WAV vs. FLAC vs. AIFF


Hi, has anyone experience any sound quality difference between the three formats? Unfortunately I been using only the wav lossless formats. I have no experience with the other two. If you have experience the three, which one do prefer and why? Thanks and happy listening
Ag insider logo xs@2xhighend64
"Malfunction"? Are you saying that the 16/24 bit data for each sample is incorrect? That the data that comes out of a flac decode is different that the wav data?
AE,

I have been very impressed with sound of both older Soundbridge and newer Logitech Squeezebox Touch as a source mainly ( I do not use built in DACs of either). Definitely better than anything I had prior and competitive in my mind with the better reference digital rigs I have heard at various dealers. The ultimate complement is that I have a large record collection and vinyl is not getting a lot of play time these days.

I am interested to see what devices like these come along down the road, but I must say, as a fairly picky and particular listener, and also as one who has worked in computer systems and software development for almost 30 years now, that I think the SQ Touch hits a nice target in terms of offering a combo of top notch sound (as a source mainly, I have never even tried the built in DAC though I hear it is not bad), features and effective design overall at a very favorable price point. Definitely a device that when used properly changes the playing field of high end audio considerably and serves as a good omen for perhaps even better things down the road.
""Malfunction"? Are you saying that the 16/24 bit data for each sample is incorrect? That the data that comes out of a flac decode is different that the wav data?"

That is exactly the point. There are many reasons why the data in each format might be different even if originating from the same CD. Anything can happen with computers and their programming at any time and often does. But the one thing that is not different is the ability of each format to store the exact same digital representation bit per bit.

That is why the format is not the issue, rather the issues may occur with everything that happens both during the rip and during playing/streaming of the digital data stream at each phase of processing prior to hitting the DAC and being converted to analog.

So the bottom line is that each format may result in different decisions being made in terms of how to minimize the risk of all the gadgets involved in ripping and playing doing more harm than good. Network audio streaming I agree is one of the simplest, least expensive and practical ways to help accomplish this.

Most general purpose computers have no business being connected directly to your high end audio gear! Think of this as a form of isolation, similar to other steps you might take to isolate your rig from potential sources of noise.

Also think of network players as a specialized type of computer that is designed to stream audio effectively to your rig. Although this is still an emerging audio solution, it is one that lends itself well to solving the problems using technology that is readily available and affordable TODAY.
The idea that the FLAC decoder produces wrong numbers is just not credible. People have repeatedly shown that the compression/decompression algorithms works. And, computers very, very seldom make computing mistakes. If each time you opened a spreadsheet it produced different results, people would not use them. If there is one thing that a computer can do it is do computations correctly. If people think that the computer is regularly doing the FLAC computations incorrectly and in a random manner, then I would love to see some actual proof of that. I just do not think it happens.

So, others issues for audio seem to be electrical noise and timing. Electrical noise, for example grounds, can potentially be an issue. That is why people are building galvanic isolation into higher end devices - to break the electrical connection between the PC and the DAC. Of course, electric noise is also present in network players, it just is not tied to the PC.

That leaves timing. Digital audio depends on precise timing of each sample. Before aysnc USB, the timing was problamatic and jitter was a real issue. That is why I keep coming back to aysnc USB. If it works are advertised, the jitter should be very low and independent of the source format. If someone can explain why the source format processing influences the final timing in a aysnc USB device, then I am all ears. I admit to not knowing the exact inner workings of the aysnc code (very few people do). But if it works as advertised, then FLAC decoding should not be an issue with its timing.

I agree that networked solutions can provide better isolation that direct connections. Remember, I am not talking about audio streams in general, but the difference between FLAC and WAV files. I am not willing to say that computers routinely make computational errors when compressing and decompressing FLAC files and therefore WAV files are better. If people think they hear a difference, that is up to them. But I have yet to hear a detailed explanation of why that happens that makes sense.

Time to get ready for Thanksgiving.
I just did an A/B comparison with Flacs and Wav of the same tracks in the same playlist, allowing me to switch. I heard no discernable difference.