The data stored in the ram for digital out is the same data, but with flac, was decoded to that point by the processor.
I'm listening to 24/96 on Qobuz right now, it's the flac version of the Original Higher Res Master File. It sounds good, only slightly higher res than 44.1, but it's what...
I usually use Audirvana Studio, it's using up to 4gb ram buffer. Kernel streaming, no other dsp's.
Why am I being dismissed as an opponent of flac? Isn't this the discussion forum for that? Are we all only supposed to be saying we can't hear a difference with flac? Then with mqa again with...
The file is not sent straight to ram as a flac, it must first get worked on by the cpu. Noise.
I would like the file to flow into my dac's input. Look at what comes first: If you add flac, it reads from disk to be worked on by cpu before getting into ram. Then, it gets played by your...
So, if someone can hear a difference flac makes, they're wasting your time, and don't know what they're talking about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_memory_access
Did you come to this thread to tell people that mqa sounds better than Original Higher Res Master Files?
The file cannot be sent to the dac directly, from a pc. The file is read to ram, if flac, gets processed into ram by the cpu, then played by the player software with it's output method selected, out the usb port to a cable. All those factors are chances for different types of degradation to...
Bit perfect can only be achieved if the dac chip receives the file directly. Good luck with getting that to happen.
Wav's will not go through your processor, they get read straight to ram, then get digitally sent out. A flac file does go through the processor, and then sends the output to ram...
Bit perfect can only happen if the file reaches your dac chip unaltered. Flac is a lossless alteration before being sent out digitally. All the bits were there, yes, congratulations on not being mp3, but a process inside a noisy device's most noisy part has to happen to play it back. I know...
Bit-perfect refers to the theoretical process of streaming from disc to dac, directly and unaltered. Flac has had a process done to it where it needs to be sent through a processor for the calculation of the bits it will send. I believe the problem is that the ones and zeroes that get sent to...
MQA can not be better than the original. It is claimed to be another compression on top of compression. If the original was the best master, it has been compressed (folded), and needs to be uncompressed on top of being flac.
Qobuz is cheap, cheaper than TIdal. You could always try not needing...
mqa claims to 'fold' higher bitrates into a more packed 44.1khz. If you use the original higher res file, it will sound more original to the source. MQA is not better, it's more compressed. You're not even getting any more bandwidth from Tidal, while still paying double.
Why would they do that? MQA is further from bitperfect than flac. You are speaking as though mqa were better than higher res. If mqa works perfectly, it will only match the original higher res. Working perfectly is impossible.