Why do so many quality DACs sound better with WAV than FLAC, AIFF, and others?

[microstrip]

The downside of computer audio is the infinite variables.(...)

Exactly my point.

Any opinions on this one? http://www.soundstageultra.com/index.php/equipment-menu/587-highend-audiopc-audiophileoptimizer-computer-audio-software

 

[Andre Marc]

Exactly my point.

Any opinions on this one? http://www.soundstageultra.com/index.php/equipment-menu/587-highend-audiopc-audiophileoptimizer-computer-audio-software

Yes, so with all the variables, your notion of offering "help" to the OP is nonsensical. There was no request for help or any detail of set up, just
a grand statement kind of cloaked in a factual statement.

 

[Chris F]

The only thing I can think of is that it is possible the decoding algorithm/path is not correctly implemented in the player.... Does this difference exist with all software players?

Otherwise as previously mentioned decoding is orders of magnitude less CPU intensive (by design) and even further nearly all quality playback software buffers everything to memory and plays out from that regardless of the incoming format.

 

[YashN]

Interesting hobby we have, don't we?

To an extent - there are so many systems and variables.

I did critical listening comparisons in my system and I decompressed everything offline before playing when in the single computer + DAC configuration - WAV and AIFF sound better than FLAC in that config in my system to us (quite an old iMac now and Audirvana 1.5) and it's not even close.

Power spikes and concomitant ground plane noise associated with additional processing affecting the D/A at the DAC or also sending out noise through the mains, getting at the amp probably.

I could have settled on WAV but the tagging is lacking so I use AIFF for rips (offline converted to DSD128 for playback).

 

[prerich]

I can top that. Doing the same while also applying Dirac DRC. On audio only I do MCH DSD -> PCM conversion and run Dirac. PC does not break a sweat....

You've got me there, however I'm running an EQ program myself as a VST (MathAudio RoomEQ).

 

[rbbert]

...I could have settled on WAV but the tagging is lacking so I use AIFF for rips (offline converted to DSD128 for playback).

There are those (one being "Steve" who owns Empirical Audio) who claim WAV sounds consistently better than AIFF.

Given the various advantages and (potential) disadvantages of all the file types, the only sensible suggestion is to see what works best for you. You can always change your preference in the future. Unless your are ripping your own CD's (and maybe even then), all your audio files have been FLAC at some point in the chain.

Actually, Barry Diament's Soundkeeper label sells never compressed PCM recordings, and perhaps MA or Blue Coast does also; I haven't checked all the boutique downloadable labels, but all the major sellers send you FLAC whatever format you actually buy.

 

[Alpinist]

Actually everything is buffered into memory, there is no decoding on the fly. It is your playback software that will do this.

And if you are using a NAS to stream via ethernet there is total isolation between processing and DAC.

There are lots of brainwashed audiophiles out there.

Ok Andre,

Then how do you explain the superior sound of the WAV file vs. FLAC file? I have done over a dozen direct comparisons of WAV vs. FLAC (my friend prefers FLAC files due to the reduced space requirements, so we trade them) and in nearly every comparison (all but one) the WAV file has sounded superior to the FLAC. In fact, I am able to pick out the superior sounding WAV files from the FLAC with my eyes closed. The biggest perceptible difference is the depth of the soundstage, although I do hear more nuance from WAV as well. My system is Audirvana Plus, Mac Mini, WW Platinum 7 USB, Esoteric K-01, Soulution 520 preamp, 501 mono amps and Raidho D3, so it is quite resolving. And I strongly resent being called "brainwashed".

Ken

 

[Alpinist]

To an extent - there are so many systems and variables.

I did critical listening comparisons in my system and I decompressed everything offline before playing when in the single computer + DAC configuration - WAV and AIFF sound better than FLAC in that config in my system to us (quite an old iMac now and Audirvana 1.5) and it's not even close.

Power spikes and concomitant ground plane noise associated with additional processing affecting the D/A at the DAC or also sending out noise through the mains, getting at the amp probably.

I could have settled on WAV but the tagging is lacking so I use AIFF for rips (offline converted to DSD128 for playback).

