Can FLACs ripped from CDs sound as good or better than the CD ?

yes, it does. Tagging in wav is shaky. Some programs will read it, some won't.

I think the reason most use wav now is because the number of programs that support it are almost universal, and people want to get away from proprietary formats.

 

Comparing sound quality on a streaming service such as Qobuz against downloaded files listened to on your computer or mobile device introduces way too many variables to assess causality in sound differences.

For one thing I've compared three versions of the same album each remastered several years apart and they all sound different on Qobuz. Some are normal volume, another loudness war louder and another that had some subtle reverb or an EQ adjust.

So the question is which version is Qobuz using to stream? Do you know for sure? Do you also know for sure that they may be applying their own dynamics juicing to sweeten the sound of the streamed version to make it desirable over downloads so they can promote streaming instead of having their servers constantly active with lurkers and one off downloading? Can you prove this is not happening? No, you can't.

Just like on my Spectrum audio cable feed my cheap $6 Boston Acoustics computer speakers can sound horrible or like a high end system depending on which channel I choose to watch that has sound. Two identical commercials I could hop back and forth between two channels makes my speaker sound like crap while the other sound like a million bucks.

Explain why that is? And don't give me a nonsense answer.

 

Add in that all the streaming services apply DSP to all material that doesn't fall neatly into the criteria that they (the streaming services) expect.
So even if you have the same master as one on the service, there's variability built in if that master doesn't meet the criteria that particular service demands.

 

Perhaps you've forgotten your first line in your OP.

What has FLAC got to do with sounding different between it being ripped directly from a CD vs played directly from a CD? Why not just ask does redbook CD data sound good on all transports vs conventional transports?

You said it. I felt I needed to provide facts about FLAC why you shouldn't have introduced a container format as one of the variables that makes one suspect it's the cause of sound differences played on CD transports of any version.

 

That's news to me. Thanks for clarifying this. I always dread having to go hunting Qobuz for a song I heard on YouTube that sounds amazing or quite different from the CD version that is decades old off a CD album or compilation of mine only to find on Qobuz there's three different versions neither sound close to the YouTube version and my CD compilation album.

Now where do I go looking for it?

 

I betcha' streaming services are loving the narrative of this thread on sound quality differences and the hassles of ripping and managing individual files on one's computer and questioning whether it's the best of the best in quality.

Why bother, just stream it and pay a monthly fee. It's so much easier than with dealing with all the doubts of what was done to music to make it sound different.

Just stream it and let it all wash over you and your expensive playback equipment.

 

I use Qobuz myself, but that has as much to do with the service being lossless despite the use of DSP, and that it sits in the middle cost wise between Spotify and Tidal.
I have bought downloads from Spotify that sound slightly better than the streams because the streams have had DSP applied.

 

FLAC is lossless compression. If you convert WAV file to FLAC file and then convert it back to WAV, it will be binary identical to the original WAV file.

They will/may sound different only due to hardware/software combo(s) you play them through.

Regards

 

It would be very helpful if you could provide a link to a YouTube feed that demonstrates the sound differences caused by DSP. Anything would suffice. I haven't heard any differences but I also don't know the back channel sources for the audio I hear online.

DSP is all a mystery to me in where and when it's being applied.

 

I've generally found lossless ripped playback to be better through a modern asynchronous USB interface subjectively with objective evidence for that statement. For example, this week I published the results from my RME ADI-2 Pro FS R comparing the USB, coaxial, and TosLink inputs. Assuming a ripped lossless file is played through USB and a CD transport sending through S/PDIF coax, at a microscopic level, USB is more precise timewise with less jitter although I would not argue there's an audible problem even with TosLink.

Generally, the jitter sequence from highest to lowest: TosLink (optical) > coaxial > USB/ethernet

Over the years, I have never seen much of an issue with noise through USB which is one common narrative some people claim with no evidence of a problem.

No idea why people will claim the CD player is "always" better. Never seen evidence for such a thing, much less "always"!

Which ones? Was there any objective testing? Important to check out potential timing issues between S/PDIF implementations and have a look at the DAC's jitter rejection ability. I'm sure you'll be able to find good and bad transports and likewise some DACs have poorer jitter rejection over S/PDIF than others.

Although I have been critical of some of PS Audio (Paul McGowan) videos as he clearly has blind spots with questionable claims, he does have some good ones to review audio basics. If he says "CD players sound better than music servers" as a sweeping statement, then this clearly is inaccurate as no comment of that nature could be correct for such a broad range of products! I hope he provided details like which CD player and which music server he was referring to.

BTW, over the years with reasonable quality gear, I have not found a difference in sound quality regardless of lossless format (as examined here years ago).

 

Some believe the reduction of (computer) processes to an absolute minimum, including decompressing flac files, is key to getting the best out of digital. This approach is why products like the Sonore Rendu series came about. Purpose-built audio components using high quality parts and running lean software has proven itself over time. Some of us rip to WAV because we believe in this approach. No need to argue about any of it .. rip to whatever format suits your taste and hearing.

 

Older hardware I agree - if you wanted non-lossy support 15 years ago, WAV likely was the way to go/ And/or AIFF.

More modern hardware however, FLAC is about as much of a defacto standard as you'll likely get. Except in an Apple ecosystem of course.

 

Slight digression, but people who are addicted to video services like Netflix and Hulu are amazed to learn the OTA transmission usually delivers a much sharper picture, for similar reasons. At least the premium digital music services are paying attention to SQ to the extent that their listeners demand it. But what percentage of their total audiences are we, I wonder? Probably not much.

 

I didn't know Spotify sold downloads.

I only buy lossless from Qobuz, HD Tracks, and 7-digital. I stream lossy from Qobuz just to screen a song or album, then buy it if I want.

 

Nope.

 

I meant Qobuz for the downloads.

 

oh dear, oh deary me

 

I can't find anything demonstrating the differences on Youtube.
Chances are you wouldn't notice much if there was - Youtube stream audio is lossily compressed.

There are a good number of videos about mastering for streaming services, and what happens if your material falls outside of the requirements.

 

The idea that digital files or delivery systems can be finicky, potentially favoring wav over flac due to hardware/software combos, is a new one for me.

This makes sense based on my personal experience with wav and flac.

 

Why Do WAV And FLAC Files Sound Different? Article By Dr. Charles Zeilig And Jay Clawson

Edit: What I meant is that this could be due to conversion settings(software) and the hardware on which you are making the conversion, and the playback hardware.

Regards

 

You are right I should have worded my OP better and my apologies for that

 

If you really want to change it up, try APE! (Monkey's Audio)

 

No question that playback hardware (e.g., different DACs, different settings) have an obvious effect. Unfortunately, the article you linked, originally published by HiFiCritic, has repeatedly been debunked because it's so packed with nonsense and false premise and fundamental misunderstanding of digital audio.

 

Not just debunked, but outdated as well. The article was published in July, 2016, and both DAC equipment and programing have progressed more than a bit over the last 4+ years. That timeframe represents 2 to 3 generations of development.

 

I did way back in the early 00s. Now the format is as dead as a doorknob.