Just built a PC for living room audio playback

sas · Post by **sas** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:11 am

As the title said, I just put together a new PC for audio playback in the living room. Having referred extensively to SPCR for component choices, thought I'd put it all here with details.

1. Case: None. I mounted the motherboard and the components on a piece of plywood with pcb spacers screwed in, which goes inside a piece of furniture closed at the front and open at the back for ventilation. To be honest, I couldn't find a case which I wanted to look at. The plywood solution is fine, as long as grounding is respected (and hidden from stray fingers).

2. Motherboard: Asus M2NPV-VM (AM2) -- has everything I need, integrated graphics etc. Only thing to note is that the 2D graphics quality (DSUB or DVI) is not quite as fantastic as my old Matrox G450 AGP card (DSUB). The mobo has no onboard fans. There is no undervolting in the bios, but it supports C'n'Q and software undervolting. Haven't used that yet though because I haven't needed to.

3. CPU: AMD Sempron 3200+. Wow, after my previous experience with socket A, this runs cool! All the power I need for audio playback, surfing, encoding etc. With the temps I'm getting, cannot see the need to undervolt yet. Have yet to try any gaming and so on, but will run prime95 and do some tests.

4. Cooling: Scythe Ninja RevB: BIG, doesn't even get warm. Fan is incredibly quiet. Tried running it passive, it works fine with no temperature rise at idle, but this makes no noise difference, so just leave the fan on low which is below the noise floor in my living room. Very happy with this.

5. PSU: Tagan TG 380. Recovered from a previous build. Wanted to get a Seasonic but couldn't find one when I shopped (in Bangkok). The Tagan has two fans, but is very quiet. I'm still very happy with it. Curious to know if a seasonic is quieter.

6. System hard drive: Western Digital Scorpio WD1200BEVS 120GB, 5,400 RPM Notebook drive. (as reviewed by SPCR). Suspended with elastic. No point repeating the review, except to say it's very quiet.

7. Data: Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD5000KS, 500GB, 7,200 RPM Hard Drive. Also reviewed by SPCR. Very quiet, but no point repeating the review. Only problem is it's full already -- I have 2000 CD's encoded as flac. May need a second one.

8. HDD cooling: Zalman ZM-2HC1 Heatpipe HDD Cooler.
An odd one this. As noted in the forums, the contact between the sides of the HDD and the cooler's aluminium bars is not great. There is a gap. I put some heatsink compound in, though this can be messy. Does the cooler make a difference? Don;t know, didn't compare with or without. But where i live (india) it gets hot in the summer, so I'll need everything I can get. The heatpipes at the top get a little warm, the HDD is 2 degrees C above ambient (which is 30 degrees at the moment).

9. Additional HDD cooling: Behind the suspended drives I fixed a 120mm fan at 5v -- a Silverstone FM-121 which claims 18db or something rubbish on the packet. to give an idea, this is the only this I can hear at 1 metre when everything is running (albeit not tucked into the cabinet). A waste. I'll replace it eventually. At 12v, by the way, the things sounds like a vacuum cleaner (a slight exaggeration).

10. Optical drive: some LG DVD-R DL drive. Silent when it's not being used. Noisy when a CD is in it. I only use it for installation, occasional ripping and backups, so I didn't care about this one.

All in all, a fun build. When in the cabinet, the PC is effectively silent (ie way below the noise floor in my living room with doors and windows closed and nothing else switched on, with zero outdoor noise in the early hours of the morning). When out of the cabinet, I can hear a slight swoosh of the silverstone fan used to provide additional cooling for the HDDs. When I switch off the Silverstone, I can just about hear some whirring/buzzing from the PSU at1 metre. At 50cm I can hear HDD seeking, from both drives.

An informal test, though perhaps some of the above may be useful to someone. Above all, avoid the Silverstone fans if their 120mm model is anything to go by.

