D/A conversion question: CD to 98/24

[j20056]

I have a large collection of CDs. I listen to them on a pretty good system, including bi-amplifed JBL 4350's (refurbished and with new crossovers from Seaman) with Mac Intosh Labs amps and pre. As far as sources, I use either a Wadia CD player plugged directly in the MacIntosh pre-amp, or an Apple MacPro (the computer, not the audio brand) as a digital source.

On the digital source side, I use either iTunes for 44.1/16 or SongBird for 98/24. My 98/24 sources are FLAC downloads from various sites including Society of Sound or SACD converted to 98/24 FLAC. My 44.1/16 sources are mostly my iTunes library, which consists of 500 or so CDs that I had imported into iTunes almost 8 years ago. At that time, the Apple Lossless encoding did not exist, so my collection is really high-quality mp3 but no higher. The digital sources are then sent to a digital mixer (Tascam 4800DM) where the D/A conversion takes place before hitting the MacIntosh pre-amp and amps.

Now let's get to my issue. I want to re-import my CD collection to have it in digital form. I can either (a) re-import them in iTunes with the Apple Lossless format, which should be 44.1/16 with no loss, or (b) play them through my Wadia CD player (which although old is quite high-end and has superb D/A converters) and import the analog output into my MacPro into SongBird at 98/24. The D/A conversion would be done by my Tascam DM4800, which as a professional grade digital mixer that has the ability to input/output digital signal at 98/24. I realize that the latter approach will not upgrade the quality since the CD source has not been recorded at 98/24, but it would enable me to take advantage of the high-end D/A converter in the Wadia, although it would require one more A/D step provided by the Tascam mixer.

My question: Which approach is likely to yield the best audio results? Hard disk storage size is not a constraint as I have 4TB available.

Thanks

[rusty jefferson]

My two cents is the way to go here, will be to re-import the cds. Since you already have files stored in FLAC, I would import them in that format. I don't know Songbird, (I use Media Monkey) but if it's a system you like, then use it.

The time to re-import, is of course lost, but I'm currently helping a friend do just that to over 1500 cds he ripped in mp3 years ago. It's worth the hassle. The sound quality is apparent on any system short of a Bose.

[j20056]

I am definitely re-importing them, that was already a given.
My question is whether I re-import straight into Apple Lossless format from the computer's CD ROM drive, which is effectively 44.1/16, in which case I would set the D/A of my mixer to 44.1/16 as well, or whether I take the analog output of my high end Wadia CD player and import such signal to 96/24 into SongBird. In the first case, I only have one stage of D/A at 44.1/16 from my Tascam mixer, whereas in the second case, I get one stage of D/A at 44.1/16 from my Wadia player to analog (I go on the assumption that the the D/A converter of the Wadia is way better than the Tascam, although the Tascam is pro gear) then a second stage from (arguably better) analog to 96/24 into SongBird, then play back through the mixer also at 96/24.
I'm not sure which option is better. I will obviously try botha and use my ears as a judge, but I was wondering if on apper there is an obvious better choice.

[j20056]

and btw, I completely agree with your comment about Bose. What a joke...

[Titanium Dome]

Well, the statistically obvious choice is 96/24 or, as some of us say, 24/96 (24bits/96kHz). The higher the resolution, the better the result, if your equipment can resolve it to an audible degree. If you try it both ways and cannot hear an appreciable difference, then you can save a lot of time by going for the lower but satisfactory resolution.

OTOH, you don't want to be in the position you're in now when 2012 rolls around and be facing the prospect or re-ripping your CDs again. What if you get better equipment or a higher resolution DAC and now your files need to be ripped at the highest resolution attainable for the recording?

So for me, it's obvious. Get the highest rate possible, even if it takes some time, and rest assured in the knowledge that you cannot extract anything more out of those files and you'll never need to rip them again.

"Those who fail to heed the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat them." :rotfl:




Story of my life! :yes:

[rusty jefferson]

I am definitely re-importing them, that was already a given.
My question is whether I re-import straight into Apple Lossless format from the computer's CD ROM drive, which is effectively 44.1/16, in which case I would set the D/A of my mixer to 44.1/16 as well, or whether I take the analog output of my high end Wadia CD player and import such signal to 96/24 into SongBird. In the first case, I only have one stage of D/A at 44.1/16 from my Tascam mixer, whereas in the second case, I get one stage of D/A at 44.1/16 from my Wadia player to analog (I go on the assumption that the the D/A converter of the Wadia is way better than the Tascam, although the Tascam is pro gear) then a second stage from (arguably better) analog to 96/24 into SongBird, then play back through the mixer also at 96/24.
I'm not sure which option is better. I will obviously try botha and use my ears as a judge, but I was wondering if on apper there is an obvious better choice.

Sorry, missed your original point.

You should try ripping some cds both ways and listening to them side by side. My guess would be going right to Apple lossless or FLAC @ 16/44 is going to sound better than running through a cd player/interconnects/mixer/interconnects.

You should also find out if your cd player 'upsamples' to 24/96. Cause if it doesn't, you'll still be ripping them in 16/44. We've had some discussion in other threads where some members feel (including me) original 16/44 files sound better than 'upsampled' 24/96 files. Many 'higher' end DACs now offer a feature to allow you to listen in the original 16/44 format.

[Mr. Widget]

Well, the statistically obvious choice is 96/24 or, as some of us say, 24/96 (24bits/96kHz). The higher the resolution, the better the result, if your equipment can resolve it to an audible degree. If you try it both ways and cannot hear an appreciable difference, then you can save a lot of time by going for the lower but satisfactory resolution.By all means do try both ways and give it a go... but if the original was redbook CD, I would keep it at that resolution via apple lossless or FLAC. Upconverting it through you system may sound "better", but in my experience this has not been the case.


Widget

[Robh3606]

That reminds me, does anyone know what day the world is supposed to end in 2012?

What difference does it make?? Just quit your job in December cash in your 401k's and divide it by 365. Spend all your cash everyday doing something fun. If it doesn't come in 2012 your screwed so it's the same outcome either way.

Rob:)

[Mr. Widget]

If it doesn't come in 2012 your screwed so it's the same outcome either way.:applaud: :rotfl: :applaud:


Widget

[scott fitlin]

What difference does it make?? Just quit your job in December cash in your 401k's and divide it by 365. Spend all your cash everyday doing something fun. If it doesn't come in 2012 your screwed so it's the same outcome either way.

Rob:):thmbsup:

Yep, way to go Rob! :applaud:

[j20056]

Well, the issue of oversampling is really at the heart of the matter. Wadia claims to have a vastly superior algorithm in their products. Granted, my CD player is 15 years old, but let's assume for a moment that their algorithm truly adds "realism". My thinking was that by using the analog output of the Wadia (thence benefit from the D/A algorithm) then do a A/D conversion at 24/96 from my Tascam pro mixer, then I would get better quality versus ripping at 16/44 directly in my computer (i.e. not D/A stage) then play back the output at 16/44, using my digital mixer to do the 16/44 to analog conversion. My rationale is that I would be better off using the 24/96 D/A then A/D from my digital mixer, versus staying at 16/44 the whole way, given the benefit of the Wadia algorithm as described above.
Not really obvious on paper, so I'll let the ears be the judge and will report, but curious about your thoughts on my analysis.