|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
|
|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Feeding time at the HA zoo - again. This time main course is "FLAC vs. WAV". posted by russell d on February 2, 2011 at 00:27:10:
Let's assume for a second that your response wasn't a joke.
When it comes to a question "Why don't I hear differences others talk about", there are 2 options how to react:
- assume that your hearing is perfect, your system is perfect, and others are gullible/fantasizing/having hardware issues;
OR
- question your own hearing and system. Make sure the former is good, and take strides to improve the latter.
By good hearing in this case I don't mean "normal" for average person. It's common knowledge that most detectable differences, that affect soundstage, impression of "air" and so on, lie in high frequency range.
It's not that difficult - download free tone generator, make sure your sound card and headphones can actually reproduce frequencies up to 20 KHz (better 22-24), set volume to your normal listening level, and play tones between 18 and 22 KHz. I know what my results are, to not worry about it for the time being.
Regarding hardware - I thought that on this forum, most people understand implications of additional processing at real time. There are 3 basic options for playing FLAC (let's skip cliet/server variety a la Squeezebox for now):
1. Decoding real-time during playback;
2. Decoding and loading into memory 1st track before playing; decoding and loading into memory each subsequent track during playback of previous one;
3. Decoding and loading into memory whole album before playing.
Of these three, only #3 could theoretically sound the same as WAV.
Disagreements?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "have a hardware issue" - certainly. We all do. - carcass93 09:33:26 02/02/11 (20)
- RE: "have a hardware issue" - certainly. We all do. - russell d 11:59:52 02/02/11 (17)
- Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - carcass93 12:15:19 02/02/11 (16)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - Tony Lauck 13:33:51 02/02/11 (9)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - soundchekk 07:29:52 02/03/11 (0)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - fmak 00:12:57 02/03/11 (0)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - rick_m 16:20:19 02/02/11 (3)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - Tony Lauck 08:06:16 02/03/11 (2)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - rick_m 11:05:26 02/03/11 (1)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - Tony Lauck 11:20:47 02/03/11 (0)
- No argument from me - you seem to agree that it DOES NOT EXIST. - carcass93 13:52:36 02/02/11 (2)
- "I don't think further conversation is going to be productive." - RussD 17:35:09 02/02/11 (0)
- RE: No argument from me - you seem to agree that it DOES NOT EXIST. - russell d 15:10:17 02/02/11 (0)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - russell d 12:58:29 02/02/11 (5)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - fmak 00:16:21 02/03/11 (4)
- RE: Both you and Tony speak in terms of "ideal". - russell d 10:55:47 02/03/11 (0)
- Yes - that sums it up pretty accurately. - carcass93 09:20:05 02/03/11 (2)
- RE: Yes - that sums it up pretty accurately. - russell d 10:59:59 02/03/11 (1)
- Sure. Or just because I'm right. N/T - carcass93 11:16:30 02/03/11 (0)
- RE: "have a hardware issue" - certainly. We all do. - Tony Lauck 11:39:14 02/02/11 (1)
- RE: "have a hardware issue" - certainly. We all do. - fmak 00:17:05 02/03/11 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
