?
So if not better sound quality, what is the goal? If some rippers give rips that sound better, it’s the most important. Even if technically the rips are identical.
The goal is to make an exact (or, if you want, bit perfect) copy of the original data. If two rippers generate different files, these cannot be both bit perfect. If the files are identical, it doesn’t make sense to ask which one is better in no matter which sense.
1 Like
I fully understand the goal of ripping. I have been a government research scientist for 40 years so I fully understand your point. My point is that they do sound different regardless and it’s not bias. Of course a £1200 Melco ripper is well constructed and made by a HiFi company but I suspect many, perhaps most, purchasers of this device buy it because the rips it produces sound good and better than alternatives. As I previously stated there are numerous factors, including bias, that influence the perceived quality of what you hear. You will hear what you hear and I will hear what I hear, end of story as far as I am concerned. I have numerous rips made in both DBpoweramp and using my Buffalo drive, and listening to them on my system at the ‘same’ time I can generally hear a difference.
2 Likes
Personally I don’t care if one is bit perfect or not. Since many threads now, 99% of members find a significant improvement with the rips made the Melco. Since 2 years.
I don’t believe they are fooled by their brains.
Apparently you can’t accept it because systematically you join any thread on that subject and deny it.
Why not try yourself, borrow a Melco ripper, make some rips, and see what happens.
There is the problem:-) the engineer in me says: crap, it‘s bit perfect, you can‘t hear a difference…1 and 0…! The music lover in my says: trust your ears, it‘s freaking better! Nowaday I say: if it sounds better, it is better! They can put sliced cheese in it- I don’t care if it moves me.
3 Likes
In the context of this discussion I think bit perfect is an irrelevance. Reading the bits correctly is a trivial task for any CD drive, and even if some bits were missing, it would likely cause stuttering or silence rather than altered sound quality.
1 Like
I spoke to 2 more Naim/Melco dealers: the consensus is 2-1 that it can’t be done without connecting a DAC as some have said. If in an illogical pursuit of being able to do this, one could pick up a used DAC cheap, would a Naim N-DAC or even a N-DAC-V1 work? Does it just connect into the USB DAC socket on the Melco server, or the 2nd USB socket on the D100, or either? Does it then work just with the Ethernet connection from the Melco Server to the ND555, or some other needed?
Listening to more on the N1ZS at a more reasonable (read higher) volume. I see some of the files already on it are Hi Res downloads (up to 24 bit 96kHz) and some CD rips. The ones I’ve done myelf with the D100 and compared to the Unitiserve do demonstrate some differences, I would say the Melco is a bit smoother and detailed, mind you with some music it may be that the slightly more visceral and bassy Unitiserve versions are preferable… Still more to do.
Neil
The NDAC doesn’t have a suitable USB input, so you would need to use a USB to SPDIF converter. The V1 does, so that should work with a direct USB connection, although I haven’t tried it.
Review on the Ear audio on Melco S100 switch:
Going back to my normal server to streamer connection the tone instruments went from sounding great to sounding real, again thanks to extra depth of resolution. The sound of Bastian Keb’s The Killing of Eugene Peeps being less thick and more open with superb delicacy and subtlety, any hint of its digital origins disappearing in the process. I also did a couple of A/B comparisons using tracks from Qobuz, here the timing made as great a leap in quality as the tonal aspects of each track, which had more fine detail and greater presence within the room with the Melco rather than the Netgear. I did wonder if this switch was good enough to close the gap between services like Qobuz and my library, it did help but the local version sounded more relaxed and enjoyable every time. Finally I made a contrast with the English Electric 8Switchthat is a quarter the price, here the timing was on a par but the Melco had the upper hand when it came to scale, tonal polish and believability. It all comes down to the sheer quantity of musical detail that gets through when noise is kept so low.
The Melco S100 reinforces just how significant a part network derived noise (RFI, EMI) plays in streaming systems. It made as much difference as to the end result as servers, streamers and DACs do, and that’s the key point really, that a well thought out network switch is as important as the parts of the system that actually handle the audio signal. Now can someone please make one that I can afford!
