|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.135.188.187
In Reply to: RE: New dB Poweramp user question posted by Todd A. on December 23, 2020 at 10:05:10
Rip them to WAV or FLAC (or even AIFF) because they are PCM and that is what is on the CD. This means there are no conversions and, also, these are the most commonly used formats.
There is no good reason to rip them to DSD.
Follow Ups:
Guess I'm the only DSD fan here.
DSD128 sounds great to me.
Even upsampling.
Sony Z1 does it too.
Conversion from PCM to DSD cannot, by definition, be a "bit-perfect" procedure. Thus, ripping and storing from a CD should be done in a "bit-perfect" form allowing conversion now and in the future, as better conversions and processes emerge.
Upsampling to DSD should be an option but not a choice for archival storage.
The reason that you CAN do something is no reason that you SHOULD.
Rule 1. When ripping do not rip to a format that is not an integer of the original sample.
Rule 2. Do not transcode e.g. from PCM to DSD or vice versa. An original recording made in DXD (PCM) of which you have a copy may be an acceptable exception.
Rule 3. If possible try to maintain the format that is the same as the original digital recording or digitisation of an analogue one. This may mean not ripping from CD but, if possible, buying a download that is as per the original recording format. Research may be required to establish the original format.
If you have chosen to rip from CD to FLAC, dbpoweramp gives you the opportunity to use FLAC; No Compression. Choose this unless you have storage limitations. You then have a perfect copy of the music data on the CD plus superior ID3 metadata storage.
"We need less, but better" - Dieter Rams
Even WITH compression you still have a perfect copy with FLAC. The compression just means smaller file size.
" Even WITH compression you still have a perfect copy with FLAC. The compression just means smaller file size."
Yes, this is so. However there are many reports of lossless compressed FLAC files sounding inferior to .wav equivalents. It seems that in certain replay systems there may be a latency issue when decoding FLACs on the fly. Using uncompressed FLAC avoids this issue. Further with modern storage capacities it is arguable whether compressing files at all brings any benefit.
Moreover using a compression system where the decoding algorithm may or may not be available decades away seems not a good strategy for archival storage. Younger folk than I may not understand my reference to decades of storage. I am still playing LPs from the first years of the 1950s. Those CD rips may end up requiring similar longevity.
"We need less, but better" - Dieter Rams
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: