CD Players Vs FLAC

[Guest2]

I know that audiophile quality sound systems use high quality cd players to play music.

How much quality is lost by converting a CD to FLAC at Compression level 0 then playing through a computer? Im guessing the quality will be lost by going through the computer, soundcard, 3.5mm jack to amp then speakers, not the actual quality on the FLAC track.

Also am I more likely to damage speakers by running through my soundcard then amp and speakers instead of just cd player to amp and speakers? The volume will obviously differ from a CD player to my Audigy 2 ZS soundcard as I am presuming the Audigy software may have some sort of amplification.

I have always ran my soundcard at 100% volume, 100% wave volume with treble and bass at default in the middle. My amp is always on source direct (bypassing the balanace, treble and bass controls)

 

[alex24]

I think you're right about the FLAC quality. There should be no difference from the CD bar losses from the soundcard/cables/amp etc. The actual encode should be perfect.

I can't see a problem running the sound card into the amp, though i'm not an expert on the subject.

 

[a1ex2001]

provided your using a decent quality saoundcard and a reasonable interconect you will struggle to hear the difference unless your comparing it to a very expensive CD player and using a top of the range amp. Personally I'd always have a CD player even though I play loads of stuff off my PC.

 

[Guest2]

provided your using a decent quality saoundcard and a reasonable interconect you will struggle to hear the difference unless your comparing it to a very expensive CD player and using a top of the range amp. Personally I'd always have a CD player even though I play loads of stuff off my PC.

My PC has a cd player, does that count? Why have a CD player if all my music is on my PC?

 

[alex24]

He's talking about a standalone CD player. Some people may prefer that, it may give a better sound and is designed to go straight into an amp.

Also, the music on your PC may be reduced quality rips (and not FLAC/WAV), so won't sound as good.

 

[Stag]

Any music system that runs on a digital source is only as good as the Digital to Analogue Converter/Conversion (DAC) and the transport of the analogue signal into the amps and speakers.

The Audigy 2 ZS doesn't have a terrible DAC, but it isn't great either. If you are an "audiophile" I'd be looking at upgrading or supplementing your setup with an external DAC fed by an optical out. Depends on what amp/speakers you are feeding for it to be really worth it?

 

[Guest2]

Also, the music on your PC may be reduced quality rips (and not FLAC/WAV), so won't sound as good.

Most of it is unfortunately 128kbps. I have a quite a lot of stuff at 192kbps and a few at 320kbps / FLAC.

Listening to tracks at 128kbps sound like crap in places compaired to FLAC

 

[alex24]

Yeah, it does, there's a noticeable difference from even 320 kbps mp3 to FLAC for me, partly why i'm buying myself an amp and speaker setup for my PC sometime this year instead of these creative inpire speakers.

 

[Guest2]

Yeah, it does, there's a noticeable difference from even 320 kbps mp3 to FLAC for me, partly why i'm buying myself an amp and speaker setup for my PC sometime this year instead of these creative inpire speakers.

Ditch them inspires asap, i had some megaworks 550 and i thought they sucked balls

Look on ebay, i recently got some B&W 603s for £90 in perfect condition. Some sold today for £350 in worse condition

Look for amps in cash converter type stores but research first

 

[alex24]

Yeah i've already had some advice from this very forum on the subject, much the same as what you've said. Only thing is i'll probably be asking for them as a present now of some sorts, so I think new would be the only way. Looking at the cambridge audio A5 or similar and Tannoy F1 customs as a basic starting set. I know better value can be had from second hand, but as a present it's different I suppose. Perhaps I should just ask for the money!

 

[Guest2]

I tested a cambridge A5 and didnt like it as much as my A1.

I will be selling a basic but very good amp, speaker combo soon. Cambridge A1 and Mission 71 bookshelf. Also with some speaker stands

 

[alex24]

Hmmm, that's a very similar setup to what I'm after, how was the performance then? Also in what way did the A1 sound better? Can I also ask why you're getting rid?

 

[Guest2]

Performance was excellent, the Missions were/are fantastic bookshelf speakers, the A1 could run them for hours and not overheat.

When I tested the A5 I turned it 1 o'clock and wasnt that loud. The A1 at 9 o'clock was much louder and didnt sound muddy. Obviously when i turned the A1 amp to 4 o'clock it was veryloud and didnt sound that clear but thats because its a 25 watt per channel amp powering the M71s that were rated at 25 - 75 watts per channel.

My Missions won awards a year years ago and still sell in the region of £50 - £90 on certain auction sites, the Cambridge A1 sells for around £40 second hand, new its £70 or £120 for the MK3

I upgraded to these on the left, therefore i needed a more powerful amp to drive them and not break them. (120 watt speakers now with a 95 watt amp)

 

[alex24]

Nice speakers there, which amp are you going to use with those now?

That was my concern over the A1, that it didn't have enough grunt over the higher volumes, hence saying A5. However, perhaps an alternative with around 30-60W per channel may be better suited.

 

[DrDee]

Any music system that runs on a digital source is only as good as the Digital to Analogue Converter/Conversion (DAC) and the transport of the analogue signal into the amps and speakers.

This.

I went from my on board 3.5mm audio out to a Cambridge Audio A300 and replaced that with on board optical to Cambridge Audio DacMagic to the same amp and speakers, and the difference was immense.

 

[james.miller]

I upgraded to these on the left, therefore i needed a more powerful amp to drive them and not break them. (120 watt speakers now with a 95 watt amp)

those speakers will be more sensitive than the missions - ie louder at any given input. you shouldnt need more power at all unless the B&W's present some awkward loads to the amplifier. in fact if anything, you should need less!

 

[probedb]

Why would use FLAC at it's lowest compression level? The default is 5! This is lossless compression, you're not losing information by compressing it more.

 

[Guest2]

Why would use FLAC at it's lowest compression level? The default is 5! This is lossless compression, you're not losing information by compressing it more.

Not sure, im using easy cd-da extractor 8 and it defaults to 0.

Im using a Marantz PM-68 amplifier. Heres the blurb about it. So you are saying more expensive speakers require an amp that gives out less watts?

This cant be right, wouldnt the amp just go pop trying to feed them juice that it doesnt have? Like some of the the B&W nautilus speakers require at least 100watts from an amp


--

The Marantz PM-68 Remote Control Stereo Integrated Amplifier offers an unbeatable combination of superb sound, high power and outstanding versatility. The PM-68 supplies 95 watts of high-current power per channel (into 8 ohms) to drive virtually any available loudspeaker system, and offers an extensive complement of recording inputs and outputs and convenience features. The Marantz PM-68 features the highest-quality internal construction, including premium-grade components throughout for optimum sound quality.

* 95 watts per channel into 8 ohms (130 watts into 4 ohms)
* High current capacity, low impedance power supply can easily drive even exotic loudspeaker designs that present difficult loads
* Two sets of banana plug-compatible speaker terminals facilitate bi-wiring
* Seven audio inputs including moving magnet phono input
* Record out selector
* Dual tape loops with additional processor loop for dedicated speaker interface devices
* Bi-directional tape dubbing control
* Headphone output
* Bass and treble controls
* A/B speaker selector
* Source Direct function bypasses tone controls, tape selector, processor loop and balance control for purest sound quality
* Premium grade construction throughout including audiophile-grade capacitors, ALPS volume control, all-discrete power amp stage with HDAM discrete amplifier modules, gold-plated phono and CD input jacks and more
* Remote control operates all functions including volume adjustment; built-in RC-5 commands allow control of other Marantz system components
* 3 years parts and labor warranty
* Dimensions: 17 1/4" W x 6 ½" H x 16 ½" D

 

[Stag]

Why would use FLAC at it's lowest compression level? The default is 5! This is lossless compression, you're not losing information by compressing it more.

Indeed all levels of FLAC are lossless, the level merely effects the time it takes to encode and the size of the file once finished.

 

[Guest2]

Indeed all levels of FLAC are lossless, the level merely effects the time it takes to encode and the size of the file once finished.

So would level 8 be the same quality as level 0, only a much smaller file size. Or would level 0 be the smallest file size?