Edit : FAT32 and exFAT sounds slightly better on USB than NTFS when using a SSD , with the Ultra

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Musician

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2023
Messages
426
Same music, with flac files using a flash memory 32 GB or a SSD 2T . Power is taken from usb on the WiiM for both storing devices.

Flash memory with FAT32 seems to sound slightly better, more open and natural. I have a suspicion that its the difference between FAT32 and NTFS that might give the small differences. Or differences between using a flash drive and a SSD ?

I will try to re-format the SSD with FAT32 to se If the differences dissapear.

Do any of you have any experience of this (impossible) differences ?
 
Last edited:
d6jg said:
Do you think that <insert name of streaming service> sounds better hosted on AWS servers on the East Coast or the West Coast and do you only get that authentic British sound from UK servers?
Click to expand...

Perhaps using computer tape drive for storage of the files will result in a more analogue sound.
 
guy48065 said:
All science begins with open-minded observation.
Click to expand...

If you get a stone tablet, and a marble tablet, and carve out the exact same data (1 or 0) on both, does the material of the tablet make and difference on the accuracy of the data?

Nope.

Partition system will make absolutely no difference. Neither will using difference types of hard drive, SSD, spinning, USB stick. It's not being open minded, it's not understanding how data is stored, and inserting half baked ideas.

If there was errors in file checksum, your computer wouldn't boot, it would BSOD, and every file would have corrupted data.
 
Burnside said:
When I read this, John McEnroe immediately came to mind - you cannot be serious…
Click to expand...

One audiophile improvement is to make mash potatoes, pile it upon your head like a mash mountain, insert a single sausage sticking up out of the mash then listen to the hifi.

Then take a photo of yourself and post it here.
 
rccarguy said:
One audiophile improvement is to make mash potatoes, pile it upon your head like a mash mountain, insert a single sausage sticking up out of the mash then listen to the hifi.

Then take a photo of yourself and post it here.
Click to expand...
Surely you’d need two sausages for stereo? 😂
 
Musician said:
Same music, with flac files using a flash memory 32 GB or a SSD 2T . Power is taken from usb on the WiiM for both storing devices.

Flash memory with FAT32 seems to sound slightly better, more open and natural. I have a suspicion that its the difference between FAT32 and NTFS that might give the small differences. Or differences between using a flash drive and a SSD ?

I will try to re-format the SSD with FAT32 to se If the differences dissapear.

Do any of you have any experience of this (impossible) differences ?
Click to expand...

I've heard it all now.

Although to be fair, I'm going to try a USB FAT32 stick later.
 
Audiophile SSD—a new business opportunity. Oxygen-free silicon for a smoother listening experience.
 
Well it can definitely read FAT 32.

Very difficult to compare for any subtle differences as there is a significant delay when swapping and scanning drives.

I'll file it with £4000 USB cables.
 
Musician said:
Same music, with flac files using a flash memory 32 GB or a SSD 2T . Power is taken from usb on the WiiM for both storing devices.

Flash memory with FAT32 seems to sound slightly better, more open and natural. I have a suspicion that its the difference between FAT32 and NTFS that might give the small differences. Or differences between using a flash drive and a SSD ?

I will try to re-format the SSD with FAT32 to se If the differences dissapear.

Do any of you have any experience of this (impossible) differences ?
Click to expand...
I remember postings years back on HiFi forum about how some sd cards sounded better than others.
Just no.
I guess we hear what we want to hear.
 
LennyBruce said:
I've heard it all now.

Although to be fair, I'm going to try a USB FAT32 stick later.
Click to expand...
I didnt suspect at all there would be any difference between the flash drive and the SSD . But there was. Now, the flaschdrive and the SSD have different inbuilt parts for the power supply . The Toshiba SSD is rated to need 5V 1A . I have no idea how much power the Sandisk flash drive draw, but the stick gets rather hot.

The ultra can give 5V 1,7A according to spec so it should be enough ? The flaschdrive is new but the SSD is two years old , and have been used earlier.
 
Musician said:
I didnt suspect at all there would be any difference between the flash drive and the SSD . But there was. Now, the flaschdrive and the DDC have different inbuilt parts for the power supply . The Toshiba SSD is rated to need 5V 1A . I have no idea how much power the Sandisk flash drive draw, but the stick gets rather hot.

The ultra can give 5V 1,7A according to spec so it should be enough ? The flaschdrive is new but the SSD is two years old , and have been used earlier.
Click to expand...

Complete and utter nonsense.
 
Musician said:
Same music, with flac files using a flash memory 32 GB or a SSD 2T . Power is taken from usb on the WiiM for both storing devices.

Flash memory with FAT32 seems to sound slightly better, more open and natural. I have a suspicion that its the difference between FAT32 and NTFS that might give the small differences. Or differences between using a flash drive and a SSD ?

I will try to re-format the SSD with FAT32 to se If the differences dissapear.

Do any of you have any experience of this (impossible) differences ?
Click to expand...
The board responses are a bit in shock at how you've framed this. The latencies in solid state storage or on the order of a few nanoseconds, and network latencies on the order of a few milliseconds, both of which are well below what the human ear can even detect. To detect differences in audio, the latencies would need to be about 10-20 milliseconds. So, what you're talking about is ORDERS of magnitude (i.e. 1000's to millions of times) faster than your ear or mine.

That said, I recommend using EXT4 instead of FAT32. EXT4 is more open where FAT32 is more closed ;)

I use EXT4 wherever I can in preference to FAT32 or NTFS.
 
hoohoohoo said:
The board responses are a bit in shock at how you've framed this. The latencies in solid state storage or on the order of a few nanoseconds, and network latencies on the order of a few milliseconds, both of which are well below what the human ear can even detect. To detect differences in audio, the latencies would need to be about 10-20 milliseconds. So, what you're talking about is ORDERS of magnitude (i.e. 1000's to millions of times) faster than your ear or mine.

That said, I recommend using EXT4 instead of FAT32. EXT4 is more open where FAT32 is more closed ;)

I use EXT4 wherever I can in preference to FAT32 or NTFS.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response. I read that FAT32 and NTFS is made for Windows and EXT4 for linux. I guess the Ultra is a Linux based machine ?
 
Musician said:
Thanks for the response. I read that FAT32 and NTFS is made for Windows and EXT4 for linux. I guess the Ultra is a Linux based machine ?
Click to expand...
I guess it must be.

Linux can read FAT 32, NTFS and EXT4.

Windows cannot read EXT 4.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
My Ultra tests
31 32 33
Replies
647
Views
36K
Musician
M
Back
Top