[Flecko]

Thx for the link JohanZ. I found more information in the net and it seems that most people are not using the C2 correction. It is not a very reliable feature. In my case my LG BR-Burner says it had C2 but even with my most scratched CD EAC tells me it has probably no C2 ability. So this might be the reason because I get different results with and without C2. Hence the version without C2 should be more right. Getting the same bitidentical results from two different drives ripping the same CD with no C2 could be a strong evidence that EAC works propperly. The problem is, I still don't like the sound. Even burned on a good CD-R, with EAC and all offset settings set right for my burner, the sound is different from the original. Sound from this burned CD , as I told before, is similar to the sound when I play it with my PC/USB-SPDIF converter. So could the copy be better than the original? Technicaly yes but it just sounds not as good. I read from other people, which tested Foobar-ripper and compared to EAC. Files were bitidentical. There are two options: 1. Everything is fine and CDs are ripped accurately. Or 2. There is something wrong and "everybody" is doing it in the same way. This is unlikely. I heard from a reliable person, that even a Linn Klimaxx could not beat his CD-Transport. I have no problem beleaving this because of my own experinces. But where is the Problem with ripping/burning CD's? Some people, even from high end magazines, claim with some burned Cd's they get a better sound than the original. As I told, a could not affirm this.

[AUDIODIDAKT]

Flecko,

Its not about the ripping of CD's, its about the burning of CDR's.

All burned CDR's will probably sound different than the original pressings.
This is caused by the CD-Player itself.
This has nothing to do with EAC.
Try to rip the newly burned CDR to your hdd, and compare to the original rip (you will get same results)
My preferred settings are without C2, even if you have a drive that is capable of C2 correction, like my Plextor.

But why o why, would you still burn CD-R's ? (maybe for in the car) if you still hang on to this means you have probably other issues, then ripping problems.

OFCOURSE CDR's will sound different, thats why PC playback is the future.

Roy


PS: where is your signature ?

[PeterSt]

Hi Adrian,

Roy is just ahead of me, but it won't prevent me from expressing a few thoughts that may help you further :


First of all, ripping with error correction (or without it for that matter) won't bring a different sound as such (or quality of if). I mean, if error correction really would help obtaining a better rip, the one without error correction will show glitches, ticks and anything that will be implied by plainly wrong(ly read) data. This doesn't make the sound different at all, but it will create or avoid the glitches.

Now, what you do, at using your CDP to playback ripped and re-burned CDs, is making yourself subject to jitter. This is because CDs *do* contain inherent jitter hence imply it by playing them via a CD player.
This immediately is the answer to your question how copies can sound different from originals. Also, copies can be better (they improved on jitter) or worse (the jitter got worse).

A complete other matter is that it isn't said (to me at least) that your perceived thinner is worse. It could be better, but your system doesn't anticipate on it. Example :
One of the first thing bad playback will incur for, is less defined bass. The result will be a more full sound (I hope this is clear without further explanation !). But it is *not* better. Now, a very simplified argument to what I just said (your system doesn't anticipate on it) is that your system doesn't exhibit a sufficient amount of bass in the first place. And, this by itself can be so because you calibrated your system (including loudspeaker placement and everything) on that fuller (though wrong) sound.

I don't say this is happening to you, and I also don't say rips should sound better than originals ... I only give a logical explanation for your observations.
Please trust me on one thing though : if you perceive playback to be better via a CDP than via XXHighEnd, you must have quite some CD player (unknown to the world ) and you are quite alone ...
but ...
playback via computers can go wrong in so many places that it just *will* be wrong without attention.
Btw, one of the (negative) merits of that is thin sound (and totally unrelated to the thin sound you perceive).

I hope this helps you a little !
Peter

[AUDIODIDAKT]

Other subject same section,

There is also a program, to get accurate rip results out of your lossless torrent files.

It sees every folder in your download location, like an original CD (When original EAC cue and log are present in that folder)(can read logs from other ripping programs as well)
It can even correct the original drive offset (when this was not done or forgotten on the original EAC rip)
The more I use this program, the more I think offsets DO matter. (but it can be a placebo too)

Its called cuetools, best program I've used so far.
http://www.cuetools.net/doku.php/cuetools:cuetools

- can recognize and correct drive offsets (can do this be a simple setting, so no hassle)
- AccurateRip support
- it can recognize a HDCD as such.
- its fast, because it can also use FlaCuda to convert your lossless files to FLAC, this is a Nvidea operation using your videocards API's,
  creating a file smaller than FLAC8 (not spectacular), and does this faster than libFLAC.(overhere (quad core) X 400 for flac  and wv files)(ape remains slow as ever)
- it creates folderstructure, depending on the tags.
- and does this all directly from your download folder, no matter what lossless file is in there (OK not all, but the most common used, check the link)
- and ofcourse batch encoding, so not just convert one album, you can do the whole bunch at once.

