I just installed the Music Server computer into my main system yesterday, and thought I would post my first impressions. But before that, let me recap the system for you:
Compaq desktop (circa 2006) w/AMD Athlon 64 single core processor running at 2.4Ghz, with 2GB DRAM (max.) and two Western Digital 250GB hard drives. Upgrades (so far) include an ASUS Xonar D2 24-bit/192Khz PCI digital sound card, an NVIDA GeForce 8400 PCI express video card, and Windows 7 Home Premium OS.
The Xonar includes an on board DAC for an analog output, but it also has digital outputs (coax and optical) that convert the WAV/FLAC/ALAC/MP3 files to a standard PCM format (up to 24-bit/192Khz) for outputting to a DAC or, in my case, a true digital amplifier like the Lyngdorf TDAI-2200 via a DH Labs D75 digital coax cable.
I began my listening session with some high-res (24/96 and 24/192) FLAC files that I downloaded online and converted to Apple Lossless (ALAC) files using the dBpowermaster ripping software — and the results sounded great! To my ear, it sounded like a high-res SACD. No, I haven’t done the digital-to-CD or digital-to-SACD comparisons yet. I wanted to optimize the music server before making those comparisons.
Next, I moved onto some demo quality CD’s that I’d ripped directly into Apple Lossless using the iTunes program. I’d been listening to many of these on my computer audio system for the past couple of weeks, and was curious to hear how they’d sound on my main system. At first they sounded fine, but upon further listening, I began to notice a “digital sheen” that seemed to etch the music with a cool (but not harsh) glow, not unlike that of a florescent bulb. Over time, it induced a slight case of listener fatigue that wasn’t apparent until the session ended.
I did a little research and came upon a website called The Computer Audiophile (www.computeraudiophile.com) that I found both interesting and informative. And, like audiophiles the world over, there’s no shortage of arguments and discussions in the forums concerning the differences that some members are hearing (or not hearing) between different files formats, ripping software, hardware, and such. Some have mentioned that certain ripping programs, like dBpowermaster and others, do a better job ripping music files than the iTunes program does. So I took up the challenge and ripped a couple of HQ CD’s into ALAC using the dBpowermaster program. I was impressed with its advanced feature set that allows for files comparisons, and even provides offsets for over 2600 different CD/DVD ROM drives to more accurately calibrate your drive for optimum performance. Needless to say, dBpowermaster provided a slight, but noticeably better sounding ALAC file than iTunes did. The results produced a sound that was warmer than the earlier cool blue florescent sound that iTunes produced, but it still didn’t have the warm glow you get from an incandescent bulb(ous).
One member of the Computer Audiophile forum posted a reply in the ongoing discussion comparing file formats, where he passed along an opinion from his brother, who is a recording engineer somewhere in Europe. He states that his brother can definitely hear the difference between losslessly compressed music files, such as FLAC and ALAC, and uncompressed files like WAV and AIFF (even though, on paper, these files are supposed to be identical); and, that for high-quality playback, all the engineers he knows use uncompressed WAV files for critical listening. I ripped some CD’s into WAV files and made the comparison — and I have to agree with his assessment. My most immediate impression (without going into detail) was that the improvement was like comparing a CD to a SACD. There was more of everything — ambiance, clarity, image specificity, depth, etc.
The only explanation I can come up with is, if both the ALAC and WAV files are bit accurate representations of the original CD, then the differences I’m hearing must be somewhere in the way the two files are processed for playback. Perhaps there’s an anomaly, such as jitter, that’s introduced during the streaming and expansion process required for playing back the compressed ALAC files? Whatever the explanation, that doesn’t change what I heard. So I have decided to go back and re-rip the CD’s I’ve already done as WAV files, and continue in this format. If you think about it, the reason for introducing compressed files in the first place was to conserve precious (and, at the time, expensive) storage space. But now that you can buy a 1.5TB hard drive for $110, that consideration is no longer a issue.
FURTHER REVELATIONS
1) The original power supply fan on the Compaq is too noisy. Solution: order a PC Power & Cooling Silencer ATX-370 super quiet power supply. Price on Amazon about $46. Another advantage with the PCP&C is that all the outputs are on a single bus, which optimizes efficiency and eliminates the possibility of overloading a supply using multiple, lower rated buses.
2) Like the rest of my audio equipment, the music server computer benefits from the addition of brass Audio Points in place of the rubber feet.
3) The addition of the Acoustic Revive REM-8 EMF Canceler made a noticeable improvement when placed atop the computer, right above the power supply. (What does an audiophile bird say? …”tweak, tweak!”)
Signing off from audiocomputerland, 10-4, over and out!
doc
[part one]
Discover more from Audio Resurgence - High End Audio Reviews and Products
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
