media players that support 24-bit FLAC

[databass]

Lately I've been ripping a lot of my vinyl into 24-bit/96 KHZ FLAC Files.

My only problem is that I haven't been able to find any portable media players that support this format, at this high bitrate.

Does anyone know if there are there any affordable (under $300) portable media players that will play 24-bit/96 HKZ FLAC?

I don't want to have to down-convert. I want to play these at their native resolutions.

Thanks.

[CrowdAds]

[saratoga]

Fuze/Clip running rockbox, provided you dont' mind only carrying a few GB worth of albums.

[Mangemongen]

Originally Posted by saratoga

Fuze/Clip running rockbox, provided you dont' mind only carrying a few GB worth of albums.

I've read somewhere on head-fi that rockbox downsamples 24/96. I do not know if this is true though. Maybe someone here knows for sure.

[Marvin the Martian]

Originally Posted by Mangemongen

I've read somewhere on head-fi that rockbox downsamples 24/96. I do not know if this is true though. Maybe someone here knows for sure.

Did you not look closely at the post you quoted? Take a look at what I circled. I think it's safe to say that he would know the answer.

[saratoga]

Originally Posted by Marvin the Martian

Did you not look closely at the post you quoted? Take a look at what I circled. I think it's safe to say that he would know the answer.

No hes right I missed the last sentence. It will resample to 44.1KHz.

I'm not sure anything out there is going to actually run at 96kHz. Reclocking the DAC like that tends to break things like EQ, crossfade, etc and waste power, so I think most players tend to restrict the samplerate rather then restrict features. Its possible theres something out there that can do it though.

[j3ff1986]

Cowon S9 or J3.

[Mangemongen]

Originally Posted by saratoga

No hes right I missed the last sentence. It will resample to 44.1KHz.

I'm not sure anything out there is going to actually run at 96kHz. Reclocking the DAC like that tends to break things like EQ, crossfade, etc and waste power, so I think most players tend to restrict the samplerate rather then restrict features. Its possible theres something out there that can do it though.

Ok, thanks for clearing it up for me. I was shocked when I first read it because I personally felt there was a big difference in sound quality when I played my 24/96 tracks on my rockboxed ihp. Guess the 24bits still improves the sound a lot?

[saratoga]

Originally Posted by Mangemongen

Ok, thanks for clearing it up for me. I was shocked when I first read it because I personally felt there was a big difference in sound quality when I played my 24/96 tracks on my rockboxed ihp.

Thats normal, 44.1khz tracks sound better since the resampler isn't very good.

Originally Posted by Mangemongen

Guess the 24bits still improves the sound a lot?

Everything uses full 32 bit precision internally, except for the DAC on your ihp which will convert to 16 bit at the output. I can't say it doesn't make a difference, but I doubt its anything you're going to hear over the effect of the resampler.

Cowon S9 or J3.

Do these actually clock the DAC at 96kHz or just resample? AFAIK none of the TCC chips actually support 96khz sample rates, they just resample like we do so that no one notices. Though I guess Cowon could have made changes to the TCC stuff, but I doubt it.

[Mangemongen]

Originally Posted by j3ff1986

Cowon S9 or J3.

You sure? If so, I just got that much more interested in the J3.

[WalkGood]

Originally Posted by j3ff1986

Cowon S9 or J3.

I don't believe it, AFAIK it's just resample and not as good as rockbox.

[databass]

Interesting discussion. After reading your responses, and after diving into some other threads on this site, I get it now.

While both the Fuze w/Rockbox and the Cowon S9 will play 24-bit Flac, they both degrade the sound because of the limitations of the portable players sound card and CPU, and also because it's an extra drain on the battery.

I've been very spoiled lately--I recently bought a Squeezebox Touch--and while its SD-card user interface is horrific, it plays 24-bit/96 KHZ FLAC files without any compromise--the sound quality is simply stunning.

The awesome sound quality of experience of the Speezebox Touch has made me really jones for a portable player with a similar sound quality, so I can easily play it in my car, or on-the-go.

Hopefully the Cowon and/or Sandisk, or someone will come out with some new models that can natively support higher-resolution music.

Right now it looks like the hifiman is the only unit that does this (http://hifiman.us/sale/) but there's no way that I'd spend anywhere close to $800.

[WalkGood]

From what I've read from real world test it doesn't either and you might want to read through http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum...hlight=hifiman

Edit: Not this POS player again :/

[Satellite_6]

Is there any real difference with 24-bit/96 KHz over CD quality and why is higher res? FWIR higher sample rate and bit depth are not equal to higher resolution. . . and its pointless to rip vinyl in this way.

I'm pretty OCD about SQ, but still I can't convince myself to bother to use CD quality over high bit rate mp3 on a DAP. . . surely using anything higher than CD on a DAP is absolutely pointless! If I'm ignorant plz explain to me why not.

[databass]

Thanks. Hifiman sounds pretty horrible and overpriced.

I guess for now I'll try hacking the Fuze with Rockbox, even if it isn't a perfect solution.

