NEWBIE QUESTION : Things I should consider when ripping in .flac format ?

[PenguinMusic]

Hi guys,

Up to a recent time, I used to listen to my music on my beloved OPPO/Linn combination system. So I did not felt the urge to rip my entire CD collection until now.

But having to work a lot more for some time, I am sitting at my desk more and more and would like to take benefit of nice music listening conditions, I would like to do so.

Even if storage is not a problem, I decided not to go with .wav format.
It is nice and fast rip, BUT the tag management makes it a nightmare :-( The ripped Cd is tagged, but as soon as I change one tag, all other are set to "unknown" and I can't retrieve info on CDDB (or any other site).

So I decided to go with .flac.
Nice tag management and lossless.

But I am under the impression that the files resulting in this encoding are more "saturated" than the original file.
As I know that this is theoritically impossible, I was wondering :
- do I have to pay attention to some specific settings when I encode ? It seems the only one I have access with my software is "Compression" which I have set to "0"... As I said : storage ain't a problem here...
- is is possible that my playback software "enhances" the sound to it's limit ? It might be but that happens on several players, so...
- is it possible that my system settings are playing the files "louder" than they should be ?

For information : I am using :
- GNU/Linux Manjaro as OS (Arch based distro) ;
- MPD server with Cantata GUI front-end to rip CD's and play them back also ;
- sound output is via onboard Toslink ;
- sound is directed to ASUS Essence STU DAC/HP Amp ;
- sound is played in HP (Sennheiser HD700 and AudioQuest Nighthawks and sometimes Oppo PM-3).

Any ideas ?

Or is it just in my head (or because I hear things I did not heard before with that set-up...) ?

Regards...

 

[Dumdum]

As far as I know... flac produces a bit perfect copy of the signal as a wav does (I read this very thing on here a little while back from someone far more technical than me who didn’t believe the hype of flac and compared the two streams and found out they were identical from wav or flac), so it’s essentially identical to the smallest detail as you hear it, any differences are psychological and you are listening more intently... it’s kind of like when you have your car serviced and you listen intently for noises which were probably there before, but you didn’t hear as they crept up and got louder over time... but someone tells you somethings changed and you hear them for the first time (in your brain at least)

as for level matching of playback I’d think a simple set of tests could show that with a multimeter, just encode some sine waves and measure the output with both flac and wav of single frequencys with a load connected

 

[PenguinMusic]

Hi Dumdum,

OK...

So probably only in ly head

I can admit that...

One thing I did not thought about is that I can playback the CD directly from the Player.
I will take the "problematic" CD's and try to listen to them on my system and then on my computer.
It might turn out that this is perfectly normal

Thanks again.

Regards.

 

[0bs3rv3r]

But I am under the impression that the files resulting in this encoding are more "saturated" than the original file.

I am not even sure what you mean by that. The flac files are lossless, and you are playing back exactly the same bits, so how could it sound any different?

 

[0bs3rv3r]

- do I have to pay attention to some specific settings when I encode ? It seems the only one I have access with my software is "Compression" which I have set to "0"... As I said : storage ain't a problem here...

Setting higher compression just means it takes longer to create the flac file. Will sound the same no matter.

 

[PenguinMusic]

I am not even sure what you mean by that. The flac files are lossless, and you are playing back exactly the same bits, so how could it sound any different?

Hi,

Sorry, but english is not my native language.
So i will try to describe it...

Let's assume you have a device with "Vu meters".
When the needle in the vu-meters are going to the right hand side, it means that the sound is "saturated".
And when it does, you can definitely hear a "distortion"... Like a "brrruuuzzzz" surrounding the sound.

That is what I get when playing back the .flac encoded files.
So I got me a "Vu-meter" on my computer and that indeed happens when the "100%" is breached...

I know that the .flac is lossless and therefore outputs the same as the original file.
But is it stupid from me to think that MAYBE (please notice the MAYBE... as you ay have considered the "I am under the impression..." which denotes no certainty from me...) the player I use to playback those files "decompresses" them and applies a higher "pre-amp" output when decoding .flac files ?

Anyways, I'll compare to the original CD and I will then be able to tell...

But I must say I doubt that the team that remastered Pink Floy's "Wish you were here" for SACD did not heard that.
So it might just be how it should sound... or again, as I am ready to admit it, in my head.

Regards.

 

[Daverz]

Perhaps try turning replay gain off if you can to see if that has a effect.

You could try playing the files from the command-line with the "play" command or using VLC.

 

[PenguinMusic]

Perhaps try turning replay gain off if you can to see if that has a effect.

You could try playing the files from the command-line with the "play" command or using VLC.

Hi,

Thanks for your answer.

Replay gain is always "off" here.

I'll try to play with VLC and report

Thanks again.

 

[bravomail]

it is like copying a game exe file and playing it. then reporting that copy has better graphics. r u insane?

