For those doing comparisons, the tests aren't very useful to others unless they include some info on your setup: software, transport, DAC, etc. (I haven't gotten around to my own tests, I'm just setting up Squeezebox server now so it will send WAV as PCM only.)
WAV versus FLAC
Until now I though that the sound coming from the files in these two formats are identical. However, recently, I have heard from a person whose opinion I respect highly that sound from WAV files is "warmer" and that from FLAC files is "brighter".
I wonder if anyoner else have similar observations?
Thank you
I wonder if anyoner else have similar observations?
Thank you
67 responses Add your response
Yes Magfan, my post was supporting you. That's ok, right? :) Mlsstl, I agree that these debates need to stay reasonable, but will disagree that just because they are debates that they are "pleas for approval". (I don't really care what others listen to, I just know I like WAV better when it comes to my go-to hi-end rig.) i think reasonable debating is a good thing. |
" ...the quality with FLAC (and other lossless formats) greatly varies on different computer configurations. So it looks like it is indeed a computer issue" Hmmmmmm, I did my "fun" experiment using relatively powerful CPU - Intel Core i7 950 3.06GHz (Quad Core), ASUS Rampage III motherboard with SATA3, 12 GBytes of RAM and a SATA3 Hard Drive etc - hardly a typical "slow" computer having audible problem in FLAC processing..... Of course, very obviously that problem lies not with bit-by-bit file but with hardware and/or software involved or may be satan involvment. While, I "ripped" using EAC, the payback was Media Monkey ----------------------- " some, like Simo, above hear it regularly enough to ID file types...or at least tell the difference." Oh no dear. I don;t have music server yet. Just I read so much that FLAC and WAV sound (or should sound) identical that the statement of contrary from the highly respectable professional audio engineer "forced" me to post original question - just curiocity, nothing more -this why this forum exist. This small experiment of mine was 10 minutes - one time shot test using my working computer NOT regular listening to music from server (as I don;t have one) and for fun only. I, personally attribute the difference I very clearly observed to my 12 years education as the professional pianist as well as blind nature of testing with... 100% accuracy. Speaking about nature of testing - PLEASE, do your testing BLINDLY only BLINDLY and BLINDLY only |
Daverz, I wasn't suggesting that people conduct their experiments for others. In light of the diversity of opinion on this subject, there is only one person who needs to be satisfied with respect to any given system. And, Ted, for the most part these "debates" have all the endearing qualities of two high schools guys in the 1950s having a Ford vs Chevy argument. Whether direct or implied, the old "there must be something second class about you or your system if you don't agree with me" gets a bit tedious over time. Hence my suggestion that people figure out what works for them instead of relying on a popular vote. I'll shut up and retreat to my proper place now... ;-) |
Hmmmmmm, I did my "fun" experiment using relatively powerful CPU - .... Yes, you are absolutely correct, I take this back. To my ears, the brighter top-end of FLAC remains regardless of the PC. To me, it seems like all lossless formats have problems with the top-end extension and "life", some more, some less. I think I will be ending my "lossless" journey here; I am sticking to WAV! Most important: Enjoy the music! Best, Alex Peychev |
Simontju 02-03-11: I did my "fun" experiment using relatively powerful CPU - Intel Core i7 950 3.06GHz (Quad Core), ASUS Rampage III motherboard with SATA3, 12 GBytes of RAM and a SATA3 Hard Drive etc - hardly a typical "slow" computer having audible problem in FLAC processing.....Simon, if by any chance you have your SATA3 hard drive connected to the Marvell 6gbps SATA3 controller on your motherboard, be aware that that controller tends to be highly erratic, based on my experience and many other experiences which have been reported on the net. I obviously can't say that that was the reason for your findings, but I certainly would not rule out the possibility. I suggest that you look at the Windows Event Viewer, and see if there are a large number of errors indicated that might be hard drive related. A few months ago I built a computer which also uses an Asus X58 board (the Sabertooth), and the same i7-950 cpu you are using. I initially connected the SATA3 SSD I am using as the "c" drive to a Marvell 6gbps SATA3 port. After spending several days trying unsuccessfully to troubleshoot enormous numbers of errors indicated in Event Viewer, and frequent bsod's and crashes, I switched the SSD to an Intel 3gbps port, and the computer has been rock solid ever since. If your audio file was located on your "c" drive, and if that drive was connected to a 6gbps port, keep in mind that while you were listening this issue could have affected not only the reading of the audio data from the drive, but the operation of Windows and your audio program as well. Regards, -- Al |
Just finished a "shuffle play" test, 3 FLAC and 3 WAV files. To give the most difference between them, I set the Squeezebox server to send FLAC as FLAC to the player, but send WAV as PCM (default is to also send WAV as FLAC). So the player has to decompress the FLAC stream but not the stream from the WAV file. The Squeezebox Touch feeds a Neko D-100 DAC. All cabling is Monoprice premium XLR cables. See my system for the rest of the equipment. My test file is one I use often for auditioning equipment, the first track from Lyrita 247 (Redbook CD), Boult conducts Moeran, a track I'm very familiar with. I couldn't identify any differences. I just guessed, and my guesses were mostly wrong. A real test would involve a variety of music and more runs, but this is already getting pretty boring. |
It's under Advanced->File Types in the server settings. I'm using SBS 7.5.3. See http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html for this and other tweaks. |
Vett93, you'll find those settings by clicking on the "Settings" link at the bottom right of the Squeezeboxserver web page. That will open up a new page for Server Settings. Click on the "Advanced" tab and change the dropdown box to "File Types". You can change the stream format for each type of music file that SBS plays. My only recommendation is to make a note of the original settings before you change them in the event you wish to go back. |
converted The smithereens version of "tommy" and Steely Dan's "Goucho" from flac 96KHZ/24bit to wav 96KHZ/24bit. These are two of the best sounding HD Tracks. Notice more then half the time flac had more bits(between 4-10). Do not know why. In any case after several back and forth switching and hard listening, I can honestly say, I heard NO difference. My system: Rockport Arrakis, VTL Siegfrieds mono amps and 7.5 11 pre amp, dcs debussy, silent music server using windows 7 and j rivers set up for pure bit. Cabling Jena labs Dreamdancer. Albums down loaded from HD Tracks. You can believe what you will. Also compared to vinyl. Sorry doubters, Vinyl is still King! |
converted The smithereens version of "tommy" and Steely Dan's "Goucho" from flac 96KHZ/24bit to wav 96KHZ/24bit. On a recent event featuring Yarlung Records, almost 50 audiophiles heard the difference between 44.1/16, 88.2/24 and 176.4/24. The latter was significantly superior. Also, experimenting with vinyl A/D conversion with different sample rates confirmed the same result; you really need to go 176.4/24 or 192/24 in order to capture the soul of vinyl, any lower sample rate is a car copy. Sorry doubters, Vinyl is still King! While this is true, there are other Kingdoms available against which the Vinyl King needs gathering a very serious army. :-) Best, Alex Peychev |
I really do not know what you are saying. The highest rate recording available that I can find and down load is 96hz/24bit at HDtracks.com. Second the disscussion is if there is a difference in the sound of flac and wav and if one sounds better the the other. Which I could hear none. As far as other kingdoms, I have no clue. Are you referring to real to real? which there is almost no softwear. Or some new digital format yet to come. Please enlighten me. |
