I am puzzled why you, and other, Melco users seem so against the very idea of trying to understand why there should be the audible difference you hear? Between D100 and other ripperdTo the inquisitive, or scientific minded, amongst us, it is normal, wanting to understand, to know why and how. And after all, that is surely what all development is based on. Aside from that, if there is a difference also audible on non Melco players, something that I don’t think has yet been answered, then if the cause is known people might be able to modify files to benefit without buying a D100. Assuming claims of an audible difference are well founded, and I am not suggesting they are not, then it does raise the thought as to whether that last point might explain resistance by people who have forked out…,
If anybody can be bothered with this D100 comparison stuff, please borrow a good psu……its even better imo😂
If Melco don’t know then they would be unable to make a consistent product. I’m sure ‘development’ of Melco products doesn’t involve changing something at random, waiting for three months formit to burn in and then listening again…
As I explained to Feeling_zen earlier I provided two specific examples some years ago on a different forum and the experts came back and reported that since each pair of files were identical, there could not be any difference while listening to them. But to my ears there is, and even my non music listening wife was able to hear the difference. I was put through the ridicule wringer then and I’m not going to go through it again.
I suggest that those who are sufficiently interested borrow a Melco D100 from their dealer and experiment in their own systems.
Well maybe we should put more time into understanding, but for me listening to the music is the most important task in the ever diminishing time available in this life. I don’t really need to know how they’ve done it, just that it works!
I wasn’t suggesting otherwise, my point about development not being about the D100 ripper but a general point about inquisitiveness, wanting to know why and how. I though that should be evident in my post.
I know. I was agreeing with you 
Oops, sorry I didn’t recognise that!!
I gave up long ago.
All i will say is try for yourself if you want.
I did and re ripped all my cd’s once again using the D100 i didn’t do it for fun.
There was no objection at all that I remember… files were transferred by box or Google or by private email, or created simply by the users… not on the forum… In fact I seem to remember subsequent discussion with some Naim staff where the activity was mentioned as being followed in interest by some.
I have tried to look at my results and the range of rippers used in the old forum archive… but the forum archive seems to have an error where it just points to Google.com…
Alternatively @Richard.Dane ’s sticky returns an error
Old Forum FAQ Archive
I think a forum member is talking to their retailer about borrowing a Melco…
I have read in quite a few threads on this Forum and in threads in another HiFi Forum I use that quite a lot of people now mostly stream from Qobuz or Tidal rather than play their locally stored ripped CD’s - This being the case, it’s even more reason not to bother with the whole time consuming and potentially very expensive (Innuos or Melco) CD ripping/storage/playback option - which is pretty much what one of my long term HiFi Dealers told me very early on in my research into this option.
This is also what I have been thinking and I currently have an Innuos Zen MK2 with a lot of local music. I was thinking of upgrading to another Innuos, but have been wondering if it even makes sense? Have seen Roon come out with a new product Nucleus One and wondering if I will be satisfied with it
That is an interesting one. Using a local streamer, whether it be £20 RPi, or a £2000 Melco gives you control over the quality of your content, whether it be from hidef downloads or standard resolution CD.
Cloud streaming providers typically require the content to be LUFS processed to certain criteria or they will modify the content… you don’t get that on CD or hidef downloads.
Also some content will be removed from the streamers catalogue, usually by the distributor or artist… and so disappear. Over time you see this a lot from your list of favourites or virtual collections. No issue with your own media.
So unless you are simply casually listening, favourite albums, simgles or EPs are best purchased and streamed locally to assure availability.
Finally there is streamer rendering performance, most cloud streamer service providers use FLAC for lossless as opposed to WAV, and so on some streamers WAV may sound preferable. Also increasingly cloud streamers will be using TLS encryption of internet delivered media from their chosen CDN providers which again means the end streamer player has to work harder to decipher the media, which may affect sound performance subtly . Local streaming, all data is sent in the clear, so the processing for the streamer is as basic as can be… so the chances for generation of out of band rendering noise is minimised.
So cloud streaming absolutely gives great variety and choice, local streaming gives assured availability and quality, as well as consistent streaming rendering performance. Though with better designed more recent streamers that gap between cloud and local should diminish to the point of not noticeable for rendering performance… although the LUFS differences between cloud and CD can’t typically be circumvented.
Hence why I think it’s good to have a choice of input sources.
Thanks Simon. I’ll make enquiries of Naim to see what’s happened there.
I also hardly play from my melco these day’s, but that wasn’t the case a while ago.
