So far I rip my CDs with Asunder (in Linux) and I setup a configuration to output FLAC files.
However all my rips are detected by Audirvana (using the scanning feature) as simple CD quality…. How Can I make my rip to be “real” FLAC ?
What do you expect?
Rip a CD = CD quality
What is wrong?
Okay : so why most available rippers have sampling quality options configurable to be FLAC (or any other quality) ?
Also on my other media players : these files are detected as FLAC 96 khz : but the audirvana scanning feature detects that sampling quality was kinda “over tuned” … so my question is : is there a way to make a “better sampling” ? Some setting recommendations in the ripper maybe ? Some ripper software suggestions?
A cd ripped normally is 16/44
If ut shows on another as /96 it is upsampled
You can do that to in dac setting in pref of audirvana, but then you are not listening at bit perfect, you decide 
1 Like
Another thing flac is a format… apple by default or music or itunes don’t rip as flac, audirvana doesn’t convert to change your format, it is a player, it plays as is what you give it, it can makes upsampling to higher resolution but that doesn’t means it will be better, you have to decide yourself for that.
Not sure if you are not mixing music player and converter…
1 Like
Thanks for your answer.
However, no, I do not mix between music player and converter. I Know exactly the purpose of each one.
My question was :
On my converter I Rip my CDs with a sample rate of 96 kHz FLAC format.
Now, audirvana, my music player, has this cool feature of “detecting” files that were “up sampled” by scanning them.
Question : what is the best setting / riper software to get the best sample rate and quality in output and kinda “pass the test” of audirvana “sampling faker detection” ?
Is. It more clear ?
Why?
How does this benefit you?
They’re CDs. 16/44.1.
So rip them as 16/44.1 FLAC files.
3 Likes
@Charles-Maurice
FLAC is not an audio format. It is just a lossless codec that compresses your file to reduce its size of more or less 50%. Same for ALAC. Like when you ZIP a file if you want. It just gives you more room in your storage device.
Upsampling will not add any quality to your file, but just extrapolate datas that do not exists in the original one. CD’s are 16/44,1, so that is the best you can have.
The only way would be to resample the original analog signal at a higher rate. The Master studio files would often be at a higher rate but they are down-sampled to fit the CD’s capacity.
Ripper software are not all the same.
The choice of your software can make some quality differences. As a ripper can get the advantage of detecting reading errors, a good ripper is able to slow down the speed of the disc to get a better reading, and try to reach a bit perfect copy of the disc.
More infos here:
http://www.accuraterip.com
All the previous answers here are, with respect, a bit beside the point. They (and you) are missing what the HD Analyzer scan does.
It doesn’t simply accept the resolution it’s given (for example, 96kHz) as evidence the file was recorded at 96kHz quality. That would be useless to people like me who want to know the provenance of their files and need detection of “fake” hi res that has been upsampled after being recorded originally at a lower resolution.
So what the HD Analyzer does is look at two things, the dynamic range and frequency response of the file. The dynamic range will show whether the file was originally recorded at 16 or 24 bits. (I’m not talking about DSD here, and haven’t checked to see what the analyzer does in this respect with DSD recordings.) The frequency response will show what the original sample rate was.
So when the scan shows your files to be CD quality, it is detecting that the original recording, regardless of any later upsampling, was 16/44.1 resolution.
But what then is the use of upsampling? This: In order to reproduce music (analog) from bits (digital), filtering is required. Upsampling makes it easier to do good filtering and thus good digital to analog conversion.
Hope this helps.
1 Like