Delta_42 · Post by **Delta_42** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:45 am

sas wrote:Above all, avoid the Silverstone fans if their 120mm model is anything to go by.

Sounds like a great build, and if that Silverstone fan sounds anything like the 650W Silverstone PSU/Wind tunnel/white noise generator I've just banished to my server then its LOUD.

ronrem · Post by **ronrem** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:01 am

Something like a 800 rpm Scyth or Enermax Green (140 mm) can replace the Silverstone-or you can undervolt a Yate Loon/Nexus. Might even consider getting a BIG Antec or Xclio 200/250 mm,set up in the right place and running at 400 rpm or less you should be able to get rid of the CPU and HD fans both.

What makes a Seasonic pretty quiet is a single 120 mm fan that tends to ramp-up a bit less than most. There are many variables,some PSU's throw off more heat,some tolerate getting hotter,some have heatsinks that are more effective. Seasonic has tuned in most of these factors well. I'd ideally like to have a PSU with a fixed speed 140 mm fan but with Seasonic's efficiency and record of dependability. I'd ESPECIALLY like it to be a bit less money

amjedm · Post by **amjedm** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:17 pm

Do you have this Silverstone Fan

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductI ... tID=292216

The model of this one is FN (not FM) - not sure if you meant that.

I was thinking of buying that one from Scan.

sas · Post by **sas** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:16 am

amjedm:

No, I have the FM121, which could be (?) a white version of the FN121. In any case, I wouldn't touch a silverstone fan given there are quieter and tried and tests ones available.

ronrem:

I will probably change the silverstone fan eventually, most likely for a Nexus. However I put the PC in a cabinet and can't hear it, so it's not a big problem.
I'm not that tempted to run the Ninja passive, as i can;t hear it anyway and the ambient temp where i live (India) is pushing up now to 40C+++ when I switch the AC off.
Agreed the Seasonic PSUs are nice --- my Tagan one, however, is doing fine for the time being. Next time I get a visitor from the US I'll get a seasonic though.

Aside that, another I;ve noticed with the suspended 2.5" HDD is that when the elastic is taught (stretched tight), the HDD vibrates quite a bit (no noise, but I can feel it vibrating with my fingers). I've slackened the elastic a bit and it's fine.

niels007 · Post by **niels007** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:45 am

I went for MP3s.. With flac you know there is no 'data loss'.. but I did some blind tests and read about some of those online and basically nobody can tell the difference between a good mp3 and the original.

Except your HD that is

bonestonne · Post by **bonestonne** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:50 am

i'm no fan of flac...even with linux...i just got mp3 drivers, encoders, and programs that can play them, because my linux box can't write to NTFS, so i don't have the room for flac. mp3 is my standard on everything. i find a wav, and i convert it. the higher the bitrate, the better.

elec999 · Post by **elec999** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:51 pm

Really good build. Any pictures of it.
Thanks

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:04 pm

sas wrote:2. Motherboard: Asus M2NPV-VM (AM2) -- has everything I need, integrated graphics etc. Only thing to note is that the 2D graphics quality (DSUB or DVI) is not quite as fantastic as my old Matrox G450 AGP card (DSUB).

Interesting, can you comment a bit more? I'm thinking of upgrading from a socket A with G450 and two 17" samsungs to AM2 with either M2NPV-VM or M2A-VM. Would my video quality go down? Am I better off with a dedicated video card with dual DVI?

EV10 · Post by **EV10** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:17 pm

As the title said, I just put together a new PC for audio playback in the living room.

What sound card are you using, and what's the rest of the audio system?

but I did some blind tests and read about some of those online and basically nobody can tell the difference between a good mp3 and the original.

It's not just about telling the difference, believe me. BTW, I can tell it between even LAME 3.93.1 -q0 -b320 -k and the original CDDA. Takes just being used to CDDA.