The ripped stuff i found has the edge over streaming for SQ, but that has changed, now i find the SQ from streaming to have the slightly better SQ normally.
Still good to have the melco, but for me not really needed these day’s
I’m not against it. An explanation has been postulated that I’m satisfied with.
It doesn’t upset me if someone else can get the same results as a D100 by less costly means.
Hi MoonDrifter. Simon makes some valid points on availability. Depends if you are happy to continue also with a cd player and cd’s around the house. The versions on qobuz do churn.
Its only expensive I think if you don’t already have a pc. I think you said you didn’t? Those that do have a pc will have already got on and got their cd’s ripped in the time we have been discussing this topic. Like I said it’s a cheap bluray drive and cheap software away from getting started if you do have a pc.
It does concern me that all this ridiculous noise is creating the impression of a mystique around ripping cds. Thats totally unfair to the initiate and generates confusion and doubt that should not be there. And I worry that an unscrupulous salesperson will exploit that doubt and thats unfair to members here if it were ever to happen.
Its very simple. Ripping is not recording. It’s reading digital music consisting of 0s and 1s from a burned cd. You endeavour to get the same information back that was burned onto the cd in the first place. There are no timing challenges. No noise floor to handle with dolby b. No cassette tape to deteriorate if you accidentally put it next to a magnet. None of that. Its as simple as buying a digital download or copying a photograph from an SD card. As a photographer who uses a high end phase digital back, even phase wouldn’t be daft enough to sell me a high end multi £k card reader that improves the resolution of an image when it is copied off my cf express card. There is a little bit more involved due to the optical drive but in essence thats what we are dealing with.
Simon’s hypothesis of what is going on, assuming the conversation on perceived improvement is in good faith, is very smart but still quite an unlikely edge case in my view and one that would certainly not be universally applicable to all digital streamers. But it could happen for sure. If it was true, I am sure Spoon would love to know because it would be a very very trivial software change to add a parameter to change the wav encoding format in his software for the better. Wouldn’t finding that out advance our collective knowledge and improve outcomes for all? Anyone want to help in improving sound quality for all? Isn’t that why we visit here and contribute?
I would not let this discussion stop anyone from ripping cds in the ways described by many here at all. It’s totally at the margins.
Well there we are. I certainly won’t engage in any more circular arguments on the topic. It borders on being trolled frankly as well as feeling like engaging with a cult. And it’s now become boring. I like to think this is a rational place where we collaborate to improve our collective knowledge. I know I hugely value the collective knowledge and experience of forum members. I am prepared to continue taking the contributions here as good faith. And I am sure they are because thats what this place is all about. But we go nowhere unless we transition our discussion into evidential based investigation of explanations. We do that so well. Otherwise let’s all pause please.
So I am happy to help the community advance our collective knowledge and I will do what I can to get some evidence about what people hereabouts hear. Without evidence, all we can report is that anecdotally, users are hearing a difference. That’s it.
I also won’t let ridiculous notions stand unchallenged that two bit identical data files can lead to a different outcome in a closed technology system. It can’t unless some other independent or accidentally random event occurs such as a software defect, a kettle being switched on or a changed listening perception. Thats just computer science. That is honestly like standing in the vale of york with the yorkshire wolds hiding behind some trees and declaring that the earth is flat. I also won’t respond to that statement again in this thread if it is repeated.
Have a good day all and I hope as an OP you have all you need to make your own decisions going forward. Best of luck and enjoy your music! 
Hi @MoonDrifter, not everyone! 
I currently have a CD player and enjoy playing my carefully curated selection of discs. I probably have approximately 1000 discs. Love the physical aspect as already mentioned by others and also making sure I have a specific version/master of a recording. It’s important to me. It’s currently my main source. 
However, ripping your CD collection is not a huge or complicated task, and certainly not expensive if you already have a computer.
I’m MAC based and started the process early on in 2012 when I purchased a ‘ND5XS’ streamer from Naim. Great piece of kit by the way. My workflow is as follows:
Pioneer Blu-ray drive → Mac Mini → XLD Ripping software → setup to rip in full fat WAV → Meatadatics software to edit and cleanup all album tags → copy final resulting files/folders to NAS drive (running Minimserver UPnP) and my current streamer ssd storage ‘Burmester Musiccenter 151’.
Easy! The resulting sound from my 151 streamer is amazing. I typically listen for hours on end.
Whether you prefer to go down the Qobuz, etc. route or ripping your CD collection is up to you. You can of course do both. Don’t let anyone put you off ripping though, I get great pleasure from curating my own personal library and listening to it. That’s me!