Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 14558 times.

wplash666

Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« on: 22 Feb 2020, 12:59 pm »
Tried Qobuz this week and just seems to me my ripped cds sound better. Anyone else come to the same conclusion? I'm using a BDP-2 thru an SP-1.7.

RandyH

Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #1 on: 22 Feb 2020, 01:09 pm »
Not my experience.  I have a fairly highly resolving system and cannot reliably tell the difference between CDs (played on Bryston CD-3), ripped CDs or Qobuz or Tidal.  Often differences in masterings are noticeable.  In all honesty though I don't spend much time comparing.  If I don't hear a difference in the first 30 seconds or so I drop it and move on.  I'm using a Lumin T-1 Streamer/DAC.  Perhaps the Bryston is more revealing of subtle differences.

Rusty Jefferson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 873
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #2 on: 22 Feb 2020, 01:39 pm »
It is quite common for streaming services to be a notch down audibly from ripped cds or hi-rez downloads. I've heard it several times. I don't know what you're experiencing, but in the comparisons I've heard the differences aren't in tonality, but rather the size/depth of the soundstage, and a more 2 dimensional presentation from streaming rather than 3 dimensional from a server.

rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 5460
  • Rollo Audio Consulting -
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #3 on: 22 Feb 2020, 03:50 pm »
  Qobuz is VG. I as well prefer my server. Have yet to try Hi-Rez downloads. The only ones I would buy are ones recorded in DSD or 24/192. Not a fan of upsampling. Bluecoast Records offers DSD download just have to like the music selection. IMHO the best recordings I have in Digital.


charles

zoom25

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 983
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #4 on: 22 Feb 2020, 08:16 pm »
It wouldn't surprise me. The Bryston BDP's are very sensitive in the sound produced as a result of what inputs/outputs (NAS vs. USB) are engaged and what service (MPD vs. Tidal vs. Roon) is used despite playing the same identical file. With Qobuz and streaming services in general, you first have to confirm whether your local ripped files are same as what Tidal offers. Local playback of uncompressed WAVs is what's the best to my ears.

gbaby

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 858
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #5 on: 25 Feb 2020, 02:42 pm »
Tried Qobuz this week and just seems to me my ripped cds sound better. Anyone else come to the same conclusion? I'm using a BDP-2 thru an SP-1.7.

I came to this conclusion a while back.Ripped CDs sound better than both Qobuz and Tidal. Its no contest. In fact, ripped CDs sound better than high resolution downloads from HD Tracks. This is the reason I continue to buy CDs rather than bother with downloads or Qobuz. So, you are absolutely correct in your conclusion.

wplash666

Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #6 on: 25 Feb 2020, 05:34 pm »
Glad I'm not the only one.

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #7 on: 25 Feb 2020, 05:39 pm »
And I thought I was ear-llucinating.   :lol:

Flac CD rips, MP3-320 downloads > most hi-res 192/24 and DSD > Tidal

YMMV as usual.  :roll:

undertow

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 894
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #8 on: 25 Feb 2020, 06:42 pm »
Streaming almost anything whether Youtube, Spotify etc... have all been far less hi rez than direct FLAC files off your hard drive.

Mainly most people streaming are using generic devices to play back thru a headphone jack or other 200 dollar all in one DACs.

But I can assure you I have done extensive testing and streaming cannot sound as good as most FLAC files direct from your equipment. Even vs. Aurilic devices etc... that I have put plenty of time in with.

An example recently the new Tool Album Fear Inoculum came out on many streaming sources.

I then got the 24 bit download from HD tracks.

Forget it not even close. The HD tracks direct from the FLAC file is basically like comparing listening to MP3 on everything with streaming.

I have found this to be the case 99% of the time regardless of album.

