Bugzilla – Bug 15084
Reduction in sound quality
Last modified: 2009-11-12 07:51:53 UTC
Created attachment 6288 [details] Log File Hi Support Team, I have put in a request before in the past about sound quality of you latest release of slim server software. I’m afraid to say there are serious sound quality bugs in it. I have taken the pain to install 2 different versions of the product on 2 different machines to help you resolve the problem. Hopefully this will help and this email will be forwarded to the developers for them to have a look and resolve. I have attached log files of both versions as well to help resolve. I have squeezebox classic. How do you know there is a sound quality issue? Squeeze Center version 7.2.1 has a better sound stereo imaging than version 7.4.1. As I have a sophisticated system I’m able to pick up any defects in the sound quality. Also the vocals, and cymbals sound more lively in 7.2.1 than in 7.4.1. It just sounds more detailed. I don’t know whether the internal DAC has been compromised in some way. I noticed that on both versions, in the “file types” option you can convert wav files to stream in flac format. Unfortunately I can tell the difference hence I have set both versions to stream in pure wav native format. I can understand why you have that option as not everyone will understand the wav bandwidth implications if left to stream in pure wav, however it does have an effect on the sound quality if streamed in FLAC. A lot of people seem to think that FLAC and WAV sound quality are the same. I’m afraid to say they are not. First of all FLAC codec does not allow you to rip music in say 24bit/44.1khz or 24bit/48khz. Wav/PCM allows you to rip music in any form of quality. As the squeezebox device has a 24bit DAC I have ripped all my CDs in 24bit 48KHZ in WAv to utilize the best sound quality from the device. These are the reasons why I’m able to tell the difference in sound quality. Please not that wav 24bit/48khz is used on both versions of software. I don’t know whether your testers have gone to this extent of testing. I think you should Rip music in this format, both in Flac and Wav to compare in both versions of the software. You will notice the difference. I am a very big fun of the squeezebox classic and I don’t want the product or future products be let down by the software. I also intend to buy the squeezebox Touch, hence fixing this issue is very important. To me the sound quality is more important than the functionality. Maybe you have released the new version of software to satisfy everyone but unfortunately sound quality has been lost. I am prepared to do anything to help resolve this issue. I have attached the log files for both versions of software. I also noticed in the past that 7.3 will not allow you to scan a track, whiles 7.2.1 allows you to. When you try to it come up with an error “track seeking not available for this file format” I noticed that this has been resolved in 7.4.1, hopefully not at the expense of sound quality. I have labelled the log file to differentiate between the 2. operating system used is Vista and windows server 2003. Please forward this email to your developers. I believe they probably will understand this in more detail, Maybe not. Regards Louis Hlomador Mobile: 07958349245 Email:louis@hlomador
Created attachment 6289 [details] LOG FILE for squeezebox 7.2 on vista
Hi, I would recommend using Audio DiffMaker from http://www.libinst.com/Audio%20DiffMaker.htm to provide concrete evidence of the sound differences between the 2 software versions. You may also want to post on the forum if you need help with that software, there are several users in the Audiophile forum who could help.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7 Link to the Audiophile Forum group.
(In reply to comment #2) > Hi, > I would recommend using Audio DiffMaker from > http://www.libinst.com/Audio%20DiffMaker.htm to provide concrete evidence of > the sound differences between the 2 software versions. You may also want to > post on the forum if you need help with that software, there are several users > in the Audiophile forum who could help. Hi, I have had a look at the Audio Diffmaker and unfortunately it only supports wave files and not Flac. Which makes my case even stronger. When using version 7.4.1 does firware 130, is the squeezebox classic re-programmed to stream in flac format internally?
I think you misunderstood, you need to record the output of a Squeezebox (analog or digital or both) into a WAV file, then use Audio DiffMaker on that file to compare the difference. The forum can help you with this. There is no audible difference between FLAC and WAV playback, the exact same bits are played. If you don't believe this is the case, the standard test is to play a DTS or Dolby Digital file wrapped in FLAC to a compatible DAC. All versions of the server default to transcoding WAV to FLAC to save wireless bandwidth.
(In reply to comment #5) > I think you misunderstood, you need to record the output of a Squeezebox > (analog or digital or both) into a WAV file, then use Audio DiffMaker on that > file to compare the difference. The forum can help you with this. > There is no audible difference between FLAC and WAV playback, the exact same > bits are played. If you don't believe this is the case, the standard test is > to play a DTS or Dolby Digital file wrapped in FLAC to a compatible DAC. All > versions of the server default to transcoding WAV to FLAC to save wireless > bandwidth. Hi Andy, Go to the link below. Hopefully this will answer a few questions. I do understand your suggestion, however I'll need external special input cables connected between SB and my PC. The links below proofs i am not the only person that has noticed big sound differences. It is very noticable when you are using expensibe audiphile equipments. I understand the normal music listener may not be able to tell the difference however when you take both versions of a file and listen instrument by instrument on a particular track recorded in wav and flac repectively you can tell the differences. We are now living in a world where storage does not really matter anymore hence please take the chance and read though the links below. From what I understand with flac is the original data is not lost, thus when you convert back to wave you get the original file size, however there is no mention anywhere on the flac official website on sound quality which are 2 completely different issues. Flac definately sound Flat compared to Wav files. The links below explain. http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/flac-vs-wav-format-surprising-quality-differences-366271/ http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t65947.html http://www.mail-archive.com/flac@xiph.org/msg00054.html http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8772903417/m/7062992617 Hopefully you guys can come up with a solution. I personally think you should have a diffirent marketing strategy, as bandwidth does not affect me in anyway. I am using a hard wired network cable pluged into a switch. Yes, there is a bit of buffering when using my wirless connection. Yes there is a bit of buffering when using wireless with a slow PC with slow processor. Thanks Andy.
Don't believe everything you read on the Internet. Do your own testing to confirm. I'm going to close this bug as invalid, there's not much I can do to help without actual evidence of the problem. I would suggest posting this topic in the audiophile forum.