Big + 1

Ken

 

[BlueFox]

Ok Andre,

Then how do you explain the superior sound of the WAV file vs. FLAC file? I have done over a dozen direct comparisons of WAV vs. FLAC (my friend prefers FLAC files due to the reduced space requirements, so we trade them) and in nearly every comparison (all but one) the WAV file has sounded superior to the FLAC. In fact, I am able to pick out the superior sounding WAV files from the FLAC with my eyes closed. The biggest perceptible difference is the depth of the soundstage, although I do hear more nuance from WAV as well. My system is Audirvana Plus, Mac Mini, WW Platinum 7 USB, Esoteric K-01, Soulution 520 preamp, 501 mono amps and Raidho D3, so it is quite resolving. And I strongly resent being called "brainwashed".

Ken

General purpose computers aren't known for being very good music servers, so that might be a reason.

 

[marslo]

I am also in the camp of WAV files. In the beginning I ripped with DB poweramp to uncompressed FLAC but one day have read in CA forum that some fellows prefer WAV. Altough I do not understand why the sound is different , to my ears WAV sound more natural and FLAC more computer like. That is not a huge difference but I just prefer music in WAV and do not search to find explanation for this.
Now I ripp all my new cds to WAV and buy this format with HDTRACKS.

 

[rbbert]

...
Now I ripp all my new cds to WAV and buy this format with HDTRACKS.

Just realize that you are buying FLAC files which Jriver is coverting to WAV for you

 

[edorr]

Just realize that you are buying FLAC files which Jriver is coverting to WAV for you

HDtracks has a WAV option I believe.

 

[rbbert]

HDtracks has a WAV option I believe.

Go back and re-read my last two posts...

 

[marslo]

Well, small differences in audio are suggestion driven, I believe

 

[Don Hills]

... In fact, I am able to pick out the superior sounding WAV files from the FLAC with my eyes closed. ...

Of course. Having your eyes closed is a prerequisite. That is, you need to be able to reliably pick out which is the WAV file even if you do not know which file is being played at any given time. In other words, a blind test.

 

[edorr]

I still say if there is an audible difference you have a crappy server. They are the same bits send to the DAC, and the only difference is a miniscule amount of processing done on the server do decode the flac.

 

[rbbert]

I still say if there is an audible difference you have a crappy server. They are the same bits send to the DAC, and the only difference is a miniscule amount of processing done on the server do decode the flac.

It would be interesting to know if hooking up a Regen and/or a Jitterbug would change anything for people who notice a difference?

 

[Alpinist]

It would be interesting to know if hooking up a Regen and/or a Jitterbug would change anything for people who notice a difference?

I don't think my Mac Mini is by any means a crappy server (I have their top one and it sounds outstanding) but I do believe the Regen could offer some improvement as it has done for so many. No reason to believe it would close the gap between WAV and FLAC though.

Ken

 

[YashN]

You can always change your preference in the future. Unless your are ripping your own CD's (and maybe even then), all your audio files have been FLAC at some point in the chain.

Actually, Barry Diament's Soundkeeper label sells never compressed PCM recordings, and perhaps MA or Blue Coast does also; I haven't checked all the boutique downloadable labels, but all the major sellers send you FLAC whatever format you actually buy.

I am not sure where you get the impression that "all" my "audio files have been FLAC at some point in the chain" nor "all the major sellers send you FLAC whatever format you actually buy".

I believe you are confusing FLAC with PCM/WAV firstly, and secondly, both your statements above would still be wrong if you substituted PCM/WAV for FLAC in them:

Some of my files never have been PCM or FLAC ever in their whole lifetimes: they were pure music recorded straight to native DSD, never touched the PCM domain at any point.

Case in point which also is in contradiction with your second sentence: you can buy native DSD records at nativedsd.com and download DSD (and not PCM, nor FLAC).

 

[YashN]

They are the same bits send to the DAC, and the only difference is a miniscule amount of processing done on the server do decode the flac.

That the bits are the same doesn't even matter in these cases: it's a matter of ground plane noise, RFI/EMI and noise re-injected into the mains. Some of it can affect the DAC, some of it can even bypass the DAC in some cases and affect other equipment downstream like the pre and the amp.