But many people will defend streaming to the death because they literally don't have the Hi rez downloads or the original Redbook CD ripped thru a lossless program to even honestly directly compare, or verify the same albums so they think it sounds as good, and it is good, but its just not as good without a lot of hassle :-)

[In a car, portable Blu tooth setups, or headphones streaming will always sound good, but on a serious large hi rez - hi end system you will always hear a difference vs. pure FLAC files, or Vinyl, or even Redbook CD almost every time on basic equipment it just won't matter enough for the money though.]

rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 5460
  • Rollo Audio Consulting -
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #9 on: 25 Feb 2020, 07:14 pm »
  Off topic. I have been ripping into server using WAV. I found WAV to sound better than FLAC. Am I alone on this ? Streaming is convenient, less expensive at the press of a button. Using iPeng instead of Roon at $10/year. Cheaper and sounds better.

charles

mr_bill

Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #10 on: 25 Feb 2020, 07:20 pm »
Rollo, Do you use IPeng with a computer as a server/front end or with a streamer?
I like IPeng.

undertow

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 894
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #11 on: 25 Feb 2020, 07:37 pm »
WAV vs. FLAC should essentially sound identical.

The problem with WAV is tagging, and much equipment and software does not play WAV as well. But its not really a choice between better or not. FLAC is much more universally capable is really what it comes down to in the end.

From experience in the early testing years ago WAV was a bit more grainy sounding than equivalent lossless FLAC add on the tagging metadata issues... FLAC is the all around winner and why most hi rez files are sourced from FLAC today vs. 1999 when WAV was a primary simple format from redbook.

Shakeydeal

Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #12 on: 25 Feb 2020, 07:48 pm »
And I thought I was ear-llucinating.   :lol:

Flac CD rips, MP3-320 downloads > most hi-res 192/24 and DSD > Tidal

YMMV as usual.  :roll:

So, you are saying:

MP3s are greater than hi-res, and hi-res is greater than Tidal

Did I get that right?

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #13 on: 25 Feb 2020, 07:55 pm »
So, you are saying:

MP3s are greater than hi-res, and hi-res is greater than Tidal

Did I get that right?

Nope. Read the post. Important qualifiers in it.

gberger

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 203
  • Check 6
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #14 on: 25 Feb 2020, 11:28 pm »
Other than SQ, my main issue as a classical music nut, is getting the specific performance I want to hear.
Examples: The Verdi Requiem has over 40 different performances available on Redbook CDs.. Beethoven's 9th has over 50.  Brahm's First has over 30, etc. 

By the time it takes to find and get the specific performance I want to hear - - IF the server has it available - - I can slip the requisite Redbook CD from my collection into my BCD-3, sit back and listen.

Guess I'm truly antediluvian.

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #15 on: 25 Feb 2020, 11:56 pm »
Streaming is decent for exploring efficiently new musik that's unfamiliar to me.
Discs collection, download library,  that's for stuff I know I like, keepers.
In the end, I go back to my owned libraries for listening at top SQ on my system. No Streaming.

dB Cooper

Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #16 on: 26 Feb 2020, 03:01 am »
As I said in a similar thread, I think I might know what is happening. My hypothesis is as follows:

It isn't just you- but it's also not an innate fault of streaming. Listening to streamed audio from a PC? Not sounding the same as directly played CD? Here is my suggestion from this thread:

Assuming you are using the streaming app on a computer (I use a Mac but that is not important to what follows), open the app and look at the volume control setting within the Tidal app.

If it is all the way up (to the right), which is the default, there is your problem. You might (as I did) assume that full volume on a digital slider would provide unity gain (one of my player apps actually states this), but you’d be wrong. The Tidal app (along with many other audio apps) actually applies gain at maximum volume setting, which results in clipping on loud passages. I discovered this after installing SoundSource on my Mac. This app has small meters that change color when the signal clips. Clipping is bad and will sound bad, and you will notice immediately once it is gone.

