Computer Audio

"You may lost some tags and album art though."

You will loose A LOT of that with .wav.

I just converted my entire library over to FLAC finally after years of .wav.

Can't honestly say one sound categorically better than the other. Both sound very good, though I have not done careful a/b comparisons.

Steve, DBpoweramp can supposedly create and confirm perfect rips or not with any format, right?

Any good reason why .wav is really better sounding than .flac? Assuming the playback is doing its job correctly in both cases, of course.

I stuck with .wav for years just to be safe, but gotta say I am not missing it now that I have jumped ship.

I still have my original .wav files. I am almost ready to forget about them and delete them.

So now would be a good time to convince me I should keep them. :^)

"Maybe has to do with the offset or floating point rounding. Maybe has to do with erroneous behavior when the CODEC is running real-time."

Maybe if resmpling is done in teh process, but not for a straight format conversion. If it happens in that case its more likely a result of the CODEC. I can't see how reformatting done right with no recalculations involved would make a difference alone.

I'm saying this from the perspective of one who has written image resampling and reformatting programs professionally in past years for high precision military applications. The same principles would apply to digital audio as well I am fairly certain.

Of course, as always, the devil is in the details. If that's what you heard, there is probably a reason, but I would see no basis to place the blame on the format itself.