Hopefully some company will come up with an affordable ($100 range or less) player that can play 24 bit without degrading the sound.

I'm pretty shocked that Sandisk hasn't jumped on this opportunity. They haven't upgraded their Fuze or Clip in a while and they just introduced the 64 GB card, and this would be a great opportunity to sell bigger cards, and please the audiophiles. I realize that the masses will still buy crappy-sounding music on Itunes, but I really think that HD-audio would be more widely-accepted if there were more of an affordable portable hardware infrastructure.

Originally Posted by WalkGood

From what I've read from real world test it doesn't either and you might want to read through http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum...hlight=hifiman

Edit: Not this POS player again :/

[databass]

I can't give you a great technical answer, but after having listened to audiophile vinyls played on a Linn Turntable, ripped to 24-bit/96 KHZ FLAC, and then played back on decent hardware like the Squeezebox Touch, the answer is a definitive yes, 24/96 sounds better than 16/44.

You can argue all you want that vinyl isn't anywhere close to 24-bit, and I guess that's true, but there is a subjective quality to vinyl (more texture, emotional feeling in the music) that I prefer over CD, and scanning the vinyl in 24-bit preserves more of this feeling for me.

I think if you heard 24-bit vinyl .vs. 16-bit vinyl, played through a device like the Squeezebox, you'd appreciate the difference. And I don't think you need $10,000 worth of speakers and amps either (although that helps). My amp and speakers are pretty modest, but with a high quality source, it can make a big difference.

Originally Posted by Satellite_6

Is there any real difference with 24-bit/96 KHz over CD quality and why is higher res? FWIR higher sample rate and bit depth are not equal to higher resolution. . . and its pointless to rip vinyl in this way.

I'm pretty OCD about SQ, but still I can't convince myself to bother to use CD quality over high bit rate mp3 on a DAP. . . surely using anything higher than CD on a DAP is absolutely pointless! If I'm ignorant plz explain to me why not.

[saratoga]

Originally Posted by databass

I'm pretty shocked that Sandisk hasn't jumped on this opportunity.

Its not really an opportunity for them. Theres basically no one using these files except a handful of people, and they're mostly too clueless to realize buying crap like the hifiman isn't a good idea. Sandisk (or really anyone) won't be able to make money off it.

Originally Posted by databass

They haven't upgraded their Fuze or Clip in a while and they just introduced the 64 GB card, and this would be a great opportunity to sell bigger cards, and please the audiophiles.

32GB is the largest microsdhc card FWIW.

Originally Posted by databass

I realize that the masses will still buy crappy-sounding music on Itunes, but I really think that HD-audio would be more widely-accepted if there were more of an affordable portable hardware infrastructure.

HD Audio is a scam to ripoff people with more money then sense.

Originally Posted by databass

You can argue all you want that vinyl isn't anywhere close to 24-bit, and I guess that's true, but there is a subjective quality to vinyl (more texture, emotional feeling in the music) that I prefer over CD, and scanning the vinyl in 24-bit preserves more of this feeling for me.

I think you mean "You can argue all you want that vinyl isn't anywhere close to 16-bit". Talking about 24 bit is just nuts!

[Bitmap Frogs]

The AES once set up double blind testing between CD and SACD and results were negative.

I'd advise you to double blind 24/96 against 16/44 (foobar has a plugin for this) and see if it's worth it to go through all this in order to stay within 24/96.

Who knows, maybe 16/44 sounds fine to you and any regular player supporting FLAC will just do the trick.

[AkumAone]

Vinyl is analog, so it`s not 16bit, nor 24bit; but ∞.
Listen to some good 24bit digitalized music for some time, and then go back to normal 16bit, you`ll notice the difference.
44.1 kHz is perfect, 96 kHz is just waste of HDD space; just like buying a monitor with tweeter that can reproduce frequencies till 50 kHz which a human can`t hear.

[dfkt]

Originally Posted by AkumAone

Vinyl is analog, so it`s not 16bit, nor 24bit; but ∞.

It's somewhere around 12 bits, roughly translated (at least in dynamic range - the quantized resolution doesn't matter much).
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=35530 (especially post #6 and #16)
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=61758
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....zed_into_steps

Originally Posted by AkumAone

Listen to some good 24bit digitalized music for some time, and then go back to normal 16bit, you`ll notice the difference.

24 bit is definitely useful for mixing/mastering, where several destructive steps are involved in modifying audio material, but for the end user listening to a final mastered stereo track it really makes no difference at all if it's 16 bit or 24 bit.

[Satellite_6]

Originally Posted by dfkt

It's somewhere around 12 bits, roughly translated (at least in dynamic range - the quantized resolution doesn't matter much).
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=35530 (especially post #6 and #16)
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=61758
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....zed_into_steps


24 bit is definitely useful for mixing/mastering, where several destructive steps are involved in modifying audio material, but for the end user listening to a final mastered stereo track it really makes no difference at all if it's 16 bit or 24 bit.

That's what I thought. . .

For those who have said there is a difference have you ABX'd anything? I've mainly read about tests that are completely negative.