 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
180.183.128.144
Warning: This article isn't suitable for people who believe in 'bits are bits'. It could cause you a motion sickness and upset your stomach so it's best to turn off this window before it gets you.I know this sounds a bit hard to believe but it's true since it was done without pretense to get better sound. Well, some people who use Rewrite Data may not find this so surprising though. :P
We did some ripping experiments and my friend who owned AK380 tested the song from micro sd to compare between players.
On later days, he told me copying music from AK's file manager system in device sounds worse than copying from his ripping machine. He made a dedicated ripping machine with linear PSU and even built a new aluminum chassis to improve it.
So, we did another test. I tried copying music from laptop using default file copy from Windows 10 and ones from another file copier software call Copy Handler with different buffer size.
Guess what? It all sounded different. I was stunned. I'm aware that different micro sd cards can affect and different machines used to copy songs can sound different. But THIS! The same machine, same device, with only different changes of buffer size also affected it. That's nuts!
OK. Let's take this to next level. I use my desktop to copy 4 files named A, B, X, and Y to micro SD card, plug it into user's portable DAPs and let them listen. They all can notice the changes effortlessly and all said the same thing. B and Y sounds very different. Here's why.
A: Default USB connection using Windows 10 file copy
B: JCAT USB Card connection (with built-in PSU and filter) using Windows 10 file copy
X: JCAT USB Card connection (with built-in PSU and filter) using Ultracopier file copy
Y: JCAT USB Card connection (with built-in PSU and filter) using Ultracopier file copy with sequential write and 4kb bufferI did some research and found app similar to Rewrite Data written over 3 years ago here.
http://www.fact-reviews.com/info/diskfresh.aspx
He gave an interesting explanation about music files storage improvement on both magnetic and flash memory in SSD too.
I have yet to find anyone not noticing the different. Is it placebo effect? You can try this experiment yourself and test it with your friends. Happy listening.:)
Regards,
Keetakawee
Edits: 08/21/16Follow Ups:
Has anyone tried this yet? Allow me tell you step-by-step to test this out.
1. Download and install ultracopier from https://ultracopier.first-world.info/download-all.html
2. Go to tray icon, select options and configure performance like this.
3. Reboot
4. Click on music file, press Ctrl-C then Ctrl-V. You should get 'music - Copy' file. I recommend WAV format because uncompressed should be easier to notice than lossy/lossless.
5. Drag 'music' and 'music - Copy' files into player and listen.
I'll say again that data is all the same, same MD5 hash so copying again and again won't affect data's integrity.
I also copied files from various devices and platforms and I don't notice the difference too ***because I never copy the same file and compare them side by side***. It didn't occur to me too but my friend who's surprised why ripping comparison at my place sounded different at his home and he later realized that copying from AK's file manager sounded worse.
I recommend anyone who's curious to try comparing side by side and just say it sounds different or not. Maybe some can notice the difference and some can't. It's just a simple test.
Regards,
Keetakawee
Thanks for the giggle.
When you hear differences in two digital files, the first thing to check is that the two files have the same contents. Without doing this, any further discussion is pointless. The proper way to do this is to use a software tool to calculate a cryptographic checksum of the file, such as MD5. This will catch every bit in the file that a player application will see. If the checksum doesn't match then there is a further check to see if the differences involve the audio samples as well as the file block structure and metadata. Exact Audio Copy has a utility that does this, and any audio editor can create a difference file of the audio samples by mixing out of phase. There are real examples where two files have different file checksums, but identical audio samples. (This happens sometimes when using dbpoweramp to convert WAV to FLAC and then FLAC back to WAV. The two WAV files will have identical audio samples, but different content, either in metadata or file headers and chunk structure.) Note also that even if the file contents are identical, the operating system metadata may not be. This will certainly be the case if two files reside on the same volume, as they will have different file names and reside in different locations.
The real problem is that DAC manufacturers do not use known methods of isolating the digital input side of their product from the analog output side of their product. A related problem is that reviewers of high end DACs do not review these products with low end transports and computers, which they should do, because a high-end DAC should come with the best possible isolation.
Designers of analog to digital converters and digital to analog converters were aware of the necessity for isolation back in the early DACs. In 1961 I used an analog computer coupled to a digital computer and there were lots of rules as to how these machines were to be connected so as to reduce digital noise in the analog gear.
