ExactAudioCopy ripping software

It looks like the Sonos ZP-80 player has digital outputs so I don’t see why it would compromise the quality when fed to a good DAC. It isn’t clear from their literature what the output format is and I am no expert on these products, but if it works like the Squeezebox then it should be just fine.

Don’t take me as the final word on all of this. I’ve researched this stuff quite a bit but I’m still learning. I’m not saying it was a bad choice but I'm curious why you chose the Sonos over a Squeezebox? They look about the same to me and the Squeezebox is a bit cheaper. I would start googling both players and they both have user forums on their sites which have a lot of info.

I’m curious when you say you bought a Sonos system with a 500 gig drive. It looks to me that none of the Sonos systems have storage, they just get the data from your computer.

Herman, you state:

Compressed lossless means when it is played back that it reconstructs the original data perfectly so they are effectively the same, but compressed takes up less space.

This sounds very nice in theory, but does it work in actuality? Will I hear a "loss" of musical information? Isn't there some sort of loss in any compression/expansion scheme?

Isn't there some sort of loss in any compression/expansion scheme?

I don't think so. You can take a digital file like a picture or a music file or a spreadsheet or a Word document or whatever and compress it using a any of a wide variety of programs (like Zip) and when it is reconstructed it is exactly the same as the original file. Where is the loss?

Hi
I bought the 500 Gg HD separately,Sonos does not provide.
Sonos (current models)force you to their crappy DAC - giving only outputs for amp.
What I liked about Sonos over Sqeezebox is the incredible LCD remote.
What extra advantage does the SX-5000U2 USB Device Server that you recommended provide?

Does anyone else have an opinion of compressed VS uncompressed?
Thanks

Fatparrot: There is no loss when decoding an encrypted FLAC, Apple Lossless, or WMA lossless file. I'm sure there is some way to prove this mathematically, but empirically folks have encoded literally millions of music files in these formats and there has been no published instance that I know of where a file did not decode correctly when the software worked properly. That is certainly enough experimental evidence for me to believe the lossless claims.

Some folks claim to have heard differences between FLAC encoded and WAV (unencoded) files on some systems, but given the subjective nature of audio it's hard to know if this is a real or imagined difference. There is some thought that the processing required for decoding may effect the overall audio chain and introduce some difference if it sufficiently taxes the system, but all of the algorithms I mentioned require very little processing to decode. On a PC or Mac where computing power is in abundance, it's not likely that there would be any effect. On a Squeezebox or Airport Express unit where the processor is significantly smaller there may be a possibility, although it's hard to imagine how it might occur. I have a Squeezebox and have it set up to decode my FLAC files on the PC first and then stream PCM (WAV), and I hear no difference between the FLAC files and the original WAV files from the CD.

Note that none of the things I mentioned are due to incorrect decoding of the files. Lossless means just that and the only difference between an encoded file and the original WAV (or AIFF) image is size and the ability to store tags information.