Ripped great CDs -- or very good ones -- sound extraordinary on my Lampizator DSD Komputer (output to my Lampizator Lite 7 DAC). And most of mine are ripped via the WAV format, although I have a fair share of FLAC and Apple Lossless files as well.
Redbook Keeps Surprising
I was a Best Buy to get a memory card reader for my computer. Looked at the CDs and saw a few in the bargain bin that I would like to have, only a few dollars. Came home, ripped them with DB power amp, picked the best cover art. Transferred to my Aurender through the NAS and played away. WOW, impressive sound and I really enjoyed them both. I like the High Res downloads and my SACD collection but am often really impressed by good Redbook CD. It really is the music that counts.
- ...
- 111 posts total
bsmith 6-26-2016 5:15 pmIf the software used for ripping (and the settings of that software that were used) assures that the file is a bit-perfect copy, and if playback in both cases uses identical hardware (i.e., the CD and the ripped file are played back from the same computer or other device), one possibility is that the difference is due to differences in computer-generated electrical noise that is riding on the signal provided to the DAC (whether that DAC is internal or external to the computer), resulting in differences in jitter. Of course if the rip is not done in a manner that assures bit-perfect quality, or if the playback hardware is different in the two cases, anything is possible. Regarding the copyright law issues that have been discussed, LP2CD has provided outstanding answers IMO. With regard to the bicycle analogy, another way to look at it is that both the new bike and the one that is given away (and used by someone else) have been purchased and paid for. That is not the case, of course, when a CD is ripped and then given away. Regards, -- Al |
@lp2cd Please provide a more specific reference regarding the illegality of disposing-- for profit or otherwise-- of an original CD after making a digital copy for personal use. The RIAA seems to be vague on this point. http://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/about-piracy/ It is clear that it is illegal to sell copies, but I see nothing regarding prohibition on resale of the original-- which is not only protected by fair use, but also by legal transfer of ownership. The issue of reselling an original appears never to have been litigated, and the legal blogs I see on the subject are full of controversy. The Betamax and Groakster cases and a 2013 Supreme Court decision protecting the resale of textbooks seem to be the principal precedents. At this point the resale of an original appears to be legal arcana. |
Hi Dave, Hopefully LP2CD will provide the more specific reference you requested (which I am not in a position to readily do), but I see it this way: If the CD is ripped and the copy is given away or sold (either case being clearly illegal as stated in the RIAA reference you provided), one user has an original that has been paid for and another user has a copy that has not been paid for (from the perspective of the copyright holder, at least). The same holds true if it is the original and not the copy that is given away or sold. Why should it make any difference which user has the copy and which user has the original? Best regards, -- Al |
Hi Al, that seems logical. However, with respect to infringement the law may be more concerned with quantifying real rather than theoretical damages to the copyrighter. Clearly, there are greater damages associated with large scale selling or sharing of digital copies than with the resale of a single original CD at the retail level. Some lawyers on the blogs make other distinctions, such as contrasting the resale of an old out-of-print CD original to the purchase new CDs acquired expressly for the purpose of duplication and resale. The former resale may actually benefit the artist, as re-sale in the secondary market may stimulate renewed interest in their work. The issues of the passage of time, the seller's intention and degree of commercial interest are all variables. In the final analysis this particular issue is a nit for the industry and should be as well for us. Every point made by the RIAA regarding prohibitions against copying for commercial purposes is expressly in the context of reselling digital duplications. |
- 111 posts total