Really try it, it gets the job done
This is the missing link in getting your downloaded files properly on your music HDD.

So if you are ripping your CD's always save and keep the .log and .cue files in your folder, even if it is your end location.
DO KEEP YOUR ORIGNAL EAC logs and cue's with your music files for maybe future useage.

Roy

PS: one downside though, the CD has to be in the accurate rip database.

[Flecko]

But why o why, would you still burn CD-R's ? (maybe for in the car) if you still hang on to this means you have probably other issues, then ripping problems

This is just a tweak. I do this only for "research" purposes. If I like to compare two ripped audio-files I do this via PC and with my CDP because with the CDP the sound of burned audio-files is still better than with direct playback. Probably I need a better USB/SPDIF converter. But it will cost again 140€(The Highface is in Germany of course most expensive) and I have lost the confidence that it will be that much better. I use the PC for a very long time as transport, long before it become popular. Always trying to get the best sound out of it but it still doesn't play music.

All burned CDR's will probably sound different than the original pressings

That is clear to me. But the point is, the burned CDR sound is more like the PC-direct playback. I prefer the original CD, and so I guess something is lost during the processing with PC. I know everythings should be perfect with PC but my ears, and the ears of everyone I showed this said no. Thats not how it should sound. Most people prever the CDP and the original CD.

First of all, ripping with error correction (or without it for that matter) won't bring a different sound as such (or quality of if). I mean, if error correction really would help obtaining a better rip, the one without error correction will show glitches, ticks and anything that will be implied by plainly wrong(ly read) data. This doesn't make the sound different at all, but it will create or avoid the glitches.

I think it does. There are two kinds of errors. The one that creates glitches and the error that effects soundquality. fore example: I ripped the same Track from the same disc with the same drive and just set in one case the C2 hook and in the other not. In both cases there are no glitches but the data is different. Nearly every single bit (Hexcompare). The sound is different too. So something goes wrong but from listening to the files I can not sure tell what sounds better. So couldn't it be possible that EAC "thinks" it has everything read well but there is some kind of systematic error?

A complete other matter is that it isn't said (to me at least) that your perceived thinner is worse. It could be better, but your system doesn't anticipate on it....I don't say this is happening to you, and I also don't say rips should sound better than originals ... I only give a logical explanation for your observations.

I know. And I wouldn't say that this does never happens to me. This is probably the biggest problem at all if you try to improve your sound. I just experienced it with the wrong digital connectors (RCA) I used. I swiched to BNC and a lot of things changed. In this case to the better. It is subjective in the end but in some cases you can explain why it is better. So BNC is clearly better than RCA, technically. There are people measuring this.

if you perceive playback to be better via a CDP than via XXHighEnd, you must have quite some CD player (unknown to the world Happy) and you are quite alone ...
but ...

It is a Pioneer PD-S06. It is not one of that very expensive super highend players but I could not find anything better. At the moment I have a Meridian 200 here. It has a clearer sound, a better defined bass and shows slightly more details. This is what I thought when I heard it the first time. After some days it was clear that there is something wrong. Instruments just does not sound like they should. The one thing, that the Pioneer makes good to my ears, is the ability to has a very fine and airy sound and at the same time every instrument is coherent in it's place. There is no fuzzyness or digital sound at all. Espacialy if you listen to acoustic instruments you get a incredible feeling for what the musican is doing. Every hit on a drum will sound different and just natural. Weakness is bass pressure/control and the space between the instruments could be better. Until now I compard it to Jungson CD-5, Teac VRDS-25, modified Pioneer PD-S707 and the Meriadian 200. No one could beat it at last. Also tried an Apple Laptop against it. That the sound is thin with PC is also strange to me. But as you said, it has a better control. The most players I compared to the pioneer had "more Bass". My speakers have rather more bass (In the frequency response plus 2-3db from 100-40hz). So producing a thin sound by replacing the pioneer, that is not very strong in bass, is not easy. But I also don't beleave I have a major mistake in my PC setup...

Thank you  for your answeres!
Greetings Adrian

[AUDIODIDAKT]

I also don't beleave I have a major mistake in my PC setup...

I think you do with all respect, maybe DO swap that usb/spdif card with a HiFace bnc or tweak a juli@ with a decent BNC output.
lots of people tend to forget that you can try stuff before buying, just buy a hiface or juli@ if you dont like it just send it back, you will get refund.
You have consumer rights you know, make use of it

I have a pretty cheepo setup, all a little tweaked offcourse, and for me the opposite occurs, a CDP is sounding flat and PC playback does not.

No CDP can bring the sound I have right now, no fricking way.

I dont even recognize flat as such, I have full sound, good and fast bass.


But he thats just me!

Roy

[Flecko]

I think you do with all respect, maybe DO swap that usb/spdif card with a HiFace bnc or tweak a juli@ with a decent BNC output.

I think you are right....I will have to do this sometime, even if something in me is saying "It will not bring me there".

No CDP can bring the sound I have right now, no fricking way.

There was a guy in this forum using a Accuphase DP65 CDP and he also got an Highface reporting better sound from his CDP...

[AUDIODIDAKT]

Can a PC realy read the data accurately from CD? is the name of your topic

It should be "can a CDP read the data accurately from CD?" answer is NO it colors for starters, maybe one could like the colloring comming from it, is another question.

Is the Accuphase just used as a transport or as DAC too ?
the Hiface is not a DAC ! its a just usb/spdif converter-->> outputting to a DAC.

So my advise is: why trying all different CDP's and not even get your ears on a proper soundcard (Hoerwege ???, dont say its bad just dont know it, usb has also issues as you know)
It all depends a lot on a decent soundcard (and drivers) to get proper digital from your PC.
Good soundcard is of atmost importance.

keep sharing your experiences, hope you'll find your way in pc playback

Regards,

Roy

[PeterSt]

In either case Adrian, I know how seriously you approach all this.
I though it was good to let you know it.

If I was only able to let you hear the drastic improvement I achieved here in my room, while I started out better than the CDP to begin with (which of course doesn't say much about how your CDP sounds). It is improvement over improvement over improvement, and there is no way there would be a beginning to compare with whatever CDPlayer anymore.
FYI, the last time I did that seriously was with Bert (I think you know him) who at the time wasn't so sure. The CDP (a good one) lost, but it needed good attention. This was before the improvement over improvement etc, and I think 3,5 years ago.

Part of the problem, I think, is that when you are a normal consumer (which I was myself a couple of years ago) you don't have entry to what it is really all about. The only thing you can do is running behind the facts. Think about (and it is just one example !) working on the speakers for over a year in a row (Bert, me) and what result only that brought. But also, about the impossibility of continuing that (my personal opinion) because one of us starting to use another DAC which didn't perform.

So, you see how easy it is to go wrong ? just have a random DAC and you won't be able to proceed otherwise than falling back to nit picking cables, or burned CDs for that matter. It is a complete waste of time, because other stuff brings way way more.
I'll make it worse : XXHighEnd is a waste of time too. It's the fake solution for where the real work lies : the DAC.

So, are your rips important ? sure they are ! but it is completely sweeped away by the other things. Well, generally and IMHO.

Btw, I didn't get at first that you could have two rips with a very different digital result, as you said in your last post (or did I get that wrongly). So, if *that* is going on, something else is very much not good. No doubt about that.

Peter


PS: I can show you a whole pile of rips which were ripped completely wrong by EAC (full of glitches), and it went unnoticed. The cause in this case was something about a bad CD drive, but fact is that EAC didn't notice a thing (and yes, the cache was off).

[Flecko]

Is the Accuphase just used as a transport or as DAC too ?
the Hiface is not a DAC ! its a just usb/spdif converter-->> outputting to a DAC.

The Accuphase can be used as CDP, as DAC and as Transport. So he compared the digital signal from the hiface directly to the digital signal from the transport on the same "DAC".
Hoerwege builds some nice DAC's (I owned one) and he is moding CDP's. I think hi is well known in germany and does good work. My USB/SPDIF converter was not a cheap one. 120€ I payed a year ago. It is not asynchron but well made.

In either case Adrian, I know how seriously you approach all this.
I though it was good to let you know it.

Thank you very much!

FYI, the last time I did that seriously was with Bert (I think you know him) who at the time wasn't so sure. The CDP (a good one) lost, but it needed good attention. This was before the improvement over improvement etc, and I think 3,5 years ago.

Yes I know him. Bert, you, some other guy and me had tried a lot of different softwares and discussed all this computerplayback in berts forum. Then you started to develope XXhigh end. Bert developed his new DAC and from this time on the discussion about PC-playback was done in your forum. From time to time I was visting your site to see whats going on.

If I was only able to let you hear the drastic improvement I achieved here in my room

It would be that simple if I could visit you but the travel is probably very far. I am in Hannover sometimes but it is still far to netherlands I think?

Btw, I didn't get at first that you could have two rips with a very different digital result, as you said in your last post (or did I get that wrongly). So, if *that* is going on, something else is very much not good. No doubt about that.

Yes it is like this. But it depends on the settings made in EAC. I just changed the setting of using C2 error correction. So I got one file with and one without that option. They differed in almost every singel bit. I will do this test again to be sure. The problem might be, that if you use the C2 error correction, EAC will not read the data twice. My CD-Drive claims to handle C2 errors but if I test that ability with EAC, EAC sais it can probably not do this.

