The difference between FLAC and AIFF is very slight. Most people will very likely not hear it, or the difference are really not enough for them to care. But if your system is highly resolving and the little bit of more presence in the sound is something that matters to you, and if file space is not a concern, AIFF would be a better choice.
I have done extensive listening tests between FLAC, AIFF, and WAV, and I favor AIFF over FLAC. With AIFF and WAV, I could not hear a difference, only WAV does not do meta data like AIFF.
In my system DSD sounds a little smoother around the edges than PCM. They are both very detailed and the difference between them is not really that much, so it’s really a matter of preference what someone would choose.
The ultimate for me as far as sound quality goes is DSD 256. If I can get the recording in DSD 256, I would. I find not only is the resolution much higher in this format, but the sound has more of an analog quality to it, it’s very addicting. Only thing is the file size is very prohibitively big, but large capacity hard drives are easy to get, and worth it for the sonic performance DSD 256 offers.
You are correct. Ironically my “old” MBL Dac only can handle 96k on the inputs before it upsamples within the Dac. So I use the 2f setting on the Grim output.
Yes exactly. It was 2016 at my very beginning here I think, when Paul started a post about this and I started to experience the difference. There was certainly also a strong doubter present already.
I explained what I hear more in detail later in the forum as far as I remember, but the discussion shows, that nothing in terms of arguments and counter arguments changed since then
Yes I have! Up till this point my experience with CD playback and streaming was very good. Whether I was streaming from local files or Qobuz I can’t say that the disc players I had were superior to streaming the same music from my Auralic G2 to the modded Directstream DAC. The Disc playback at best sounded identical to the Auralic which I thought is a good thing. The PST playing SACD’s or redbook sounded identical to the Auralic playing the same music via streaming.
Enter the Gryphon Ethos the very expensive CD player that plays Redbook only no SACD. The price is high but once you hear it the price could be justified for the DAC alone but the bonus is that it has a CD player! Tonight just to confirm I compared Hugh Maskela Stimela DSD 64 from my local drive to the Ethos DAC vs. the CD layer of SACD playing on the Ethos. The Ethos lets me play PCM or unconverted DSD 128. I played both and both CD versions PCM and DSD bested the streaming DSD 64. I repeated the same scenario with Muddy Waters Folk Singer. The DSD 64 version sounds amazing but it was easily bested buy the CD playback. The big surprise for me was playing the redbook version of Chick Corea Trilogy II La Fiesta vs. the Qobuz 192/24 where again the silver disc is superior. I’ve compared several CD’s to their Hirez counterparts and I haven’t heard one best the silver disc using the Ethos. Here is a link to the an Ethos review.The Ethos is audio overkill at its finest. Would it be wrong for me to start a go fund me so I can buy it? Disregard I’ll try for a lottery prize or I may start riding my bicycle to work!
The thing is, everyone has or has had a CD player at one time or another. Not many CD players stand out as sounding better than another. The PST was touted as a step above the rest. It is.
But the MBL 1621A and the Gryphon Ethos are so very much better than any other I have heard. They stand out so very obviously. You just would not believe it until you heard it. It is not subtle, not at all. And it makes ZERO sense that the same ones and zeros the other CD players read can have so much more information heard with these two transports. It is unbelievable, I totally get why people choose not to believe. But one listen, seconds worth of playback when comparing to another player and it all becomes very, very obvious.
I was following this thread closely, then went away for a six week retreat. I come back, and it’s still in the same state—no AirLens yet and continual speculation.
OMG. I’m gonna block this thread. I give up on the thing.
It’s been years now! Nevermind six week or six months! Though not yet six years maybe.
Certainly, we have had the FLAC vs. ALAC conversation here and on other threads a number of times. A pointer here is to make sure to test with the same version of a song. A buddy told me he preferred ALAC over FLAC. But the tracks he was using were from different masterings. I swapped the files in the containers and he preferred FLAC…
I can totally believe though that those pricey CD players can make a standard 16-44 CD sound better than an SACD. They are not just CD players. They are upsampling DACS. And denizens of PS Audio forums tend to be believers in upsampling DACs.
I was looking for a new server and gave up waiting for the Octave Server, bought another product, that was in February 2019. I had a look back, Paul was discussing the Octave Server in December 2016. Patience is a virtue.
Not sure who wrote that but they obviously have not tried to buy anything non standard. Sue local deliveries are ok, but global demand for things is certainly not back to normal.
I think Paul’s transparency regarding new products is a breath of fresh air, I welcome it. Having something In time for our needs at the time is unrealistic IMHO.
The AirLens can’t be too far away now. The Australian distributor for PS Audio is flagging an estimated retail price of AUS$3995, based on preliminary pricing information.
Looking forward to the AirLens finally coming out, but also hoping the estimated Australian RRP isn’t right given Paul flagged a few months ago the AirLens was expected to retail in the vicinity of US$2K.
