Linn Forums

Current time: 2017-12-16, 06:16 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn Music Systems & Hi-fi Separates / Network Music Players & Music Streamers v / Uncompressed FLAC

Post Reply 
Uncompressed FLAC
2012-09-01, 23:03 (This post was last modified: 2012-09-01 23:09 by MattC.)
Post: #21
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-01 22:54)abl Wrote:  Actually the case work of the klimax range has nothing to do with anything, just a way of branding and pricing.

Don't mention shielding. A simple copper mesh can shield what ever needs to be shielded. Money blinds some times.

You speak with the authority of one who knows what he's talking about - so i'll bow to your superior knowledge...

...oh - hold on - that Klimax Renew DS i had - that sounded inferior to the KDS its parts (all but the cae that is) were donated from...so maybe (just maybe) you're wrong - i'm guessing that might not happen often.

...actually, thinking about it - its clearly me hearing things...oh Linn you are cheeky, making me fall for your emperors new clothes...

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-01, 23:15
Post: #22
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  One thing all of you have forgotten is that the network doesn't send 'clean' data to a DS. It's packed in a network protocol data packet that consists of a number of layers.

So when considering the inflation of flac files you have to remember the extraction of the data from the network packets. So if flac 5 is half the size of uncompressed flac that means there are more than twice the amount of network packets to strip, this has to be done by the network hardware and software in the DS.

So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

Yes - this is the I/O vs CPU debate - did you have a point on it you wished to make?

(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  Enjoy your tests and abx tests. I prefer to drip heavy water on my system as it gives me that hydrophobic realism that other types of water can't.

...Okaaaaaay...well reasoned argument there...

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 00:09
Post: #23
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-01 23:15)MattC Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  One thing all of you have forgotten is that the network doesn't send 'clean' data to a DS. It's packed in a network protocol data packet that consists of a number of layers.

So when considering the inflation of flac files you have to remember the extraction of the data from the network packets. So if flac 5 is half the size of uncompressed flac that means there are more than twice the amount of network packets to strip, this has to be done by the network hardware and software in the DS.

So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

Yes - this is the I/O vs CPU debate - did you have a point on it you wished to make?

(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  Enjoy your tests and abx tests. I prefer to drip heavy water on my system as it gives me that hydrophobic realism that other types of water can't.

...Okaaaaaay...well reasoned argument there...

If you didn't get the point then I'm sorry that you don't understand. Lets just say that you only understand a small part of the story.

If you think blocks of aluminium are important, that's good, you might just make it.

I actually have a tomato called George.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 00:24 (This post was last modified: 2012-09-02 00:27 by MattC.)
Post: #24
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-02 00:09)abl Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 23:15)MattC Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  One thing all of you have forgotten is that the network doesn't send 'clean' data to a DS. It's packed in a network protocol data packet that consists of a number of layers.

So when considering the inflation of flac files you have to remember the extraction of the data from the network packets. So if flac 5 is half the size of uncompressed flac that means there are more than twice the amount of network packets to strip, this has to be done by the network hardware and software in the DS.

So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

Yes - this is the I/O vs CPU debate - did you have a point on it you wished to make?

(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  Enjoy your tests and abx tests. I prefer to drip heavy water on my system as it gives me that hydrophobic realism that other types of water can't.

...Okaaaaaay...well reasoned argument there...

If you didn't get the point then I'm sorry that you don't understand. Lets just say that you only understand a small part of the story.

If you think blocks of aluminium are important, that's good, you might just make it.

I actually have a tomato called George.

...there really is no answer to that - but WOULD like to repeat my earlier question: Did somebody say this forum was going downhill??

...Jeez...

...at this point I feel I should step away from the keyboard - and then put some thought into where there might be a forum comprising Intellegent and rational discussion...because this CERTAINLY isn't it anymore.

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 08:30
Post: #25
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-01 22:38)MattC Wrote:  ...theres a much more mature debate going on about these questions over at the Naim (you know Naim - they're the guys who say WAV sounds better than FLAC - clearly just a bunch of druids and wizards) forum...
[...]
did somebody say this forum was on a downward spiral??

