Digital Drive

Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it.

Return to Digital Drive

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

New dB Poweramp user question

45.53.22.1
Posted on December 23, 2020 at 10:05:10
Todd A.
Audiophile

Posts: 965
Location: Northern Wisconsin
Joined: July 30, 2013
Contributor
  Since: December 0, 0000
 I've just begun to experiment with dB Poweramp, and so far I like it. Not having to search out cover art alone makes it worth the price of admission in my mind, but I do have a question.

There are 13 options for the file format you want to rip to. I just tried one out in DSD (Dire Straits - Communique) and it seems to be an awfully big file, i.e. over 1.6 gig.

My DAC/streamer is a PS Audio Directstream Jr with Bridge, which upsamples everything to DSD anyway, and which is connected to my cloud drive by a CAT 8 network cable. Are there any benefits to recording in DSD as opposed to the other options, such as AIFF, FLAC, or WAV? Sound quality is of paramount importance here. I can always get a bigger drive if need be. At this point I think I only have about 40 CDs ripped via iTunes, but I'd rather not rip a bunch of CDs only to find that I should have done it in a manner other than what I did.

So what has been your experience, or am I opening a can of worms?

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: New dB Poweramp user question, posted on December 23, 2020 at 13:31:44
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 11827
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002
 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.

 

"There is no good reason to rip them to DSD" +1 [nt] ;-), posted on December 23, 2020 at 13:47:23
Chris from Lafayette
Bored Member

Posts: 19270
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: "There is no good reason to rip them to DSD" +2 , posted on December 23, 2020 at 14:52:12
PAR
Audiophile

Posts: 1431
Location: South London, UK
Joined: June 4, 2019
Contributor
  Since: June 4, 2019
 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

 

RE: "There is no good reason to rip them to DSD" +2 , posted on December 23, 2020 at 16:22:19
kh6idf
Audiophile

Posts: 1327
Location: Texas
Joined: May 2, 2001
 Even WITH compression you still have a perfect copy with FLAC. The compression just means smaller file size.

 

RE: "There is no good reason to rip them to DSD" +2 , posted on December 23, 2020 at 16:39:33
PAR
Audiophile

Posts: 1431
Location: South London, UK
Joined: June 4, 2019
Contributor
  Since: June 4, 2019
 " 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

 

Nor is it necessary. HQ does it for you!, posted on December 23, 2020 at 17:39:09
oldmkvi
Audiophile

Posts: 9351
Joined: April 12, 2002
 Guess I'm the only DSD fan here.
DSD128 sounds great to me.
Even upsampling.
Sony Z1 does it too.

 

RE: FLAC it is. Thanks, folks!, posted on December 23, 2020 at 19:28:43
Todd A.
Audiophile

Posts: 965
Location: Northern Wisconsin
Joined: July 30, 2013
Contributor
  Since: December 0, 0000

 

RE: Nor is it necessary. HQ does it for you!, posted on December 24, 2020 at 07:31:10
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 11827
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002
 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.

 

RE: New dB Poweramp user question, posted on December 24, 2020 at 10:09:36
Mike B.
Audiophile

Posts: 25417
Location: OR
Joined: September 27, 1999
Contributor
  Since: September 1, 1999
 I use WAV for my recordings. I can then upsample to DSD if I wish with Jriver Media Center library and playback software.


 

Page processed in 0.023 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2021, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]