So, you see how easy it is to go wrong ? just have a random DAC and you won't be able to proceed otherwise than falling back to nit picking cables, or burned CDs for that matter. It is a complete waste of time, because other stuff brings way way more.

I often feel like that. (The digitalcabel-connectors experience was not of that nit-picking type. It realy cleard things and I now know how important the impedance matching is. But I completly agree with you). If I understand you right, you and bert stoped to develope together, because you couldn't compare anymore as you had different DAC's? That is a good point. For a long time, I just used the computer as transport and always compared those things like playing from ram or not. If there is nothing that stays constant you could compare to, there is a danger running round in circles. Now I use the CDP as a "constant" to compare with. Sometimes I think, "yeah now my PC sounds very good". It often takes a while to realy hear what is going on. And at the end I am always back listening to the CDP. Probably it will change with a even better USB/SPDIF converter. But as you said, that is not the "real" sollution.

Greetings
Adrian

[AUDIODIDAKT]

Ugh,

Cuetools 2.09 now also reports the track and albums peaks in the same log file.
So if you want to use xx normalize function, you can adjust it accordingly!
Maybe Peter can automate this now values are known and logged in every album folder.
Also different CD mastering methodes can be found more easely this way, just by looking at the track-peaks

Code:

[CUETools log; Date: 19/05/2010 19:34:50; Version: 2.0.9]
[AccurateRip ID: 00178d1f-00c2ef33-8010470a] found.
Track   [ CRC    ] Status
 01     [cb873e76] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 02     [d6ad3948] (09/09) Accurately ripped
 03     [c6ee3cd6] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 04     [97d7ccbb] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 05     [af7b8d75] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 06     [300d3140] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 07     [031e5746] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 08     [51c398d3] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 09     [dff00cc3] (10/10) Accurately ripped
 10     [508ecc45] (10/10) Accurately ripped

Track Peak [ CRC32  ] [W/O NULL] [  LOG   ]
 --  100,0 [03D580B4] [4DD37366]           
 01   37,5 [D5CBDEE0] [BA14E503]   CRC32   
 02   93,5 [4B003633] [E9B3A211]   CRC32   
 03  100,0 [FB6C7D3B] [46A53CDB]   CRC32   
 04   95,0 [D94B1360] [1762C43F]   CRC32   
 05  100,0 [F67D0F9E] [D7234058]   CRC32   
 06   97,4 [5E8F96BD] [064C0CC5]   CRC32   
 07   97,5 [760E913C] [70545F2C]   CRC32   
 08   94,8 [E1349263] [86C49E8F]   CRC32   
 09   95,1 [1D2292C2] [F5785E30]   CRC32   
 10   97,4 [A50D71CA] [1E90EAAC]   CRC32   

Cuetools can also be used just to verify your albums on accurip, offsets and track-peaks

Roy

[PeterSt]

Also different CD mastering methodes can be found more easely this way, just by looking at the track-peaks

Correct. And I think I already told you once (off line perhaps) that if two albums (one the remaster) have the same peak levels and the same avarage SPL (as how I calculate it), there is no way they will be different. They can of course, but the coincidence will be to big. Notice though this can't be done with the percentage numbers (much too rough).

Btw, indeed it is so that you can mangle the XX stored data to your needs. Thus, if you alter the (average) SPL level in the XXAnalysis.dat file, it just will be used. It is NOT allowed to alter the peak level data (MaxVolume) because you will imply overshoots of the maximum digital level.

Peter

[Flecko]

Some time went by and I have further made some experiences. So I am sure that the CD's are read "bitperfect". I think no one of you guys will be suprised but I had to make it clear to myself. As someone has advised, I ripped a cd, burned it and then ripped it again. Copies were identical.
So further I made a new installation of my OS and I might improved the sound. I guess there was some trouble with my soundcard driver before. I made a comparison of the three CDP, Pioneer PDS-06, Pioneer PD-S707 Hoerwege and the Meridian 200 again. this time all three on my hifi system, which is better then the system I compared the drives before. Me and my colistener are the opinion that Pioneer PD-S707 Hoerwege ist sounding the best, then comes the Pioneer PD-S06 and at the end the Meridian 200. After I reinstalled my PC i can say that the PC setup sounds better then the Meridian 200. A decision for the other CDP has not been done. One plus that the PC via XXHE has is the very good dynamics and detail. But it still sounds a little bit grainy if I play with XX. This disappears if I play the files with WindowsMediaPlayer12 but dynamics and basscontrol is gone as well. I use a ploytec USB driver for my usb/spdif device so Mediaplayer playback is improved.
I will try to improve the PC playback. Next step will be a dedicated system and a new USB/spdif converter. Probably then I get a clear winner in the transport battle. For now it is not over.