I'm a newbie in this forum, and I'm here because I started to use ISO2DSD because ... it is very usefull, obviously !
I have some SACD ISO files but don't have (at least currently...) a DSD able DAC, so I need to extract from the ISO container DSD files, then to convert them in FLAC files in order to read them with my Cambridge Audio device (which could not read DxF or DSD files).
And I'm wondering how to do that in the most 'high fidelity' way.
So I tried two possibilities :
ISO -> DFF -> FLAC
ISO -> DSF -> FLAC
and noticed huge differences, please see annexed file.
I use ISO2DSD and then Xrecode 3 tools in the process.
I am very surprised about the huge difference between DFF and DSF files... DFF are about 3 times lighter !! There seems to be a lot of information missed ? According to Foobar2000, which I use as a test reader, both formats are lossless... Is anybody could explain what is the real difference between the data of both formats (apart tagging which should be a few bytes) ?
When played with Foobar the bitrate of DFF files are smaller than DSF files, which seem consistant (sole exception is 'Time' in stereo, which is another strange thing).
Once converted in FLAC the difference in size disappears (which could be seen as quite normal), but not completely, the files converted from DFF are even bigger, at least in 6 channels, and so the bitrate is !!
For now I have not done audio tests seriously, but at first view files from DSF are of better quality.
Interestingly, playing an ISO file with Foobar gives the 'small' bitrate, seems to show that it plays the tracks as DFF files !
So the questions :
- What are the technical differences between DFF and DSF files ?
- Which should be used to convert to FLAC files ?
- Which should be kept for the future (once I will have a capable player, re-tagging is not a problem), taken into account that DFF save my disk space ?
- Why the FLAC files in 6 channels are smaller when converting from DSF ?
Thanks ! I would like to choose the best way before doing a lot of work