But what's more important is the subtle difference you'll only notice in the impression, in time. MP3 encoding works by converting the original waveform to a set of frequency-power notes, throwing away weaker frequencies and "approximating" major ones by bands. However, any musical instrument produces an entire set of harmonics, linked by frequencies and by phase. mp3 encoding totally discards phase and removes most of the weaker harmonics, making the sound far less natural. Furthermore, phase and harmonics information is used by the ear to determine the position of sound source, and mp3 removes that information, trashing the positioning.
It's not felt very well if you aren't used to live music or hi-fi audio systems, but makes all the difference once you are.

In an audio system, integrity of the sound is far more important than system's noise, which is normally far quieter than the music itself. But music quality has far more effect. I really suggest to include that in the priorities. Well, not to everyone converting wav to mp3 seems like vandalism, but it's a matter of time to get the difference. You lose sensitivity to positional information by listening to mp3, and so it might be hard to tell the difference - but ask any audio engineer, and he'll tell it right away.

Just that I went over it myself before.

bonestonne · Post by **bonestonne** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:40 pm

its a general rule, onboard graphic performance is crap compared to a graphics card, between RAM, latencies, and the data transfer speed. i have a G450 in my workstation upstairs, runs really well, even used it with two monitors a while back, ran amazing, even for its puny little heatsink.

AGP has amazing transfer rate compared to onboard. PCI is a base thing, i only use it when i have no choice.

Greg F. · Post by **Greg F.** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:58 am

If you can't tell the difference between FLAC and MP3 then you need to look at other links in your audio chain. Good amps and speakers, set up properly, will show the difference to be like that of night and day. I didn't hunt the Earth for 1960 Raytheon 12AU7s just to have the "night club in home" experience be trashed by MP3.

wildman15 · Post by **wildman15** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:16 am

Nice idea, putting components into a piece of furniture. I second the request for pictures! Also, I've ripped my collection to 320Mbps .ogg files and they sound great, but I want to go lossless. The thought of re-ripping my collection doesn't exactly thrill me, but my question is, about how many tracks did you get on your 500 gig drive using FLAC? I have just under 9,000 and expect to add more. And how did you mount your optical?

nick705 · Post by **nick705** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:17 am

Greg F. wrote:If you can't tell the difference between FLAC and MP3 then you need to look at other links in your audio chain. Good amps and speakers, set up properly, will show the difference to be like that of night and day. I didn't hunt the Earth for 1960 Raytheon 12AU7s just to have the "night club in home" experience be trashed by MP3.

No doubt you'll now produce specific samples and the results of your double-blind tests to prove where LAME --preset standard "trashes" your experience and FLAC doesn't.

pjeremy · Post by **pjeremy** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:49 am

bonestonne wrote:i'm no fan of flac...even with linux...i just got mp3 drivers, encoders, and programs that can play them, because my linux box can't write to NTFS, so i don't have the room for flac. mp3 is my standard on everything. i find a wav, and i convert it. the higher the bitrate, the better.

Try ntfs-3g-driver

EV10 · Post by **EV10** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:12 am

The thought of re-ripping my collection doesn't exactly thrill me, but my question is, about how many tracks did you get on your 500 gig drive using FLAC?

Well, a typical CD takes 250-350MB, up to 400 for metal, so 500GB can fit over 1000 discs, more likely around 1500. So you'll probably get tired of ripping before the drive is filled :). Still, it makes sense to re-rip at least the favorite discs and classical music.

I usually rip discs with Exact Audio Copy (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/), with secure mode for best records (or compromised CDs), fast for others. The secure copies are in fact read better than on a dedicated CD player (but can take over an hour), and sound as well. Fast mode is not much different from other grabbers.

No doubt you'll now produce specific samples and the results of your double-blind tests to prove where LAME --preset standard "trashes" your experience and FLAC doesn't.

Will a blind test over the internet do? I participated in such.
The idea is that you rip a track from a good CD, encode it in mp3, decode back, and then pack both the original and the encode-decode version in FLAC. Or, better, make 3 or 4 encode-decode versions to reduce the chance of guessing and let people test bitrates.
Then you write down in a text file which track is real and which went through compression and how, encode that file (a password-protected archive will do), and upload all three somewhere. Ones who want to test themselves download the tracks and write down their guesses. Then you post the password so they can check themselves.
It's as good as a non-net double-blind test, since there's no non-verbal communication anyway.

I can tell mp3 from flac almost every time, with the exception of pure electronic music (which has nothing to lose from compression). If you don't believe, you can post such samples and I (as well as probably Greg) can tell these apart.
There's really a lot of difference, you just notice it only if you're used to CD or lossless formats. Having a decent system helps, but isn't necessary - when we done that test, some people with $200 speakers still told it all correctly. Of course, you won't feel the difference on plastic speakers or otherwise very poor ones. But when the amp and speakers aren't the "bottleneck", lossless or lossy format difference is quite significant.

ronrem · Post by **ronrem** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:33 pm

at dimeadozen where live recorded music is shared by hardcore collectors (Bit Torrent) mp3 is banned. Flac is the main medium though there's some SHN and APE...both are getting rare.

As was the case with eTree,the folks who are the tapers,who have a $2000 set of Schoeps mics,are just crazy-anal about perfection,drive things,along with the guys who have-say 100+ live Bob Marley shows,or Reel to Reel master soundboards of Jefferson Airplane,Miles Davis..whatever. They don't want to pollute the pool,have issues about is this the source that was pure lossless or the one that had been an MP3-then got upcoded to flac.

For a casual listener with modest gear...the difference may be irrelevant.
I'm from when Vinyl crackle,tape hiss,cheap distorting components were all I COULD have...so, now,degrading the source at all just is not something I'd like to do.

alphabetbackward · Post by **alphabetbackward** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:36 pm

Sounds very interesting. I too would like to see pictures.

Without a case, wouldn't you have to worry about RF?

Jeez...the way you guys niggle over such details make me think you guys don't even enjoy the music...

Greg F. · Post by **Greg F.** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:24 pm

Alphabet, you have it exactly backwards. It doesn't take that much to get it right and when you do, you enjoy it more because you discover more things in those songs. A lot of those old tunes you listen to have whole instruments being played that you didn't even know had been in the recording studio. That is not the way the recording artist or composer intended their work to be appreciated.
I recently played a Cheryl Crow CD that one of my wife's friends had with her. I wouldn't walk across the street to listen to the lady perform, but this gal wanted to hear it on my main system. When it was playing she commented that she hadn't realized how much the backup singer was actually contributing to the performance. Exactly! In fact, she had the better voice by far.

Nick, I will not produce specific samples and double blinds. I have been building my amps and speakers for years now. I have a cadre of friends who do the same. We can hear and determine the best because we compare it to: live acoustic music.
I stopped reading magazine and internet reviews years ago. I also thought I had quit proselytizing, but apparently not.

As EV10 told you it will make no difference if you listen to electronic music. But if you value the female singing voice and the alto sax and the Baldwin grand piano

go here:
http://www.bottlehead.com/

EV10 · Post by **EV10** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:13 pm

Without a case, wouldn't you have to worry about RF?

That really might be a minor, but an issue. Though I guess it won't have much effect (after all, internal radio and TV tuners work fine, and even sound cards are OK), but still might be a reason against going caseless.

Jeez...the way you guys niggle over such details make me think you guys don't even enjoy the music...

Well, gamers are often concerned about their video cards and CPU, but that doesn't mean they don't enjoy games ;-)

Sound isn't very simple. You can launch a 3D demo on a stereo system, which will make you feel sounds are behind or ahead of you, close or far, but there are no speakers behind, or close and far. Have you ever wondered how it happens?
There are just several levels of sound perception. First of all, there's just plain quiet-loud scale. The next, most understood level, is frequencies and power at these frequencies. This gives a very basic stereo effect, by left speaker being louder or vice versa. And, unfortunately, this is where MP3 format developers stopped.