Bottom line: bits should just be bits. They are not and this can easily be shown by measurements as well as by listening.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I checked MD5 hash and they're all matched. I also safely ejected micro sd card after copying too.
What I did in this experiment is using different file copying software so it shouldn't affect the actual file like file conversion software. At least MD5 isn't changed.
I believe the issue with little problems in here and there won't be solved anytime soon. It'll be the people who become less concerned about it to the point that people stop thinking could become a problem in future.
Regards,
Keetakawee
without any sort of description as to what the changes are.
It sounded different. You were stunned. That tells the rest of the asylum precisely zero about what you heard.
Don't be shy, give us a description of the changes!
JE
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all." - William James
*
I didn't say anything about sonic improvements. I only said what I did and the result of being different. The current point isn't about getting better sound with file copying right now but proving if file copying software can affect sonic performance.
You can install Ultracopier, configure performance for 4KB buffer and copy music files to compare and see for yourself? It won't take long more than couple of minutes to do this test yourself. That's what I'd like to hear from sharing my test result. :)
Regards,
Keetakawee
As you noted in your preamble, obviously you appreciate that this is going to raise eyebrows.
The DiskFresh link is interesting and I'd like to know if the theory of magnetic decay stands up to study. However, I fail to see how this is at all meaningful to what you're testing. Magnetic decay leads to data loss by that theory. But that's of course not what you're claiming when you did the various ways of copying.
So do you have a theory here? Is it possible to repeat the research and convince yourself in a *blind* fashion? You mentioned possibility of placebo. Well it's your opportunity to run a blind test and report back. I'm not sure why others have to try this since it goes against how computer storage works. My Word documents didn't change with different copying techniques, nor have I lost or gained money by different ways of copying Excel spreadsheets.
For example try using foobar ABX plugin on 2 of these files and show us the log file. That would help! Thanks...
-------
Archimago's Musings : A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
Or you can just try Ultracopier or any file copying software with smaller block/buffer size and see if sounds different yourself. Much faster than debating over null result. ;)
Regards,
Keetakawee
"Or you can just try Ultracopier or any file copying software with smaller block/buffer size and see if sounds different yourself. Much faster than debating over null result. ;)
Regards,
Keetakawee"
Well, that's the problem isn't it?
Over the years, my music collection has been copied back and forth many times. Sometimes for backup. Sometimes to reshuffle folders. And over the last decade, the copying has been done by various versions of Windows. Sometimes it's between SSD drives. Sometimes between hard drives. Sometimes with Windows XP/Vista/10/Server 2012/Linux/Mac OS X. Sometimes through WiFi/powerline ethernet/gigabit ethernet...
Each one of those copies have involved different block sizes on the storage device itself. Each OS will do things a little differently. interfaces like ethernet may have standard vs. "jumbo" frames.
Should there not then be wildly different sounds based on the "history" of the files??? I haven't noticed any difference barring file corruption. I don't recall any discussion in the vast majority of boards about these kinds of differences...
It's not about arguing null results. It's about actually understanding what you're doing and why you think it makes a difference. What's the point of saying Ultracopy sounds different if we cannot learn anything from it. It just leads to more neurotic and obsessional thinking most likely originating from placebo effect (again as you had brought up) if you can't state your case showing that you accounted for this.
-------
Archimago's Musings : A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
Isn't one of the reasons for digital is that it is robust enough to avoid cumulative errors despite being copied numerous times?
Isn't the very existence of DRM evidence that digital is very good indeed at maintaining data integrity through multiple generations of copies?
Why do these changes only seem to occur in audio data? How do other data types manage to maintain their integrity?
JE
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all." - William James
You keep trying.
This subject we have been discussing 10 years ago -- at length.
As a matter of fact "bits remain bits". From a bit-value perspective.
What differs is the physical bit situation and its environment -- jitter/noise/bit shape etc.
Yep. And this can have and usually has impact to the sound.
Bottom line. We'll have the same issue/discussion in 10 years from now
if DAC manufacturers won't get their devices under control.
Hint. You might try a RAMDISK with full file buffering.
Good luck.
I believe some people are already aware that different storage can sound different. But different caused by file transfer method is new to many people.
Some people realized it from Rewrite Data but file copying mechanism is more ordinary and it made results enough for my friend to take it seriously.
Regards,
Keetakawee
I need to get me one of them placebos. Hell, they can cure anything.
"To Learn Who Rules Over You, Simply Find Out Who You Are Not Allowed to Criticize."
-Voltaire
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