I read the Naim forum. But as far as I can see they don't have more knowledge than I can see here in this Linn forum.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 08:37
Post: #26
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

I read this as: FLAC files take processing time for decoding the compressed files and that could make a difference to WAV files. That could be a reason why WAV sounds better.

On the other hand WAV files take more processing time for the handling of the network protocol stuff because there are more packages. This could be a reason why FLAC sounds better.

Now what?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 08:42
Post: #27
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-02 08:37)sofa Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

I read this as: FLAC files take processing time for decoding the compressed files and that could make a difference to WAV files. That could be a reason why WAV sounds better.

On the other hand WAV files take more processing time for the handling of the network protocol stuff because there are more packages. This could be a reason why FLAC sounds better.

Now what?
It only says that the explanation about 'more processing hence audible effect' is flawed as it works the same for the larger files - it doesn't help with what people are hearing. I tried it yesterday BTW, I can't detect a difference...
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 09:26 (This post was last modified: 2012-09-02 09:49 by MattC.)
Post: #28
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-02 08:30)sofa Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 22:38)MattC Wrote:  ...theres a much more mature debate going on about these questions over at the Naim (you know Naim - they're the guys who say WAV sounds better than FLAC - clearly just a bunch of druids and wizards) forum...
[...]
did somebody say this forum was on a downward spiral??

I read the Naim forum. But as far as I can see they don't have more knowledge than I can see here in this Linn forum.

I didn't say it contained answers - I said it contained Intellegent discussion - which is more that we get here...



(2012-09-02 08:42)Quaternione Wrote:  
(2012-09-02 08:37)sofa Wrote:  
(2012-09-01 21:40)abl Wrote:  So while a flac with compression takes processing time it takes less network protocol handling, this still has to be handled by the DS.

I read this as: FLAC files take processing time for decoding the compressed files and that could make a difference to WAV files. That could be a reason why WAV sounds better.

On the other hand WAV files take more processing time for the handling of the network protocol stuff because there are more packages. This could be a reason why FLAC sounds better.

Now what?
It only says that the explanation about 'more processing hence audible effect' is flawed as it works the same for the larger files - it doesn't help with what people are hearing. I tried it yesterday BTW, I can't detect a difference...

I've compared FLAC compressed with FLAC uncompressed (and that's SO important - not Compression level0 - UNCOMPRESSED - only available in dbpoweramp 14.1 onwards) and its night and day and black and white...

...first heard it in my dealer - some guy who had come into buy and Arcam iPod dock had a listen - he thought it was night and day too...

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 09:36
Post: #29
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
I'm not the only one either....

http://www.soundorg.co.uk/news/ripnas-an...grade-115/

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-02, 13:00
Post: #30
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-02 09:26)MattC Wrote:  I've compared FLAC compressed with FLAC uncompressed (and that's SO important - not Compression level0 - UNCOMPRESSED - only available in dbpoweramp 14.1 onwards) and its night and day and black and white...

...first heard it in my dealer - some guy who had come into buy and Arcam iPod dock had a listen - he thought it was night and day too...
Ok, no more smart a$$ remarks but what did you hear? I tried it. I even ripped a WAV file. No difference. FLAC compressed, FLAC uncompressed, WAV - nada. Nobody could hear it, then 96/48 and everybody jumped at the 96/48. I did not explain to anyone what they were listening at/for.

What was the "black and white?" I am not trying to be confrontational just wanting to understand what you heard.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#1: KDS,KK,SME20/2A w/Akiva, Uphorik, Exakt 350A, Transparent Reference XL Cables
#2: LP12 40th Aniv.,KDS,Unidisc 1.1,KK Solosx2,Kremlin,LP12, Wilson Duette 2,JL Audio F113, Transparent XL Cables
#3: Klimax Renew, Klimax Chakra twin, Akurate Pre, Majik 109s, Akurate Sub
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)