But there are more levels. Each sound source produces a set of harmonics, for instance, if the basic frequency is 1000Hz, there will be 2000, 3000 (weaker), 4000, et cetera, all 1000*n numbers. The ear doesn't perceive them separately, but rather as a single sound. Since higher frequencies weaken with distance faster, the harmonics power ratio is used to determine range to the object. For instance, an object with 50:42:34:32dB ratio of 1st:2nd:3rd:4th (1000:2000:3000:4000 Hz) harmonics is closer than the same one with 50:38:28:22dB ratio. Unfortunately, mp3 encoding discards all the frequencies below a certain level. It's OK for unrelated sounds, but it cuts off the harmonics, at the second one usually, destroying distance part of positional information and making the sound a little bit unnatural.

Next, there is phase information. While the harmonics power alone gives info, it gives only rough data, about the first digit, and even that not precisely. However, different frequencies move with slightly different speeds (very slightly, higher frequencies are faster), causing phase delay between the main signal and harmonics. That information is useless on its own, but, when coupled with generic range data provided by harmonics, it clarifies the range, providing quite accurate positioning.

And, to add, the ear isn't stationary. Just like the eye, the head and the ears make periodic micro-movements. The outer ear is actually a complex selective reflector, causing extra phase delays for certain frequencies. Comparison of these delays at left and right ear, coupled with micro-movements, can provide precise directional information - up to 1 degree horizontally and 4 vertically.
If you've seen videos of people shooting blind, just by sound, and hitting, these three methods it's how their ears get the range. Phase delay analysis is also exactly the way sonars and radars work.

Obviously, it only works if the original object is a phase-aligned sound source. All real instruments and natural sound sources are such, but mp3 recordings... aren't. Mp3 only packs frequencies, and has quite a bit of granularity, enough to destroy that subtle phase alignment at medium and high frequencies. Furthermore, as speakers also are sound sources, they have their own harmonics, which, with lack of real ones, are perceived by the ear as the real thing, and so the speakers sound picture is perceived as produced by the speakers, just the one-dimensional rough positioning.

However, with losslessly compressed music and a decent sound system you can feel the entire three-dimensional picture... it's hard to start perceiving, but once you start, it's really breathtaking. You can close your eyes and almost see an entire landscape produced by the music. With classical live music, you can feel individual musicians, just like if you were there. With well sound-engineered, but live instrument music (progressive or art, as it's often called), it can be anything the author wanted.

This positional information is just the reason why loudspeaker and amplifier manufacturers are all chasing lower harmonic distortion - to make it retained. Well, tube amps have high total distortion figure, but it's mostly contained in the second harmonic, so it mostly breaks even, everything just sounds closer, but in place. Just talk to audio engineers and you'll learn a lot more detail than I can convey here. There's a term - transparency - and it determines how clear the sound picture stays, how well can the positional information be felt. Mp3 doesn't add dirt to sound, like speakers do, and that's why people originally didn't find its flaws... but it does a far worse thing: it destroys the positional detail of the original music.
Speaker makers are trying hard to minimize harmonic distortion, avoid intermodulation (when 10kHz+1kHz also produce 9 and 11 kHz) and to make good crossovers which doesn't introduce much phase distortion (and it's why cheap 3-way speakers sound poor - they lack proper crossovers), and amp makers run for the same. Mp3 encoding ruins all that work, destroying the information that the audio systems tries to keep unpolluted.

Now, for the cost. Today a nice 400GB, 16MB cache, quiet and reliable Samsung HDD costs $100 or a bit more, bringing gigabyte cost down to 25-30 cents. That gigabyte can store 3 CD in FLAC format or 6 in mp3. And, so, the cost of storing a CD in FLAC is just $0.10, or 10 cents. Lossy mp3 saves 5 cents out of that.