Fortunately this problem isn’t that hard to fix- its just that nobody seems to know about it*. For those who use a Mac, buy Rogue Amoeba SoundSource ($20). Play an album with really loud peaks (Chick Corea’s Trilogy works well) (another good candidate would be the infamous Telarc 1812 cannons) and adjust the volume down until the little meters stop turning red on the loudest passages. This will actually be about 2/3 of the way up on the slider.  NOTE, selecting the DAC as the output device grays out the System volume adjustment (on a Mac anyway) so you must set the source app correctly. Reducing the volume downstream doesn't 'un-clip' a clipped source.

If you use a Windows machine, you’ll need to do a little research to find the appropriate software to accomplish the same thing. What you need is probably a VST metering plugin that incorporates some type of clipping indicator. You need it to sample the output of the player or streamer app directly. I'm sure there is something on the Windows platform that does something similar to SoundSource or AudioHijack. Set the meter to 'Peak' mode and experiment as described above.

I have found that virtually all digital music apps with their own volume controls have this problem - both web-based streamers and standalone player apps. Only VLC has a little tick mark on their volume slider denoting unity gain. On a player app, you can also play a calibrated test tone through a metering plugin to accomplish calibration. Streaming apps are a little more challenging to set.

I think you’ll find, as I did, that a signal that isn’t clipping sounds better than one that is. My Modi Multibit sounded like a whole different animal after getting things right. Garbage in, garbage out.

I wonder how much business the lossless streaming services are losing due to people not actually getting the SQ they’re paying (extra!) for. Judging by the discussions I see on this site alone, I'm guessing quite a few.  I see debates about which streaming service does the best job delivering the exact same digital file to your DAC. I also wonder how much money gets spent on faulty solutions. This question came up in another thread, and the OP was inundated with suggestions about which magic USB cable to buy. Eliminating the clipping is the first step, if that is in fact what is happening in your system. Ever hear someone say that digital in general (or streaming in particular), sounds ‘hard’? I can't help thinking this could be why in at least some cases. After I solved this problem, local ripped files and streamed versions sound indistinguishable (to me; YMMV).

*Including the streaming providers, who showed little interest when I contacted them.

Hope somebody finds this helpful.

Rusty Jefferson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 873
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #17 on: 26 Feb 2020, 03:53 am »
  Off topic. I have been ripping into server using WAV. I found WAV to sound better than FLAC. Am I alone on this ? Streaming is convenient, less expensive at the press of a button. Using iPeng instead of Roon at $10/year. Cheaper and sounds better.

charles
Charles, WAV files will sound better than FLAC on a good system because the server has to "uncompress" the FLAC file on the fly, requiring processing power and effort, adding noise.  You can uncompress your FLAC files back to the original size as WAV with Db Poweramp and maintain the tagging. These are called Uncompressed FLAC, and are the same as an original WAV rip. Win, win.

CanadianMaestro

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 1760
  • Skepticism is the engine of progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #18 on: 26 Feb 2020, 11:52 am »
WAV sounds hoarse to me, compared to Flac on my system. Almost never fails. Can be subtle, but in the end, I like Flac.

In the end, if the rec is well mastered to begin with, file format is irrelevant.

poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 4016
  • Science is not a democracy - Earl Geddes
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: Qobuz vs.ripped cds, is it just me?
« Reply #19 on: 26 Feb 2020, 12:11 pm »
dB Cooper and Undertow,

Thanks for both your inputs. Definitely something for me to think about particularly dB’s advice. We absolutely don’t want to be clipping the digital signal prior to sending it to the DAC! I am one of those dinosaurs who has yet to make the jump to streaming and don’t have Tidal or Qobuz account primarily cause my ISP can get choppy at times. Everything I have is ripped from CD’s or are downloads (AIFF or FLAC) from online.

Given that the great majority of music was streamed in my last attended audio show (Florida Audio Expo) you can imagine if the problem starts from the source, the entire equipment chain will render a muddied performance!

I wonder if the Roon digital engine with Tidal or Qobuz running within corrects the egregious deficiencies dBCooper has stated? Anyone know?

Best,
Anand.