Yes you need to get USB out into Naim who apart from the DAC-V do not support USB. The Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB/Spdif costs about the same as as good DAC or second hand N-DAC. You need the D100 connected to the N10 as the N10 has the control software in it.
This is not true: as I commented, I have no doubt that people hear differences between Melco rips and other rips.
What we disagree about is which conclusions to draw from such observations. You are after rips that please your ears. I believe that sound quality is not a suitable criteria to value rips and that two identical files are … well identical.
Ripping is discussed in details in http://designwsound.com/dwsblog/hifi-computer-faq/cas-5-cd-ripping-for-mac-itunes/: there is nothing misterious or particularly difficult in testing whether a rip is exact or not.
In the context of ripping, “if it sounds better, it is better” is a very unsuitable criterion. Making CD rips that sound better than exact copies is very cheap. But it is not the purpose of ripping.
Because I fully trust what other members have reported and I do not see the point in wasting time repeating an experiemnt that people with better systems and ears have already done!
1 Like
The link doesn’t work for me.
Perhaps you have entered the column at the end as part of the link
? This works fine for me. If not, just go to http://designwsound.com/dwsblog/ and then select “HIFI & COMPUTER” -> “CD Ripping”.
The second link works! thanks 
Its an interesting article, explaining that AIFF is the same as WAV. The same CD was used for each experiment so sample variations were not considered. I was expecting AIFF to be different to WAV so its good to see someone has done the detailed work on this.
I use dbpoweramp and if I recall correctly it gives me a confidence in the rip / track by comparison to a database. This implies that all rips are not equal across different sample CDs and different computers, I have found many of my rips are not perfect due to imperfections on the CDs and I have had to tweak to get a good result. In some cases I have been unable to rip tracks. I am specifically talking about FLAC rips.
What the Melco devices provide a more simplistic and repeatable ripping mechanism avoiding the use of a laptop, software etc. For me this provides a speed and convenience I am willing to pay for when ripping a lot of CDs. When I had a Melco N100 on demo, I used my apple external drive and the rips were more than acceptable. I didn’t have the specific Melco drive so was unable to assess whether the files produced by the apple drive and the Melco drive were the same or different. I am told that the Melco drive is better at recovering data from damaged discs, but I have no evidence to prove this, just the word of my trusted dealer.
One other thing occurs to me: as the router/modem is close by and has 2 sockets, if I connect the Melco direct to the modem and direct to the ND555 does the quality of the switch matter as much? It will still be connected to the Modem’s second socket for other devices (Sky mini box etc) but does the fact that the Melco would not be connected to it mean the switch is less important, or does it have an impact anyway indirectly?
Neil
Excuse my ignorance again!
I guess that would depend on the capabilities of the switch. If it’s sending multcast data to every device on your network, the streamer might not like this. If the switch is, in effect, acting as a filter, and only sending the streamer data that is actually intended for it, that might reduce the superfluous electrical workload in the streamer.
As I understand it, audiophile switches tend to be quite basic under the hood, and while they may bring other benefits, they will not have the same abilities as a commercial grade switch such as the Catalysts in this respect.
This is not the case because audio CD has error correction that can reconstruct damaged data without loss, but if the damage is too big it interpolates and thereby loses information. There is only a read failure if the damage is too big for even interpolation.
However, most CDs are good enough for the full lossless correction, it is a rather trivial task nowadays, and there are checksum comparisons in dbPoweramp and the like.
But sorry for thread drift
Thanks for the input. I’ve finally decided on an N10, S100 and D100 with a dual Plixir power supply for the latter two items. Audioquest Vodka from Switch to N10 and N10 to ND555, Cinnamon from Modem to Switch and Carbon USB from N10 to D100. Powerline for N10 and Powerlin Lite for Plixir. Will report once sourced/installed! The upshot seems to be that you can’t use the D100 for CD replay with an ND555 unless you have a separate DAC connected to the N10 by USB. The only Naim option would be a NAC-V1, or maybe a Chord instead. Will wait and see whether to do that later!
Neil
4 Likes