So, do you really want to forfeit all that data, the detail of the music, just for 5 cents a disc?

sas · Post by **sas** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:38 pm

Sorry, been busy with work so just caught up with questions...

EV10 wrote: What sound card are you using, and what's the rest of the audio system?

This is the signal chain:

1. Music on hard drive: I have 1,967 CDs encoded and stored on the 500GB HDD and it's full. About 75% of the audio files are FLAC or APE (both lossless), the rest (CDs I'm not too fussy about) are MP3 or MPC (lossy).
I don't want to get into a debate on blind testing and so on, except to say lossless works for me and it may or may not for you. In any case, it's cheap to try, so the best advice is give it a go and if you're happy with MP3, great. There is no right or wrong here, just whatever works for you.

2. Playback software: J River Media Center, sound output is Asio4all.

3. The 'sound card' is a diy USB DAC -- a DDDac 1543 Mk2. (www.dddac.de). Powered by a DIY Mosfet-based 12v regulated PSU.

4. DIY Buffered active crossover -> DIY Class A-A/B monoblocks (volume controlled in software) -> DIY speakers (Scanspeak drivers).
or
4. DIY Class D amp -> DIY horn speakers.

alphabetbackward wrote: Sounds very interesting. I too would like to see pictures.

don't have a digital camera but will try to track one down. The PC is not that interesting though - just bare components screwed to a plywood board...

alphabetbackward wrote: Without a case, wouldn't you have to worry about RF?

Haven't noticed any, but having said that the temperature where I live (india) is high and the AC or fan is on alot, meaning the noise floor is not as low as it could be and it's hard to tell most of the time. When I switch all other household appliances off (and sweat), I can't hear noise (or the PC).
The PC and components are getting clean, stable AC which is isolated and filtered from the wall (nothing fancy, just a cheap isolation transformer and DIY RFI/EMI filter). The USB input on the dddac is also not bus powered (not taking the 5v from the PC, but from the cleaner DAC PSU). The PC is also in a cabinet about a metre from the components. I get no hiss/buzz/hum on my 96db sensitive horns with my ear next to it, so seems OK.
The sound from the PC is also much better than my CD player (a DIY modded Marantz CD17, admittedly a 10-year-old model, but still a good player).

qviri wrote: I'm thinking of upgrading from a socket A with G450 and two 17" samsungs to AM2 with either M2NPV-VM or M2A-VM. Would my video quality go down? Am I better off with a dedicated video card with dual DVI?

I just have the impression that on 2d (photoshop especially), the G450 (dsub) is clearly sharper than the built-in graphics on the new mobo (DVI or d-sub). Not by a huge margin, and I'm being picky when I say that, because the use of the PC is for audio playback.
3D on the mobo, however, is a nice surprise after the Matrox, and I'm enjoying Flight Simulator with the kids.

But if I was using the PC for photo or video editing, I would not use the onboard graphics. I would search the forums and reviews to see where things stand on the 2D front -- I'm sure ATI & co have caught up with matrox by now.

cheers, sas
[/url]

hexen · Post by **hexen** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:59 pm

niels007 wrote:I went for MP3s.. With flac you know there is no 'data loss'.. but I did some blind tests and read about some of those online and basically nobody can tell the difference between a good mp3 and the original.

Except your HD that is

you are %100 wrong

a more accurate statement would be: "MOST people can't tell the difference....."

EV10 wrote:
I can tell mp3 from flac almost every time, with the exception of pure electronic music (which has nothing to lose from compression). .

to say that file compression only affects specific types of music is ridiculous. (compare two tracks wav vs. mp3 of the same trackon a loud system, then tell me there is nothing lost)

sas · Post by **sas** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:29 pm

For me, on my main system, there is a difference between lossy and lossless, blind tested and otherwise. Others will say its placebo, invented or whatever. Fair enough.

Indeed, most people can't hear the difference on their systems. But some can on their other systems. Doesn't mean that everyone should use lossless or everyone should be satisfied with lossy. Give it a try (it's free), draw your own conclusions and go with what suits your system, ears and HDD budget best.

