advertisement


WAV or FLAC????

S

strummer

pfm Member
I just downloaded the latest EAC Beta. I've not ripped anything for a while, so was rusty on the procedure.

Ripped 1st CD & couldn't find any mention of FLAC, so I clicked the WAV button & ripped as WAV..

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that files on a CD are WAV & the only reason FLAC was preferred is WAV didn't include all the Song Title data???

Anyway, the album plays as normal on SB & has all the titles etc.. Sounds perfect.

Should I stick to FLAC or continue ripping to WAV?



Ta!
 
WAV will also take up twice the space that FLAC does.

Personally given the choice I'd go for FLAC, if for no other reason that the meta data is held within the file itself, so you can change players and still have access to the data.
 
Hi

Stick to flac, it's smaller, lossless and as you rightly say can include all the metadata which wave cannot natively support.

I use dbpower amp and is very good (having said that I think db can apply metadata to wave, but its not in the format standard)
 
Does EAC let you make FLACs ?

As BE718 I use dbpoweramp - it's pretty much foolproof and guaranteed to make an exact copy. It also allows you to recode from WAV to FLAC if you want to do it that way.
 
chrisletts said:
Does EAC let you make FLACs ?

As BE718 I use dbpoweramp - it's pretty much foolproof and guaranteed to make an exact copy. It also allows you to recode from WAV to FLAC if you want to do it that way.
Click to expand...



It always did. I ripped hundreds of CDs to FLAC on EAC.

Then I didn't do any for a year or so, changed PC etc.. Just downloaded it again (latest beta). Looks just as I remember it, but can't remember how I ripped FLAC...
 
Just use dbpoweamp it is much friendly and faster and rips perfect, I don't understand the fascination with that ancient crock of shite EAC:)
 
FWIW, Naim strongly recommend WAV. Linn recommend FLAC. For the life of me, I have never understood how un-compressing the file to re-create the WAV created any meaningful processor challenges for a system in 2015, but Naim maintain it has an impact.....

I use DBPoweramp and always have done FLAC....!!
 
muzzer said:
Just use dbpoweamp it is much friendly and faster and rips perfect, I don't understand the fascination with that ancient crock of shite EAC:)
Click to expand...

EAC will do discs which other systems won't rip. EAC once took 4 days to rip a heavily scratched CD which dbpoweramp gave up on. But for normal discs, that shouldn't be needed
 
strummer said:
It always did. I ripped hundreds of CDs to FLAC on EAC.

Then I didn't do any for a year or so, changed PC etc.. Just downloaded it again (latest beta). Looks just as I remember it, but can't remember how I ripped FLAC...
Click to expand...

You have to set it up.

I'm on my ipad. If nobody else explains how to do that I'll send you something later from my laptop.
 
strummer said:
I just downloaded the latest EAC Beta. I've not ripped anything for a while, so was rusty on the procedure.

Ripped 1st CD & couldn't find any mention of FLAC, so I clicked the WAV button & ripped as WAV..

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that files on a CD are WAV & the only reason FLAC was preferred is WAV didn't include all the Song Title data???

Anyway, the album plays as normal on SB & has all the titles etc.. Sounds perfect.

Should I stick to FLAC or continue ripping to WAV?

Ta!
Click to expand...

Storage is cheap, so rip in Apple's AIFF.

Best regards,
Peter
 
I blind tested WAV & FLAC and at times I thought I could hear a difference, but nothing statistically significant emerged.

On the other hand I could spot the difference between 320kbps mp3 and FLAC in ABX tests 100% of the time. FLAC has better 'air' and 'hall ambience' i.e. the extreme high frequencies are better. You need a pretty serious setup to make these differences so apparent though.

Please don't forget that FLAC can be converted to WAV or AIFF with *NO* loss in quality, the conversion (funnily enough) is lossless.
 
Yomanze said:
On the other hand I could spot the difference between 320kbps mp3 and FLAC in ABX tests 100% of the time. FLAC has better 'air' and 'hall ambience' i.e. the extreme high frequencies are better. You need a pretty serious setup to make these differences so apparent though.
Click to expand...

And this depends on the MP3 encoder to a degree.

Peter
 
Brian said:
Can you explain the reason behind that suggestion? I haven't seen the OP mention apple or itunes anywhere
Click to expand...
You don't need Apple or iTunes for AIFF playback, AIFF is uncompressed but contains all the tagging info etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top