 

[PenguinMusic]

it is like copying a game exe file and playing it. then reporting that copy has better graphics. r u insane?

Hi,

Is it me you're talking to ?

If so, I really do not get what you're meaning.
I'm saying quite the opposite : the copy does not sound better :-(

And I am not saying it DOES sound worse, I wrote : "I am under the impression that playing it back is over saturated".
So I am wondering if I did something wrong as I know (and wrote it also) that it is quite not explainable...

I do not think there is need to be "agressive"...
I am just trying to figure out if something is wrong somewhere in my set-up...

If nothing comes to mind, then it will be in my head...
And I am ready to admit it as I tried to copy to .wav and to .flac and did a listening comparison.
My conclusion : if there is a difference, I am not skilled enough to hear it...
So .flac is good enough for me.

I asked to get explanations.
All I have are statements...
So it must as you say it.
If this thread can be closed as I do not want to start a totally pointless debate...

Best regards.

 

[0bs3rv3r]

Hi,

Sorry, but english is not my native language.
So i will try to describe it...

Let's assume you have a device with "Vu meters".
When the needle in the vu-meters are going to the right hand side, it means that the sound is "saturated".
And when it does, you can definitely hear a "distortion"... Like a "brrruuuzzzz" surrounding the sound.

That is what I get when playing back the .flac encoded files.
So I got me a "Vu-meter" on my computer and that indeed happens when the "100%" is breached...

I know that the .flac is lossless and therefore outputs the same as the original file.
But is it stupid from me to think that MAYBE (please notice the MAYBE... as you ay have considered the "I am under the impression..." which denotes no certainty from me...) the player I use to playback those files "decompresses" them and applies a higher "pre-amp" output when decoding .flac files ?

Anyways, I'll compare to the original CD and I will then be able to tell...

But I must say I doubt that the team that remastered Pink Floy's "Wish you were here" for SACD did not heard that.
So it might just be how it should sound... or again, as I am ready to admit it, in my head.

Regards.

I see. Yes, 100% VU would cause what I call "distortion". That isn't something that can happen normally in the digital world. The flac file created should have the same digital values as the wav file - again no difference.

 

[0bs3rv3r]

I asked to get explanations.
All I have are statements...

A statement can be explanatory.

Everyone is trying to tell you they are the same - no difference

 

[MRC01]

... Even if storage is not a problem, I decided not to go with .wav format. ... So I decided to go with .flac.
...
But I am under the impression that the files resulting in this encoding are more "saturated" than the original file.
As I know that this is theoritically impossible, I was wondering :
- do I have to pay attention to some specific settings when I encode ? It seems the only one I have access with my software is "Compression" which I have set to "0"... As I said : storage ain't a problem here...
- is is possible that my playback software "enhances" the sound to it's limit ? It might be but that happens on several players, so...
- is it possible that my system settings are playing the files "louder" than they should be ?
...

If you start with a WAV file, create a FLAC from it, then uncompress the FLAC to create a new WAV file, it is identical to the original WAV file. FLAC does not change the data; that is what "lossless" means. The only FLAC setting is compression level, and it does not change the bits. You can safely use max (I think it's level 8) compression all the time.

If you are getting overload distortion when playing the FLAC files, it means that same distortion is in the original WAV file, or it is introduced in your playback chain. It cannot come from the FLAC conversion. It's quite possible there is something wrong in your setup that is setting the levels too high. Replay gain setting, or audio level settings, whatever. Also, it could be the music itself. Sadly, a lot of modern music is recorded too hot with lots of dynamic range compression and clipping.

 

[PenguinMusic]

Hi guys,

OK.
Got you all.

Anyways, I've given it at "closer" look.

The problem mainly appears on files that I bought and so did not encode myself !
So that basically means that the original music is poorly mastered :-(

Just in case, here's a link to a file I bought and downloaded from Qobuz and where you can distinctly hear what I mean...
And indeed, the "Vu meter" goes in the red zone when I can hear that.

Best regards.

 

[Dumdum]

Hi guys,

OK.
Got you all.

Anyways, I've given it at "closer" look.

The problem mainly appears on files that I bought and so did not encode myself !
So that basically means that the original music is poorly mastered :-(

Just in case, here's a link to a file I bought and downloaded from Qobuz and where you can distinctly hear what I mean...
And indeed, the "Vu meter" goes in the red zone when I can hear that.

Best regards.

Or maybe converted from mp3 or similar lossy format

The number of times people have said they have converted 320 mp3 to flac and it ‘sounds better’ simply amazes me... normally on Facebook

 

[PenguinMusic]

Hi Dumdum,

It can be.
But given the reputation of the Qobuz service, I highly doubt it.
Unless the record label that gives them the files already encoded went from mastertapes to .mp3 and then from .mp3 to .flac...

Unlikely, but why not ?

Regards.