Part of the problem is that all too often the argument revolves around an MP3 fan saying there is NO difference, and an audiophile saying MP3s are rubbish.

I prefer to say that MP3s are excellent (256kbps is just fine on my ipod), and lossless is just that little bit better for critical listening on a good system.

I would consider the difference to be similar to a good tweak in a system --- upgrading a cap or resistor or power supply for example. It's all about squeezing everything out of a CD. It's not night and day, just about marginal, incremental improvements.

But I think it's useful to mention the other huge advantage of ripping to flac -- they are a bit-perfect master backup of your not-so-durable CDs. Many of the CDs I bought in the late 80's are now unreadable, even with EAC. Thankfully they were ripped to lossless a few years ago.

Happily, HDDs are getting so big and cheaper that this argument will soon go away....

EV10 · Post by **EV10** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 11:29 am

3. The 'sound card' is a diy USB DAC -- a DDDac 1543 Mk2. (www.dddac.de). Powered by a DIY Mosfet-based 12v regulated PSU.
4. DIY Buffered active crossover -> DIY Class A-A/B monoblocks (volume controlled in software) -> DIY speakers (Scanspeak drivers).

That quite deserves to use lossless.

to say that file compression only affects specific types of music is ridiculous. (compare two tracks wav vs. mp3 of the same trackon a loud system, then tell me there is nothing lost)

Not that it doesn't affect. But, well, if you use LAME 3.93.1 with "lame b320 -q0 -k" command line switches, on purely electronic music, it's very hard to tell the difference. Basically I wouldn't say it changes the enjoyment of it, but, then, I don't like electronic music anyway, so maybe that's why. For other music, the difference seems much more considerable - all instruments on mp3 feel hung between the speakers.

After all, mp3, if encoded with -k (don't limit frequencies and skip ATC cutoff), doesn't really take something away from the music. It rather deconstructs it into a coded form and then constructs a new signal out of it. Using a spectrum analyzer shows mp3 construct's blocky structure - and after just looking at original and mp3ed organ records, one might never want to hear mp3 again.

Give it a try (it's free), draw your own conclusions and go with what suits your system, ears and HDD budget best.

Just that today, with cost of lossless CD storage at $0.10 each, I don't see the reason to run for these $0.05 out of them and use mp3.

I prefer to say that MP3s are excellent (256kbps is just fine on my ipod), and lossless is just that little bit better for critical listening on a good system.

Well, for ipod, mp3 are OK, of course. But IMHO the difference is well more than just a bit. It's actually more felt not with critical listening, but when just enjoying the music - mp3 feels incomplete after you're used to the original.

sas · Post by **sas** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:15 pm

Pictures: here you go, nothing exciting as I said, just components screwed or blu-tacked to a piece of wood. Damn ugly in fact, but invisble once in a cabinet.

and

and finally:

The only issue is that it needs to be kept away from kids' fingers (so I locked it in a cabinet), and it needs to be dusted more frequently than an encased PC (I take it out and use an air blower every couple of weeks).

zoob · Post by **zoob** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:10 pm

Just a question about how you ripped to FLAC: Did you encode each track as its own file, or one big FLAC with a CUE sheet embedded?

sas · Post by **sas** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:18 pm

Each song is ripped to an individual file. I never got along too well with cue sheets. In the software I use (J River Media Center - 'JRMC'), there is gapless pleyback and more than adequate buffering, so there is no issue when playing songs on an album that run into the next one.

For ripping, I exclusively use EAC and rip into wav. Then I use Foobar for conversion into flac and basic tagging (the flac plugins for JRMC are a work in progress so I prefer not to use them for anything except playback).

Just built a PC for living room audio playback

Just built a PC for living room audio playback

Re: Just built a PC for living room audio playback

Re: Just built a PC for living room audio playback

FLAC

Nice Project

Re: FLAC

NO