[Hero Kid]

    Quote:

Not to knock FLAC but to me, it's more to learn that I'm not going use.

 
If you can't see the obvious advantages of FLAC so be it. I think people are wasting their time trying to educate you when it doesn't appear you're taking anything new on-board.
 
That being said I can't help but say two things. 
 
One. There is a quote button and I see no reason not to use it.
 
Two. What on earth are you talking about learning how to use FLAC? All you have to do is change the setting of your ripping program from .wav to .flac. Then as long as you know how to make your media player play those new files you're set.
How is that difficult and/or what is to learn?
 
PS: FLAC → WAV in my opinion,  for obvious reasons.

 

[Roseval]

Quote:

 
That's a basic simplified software view of audio playback.  FLAC and WAV get treated the same.
 
 I wonder just how much the application code can affect jitter as long as the application level code is being at least reasonably competent about playback.  I'd think that the driver level and OS level code would be more likely to do things that ultimately affect jitter.  Driver and kernel code doing things like changing CPU speed and power on the fly, blocking application threads during interrupt processing, background disc reads, network drivers being CPU and interrupt time hogs, things like that.  Things that aren't in direct control of the application.

Excellent write up.
I agree with your conclusion, regardless the format , all audio files are treated the same.
 
From a programmers point of view you can do another thing.
Instead of running 2 parallel treads, you can run 1 at the time.
First decode to PCM and load in memory.
After completion of this process, start playback.
This is called memory playback.
The memory playback option in J River more or less works this way
 
The timing of the DA conversion is a matter of a clock.
The good ones has a intrinsic jitter of 2 ps.
This is a horrible small value.
I can imagine that any electrical activity in side the PC, might it be RFI, a spike on the power rail, etc can disturb the clock.
So there is probably not a direct relation between the software and jitter but a indirect one, the total electrical system activity can affect the clock.
This picture is one of the very few I know demonstrating the point.
There is an obvious rise in jitter level the moment the system starts playing.
 
Anybody arguing that the level DOUBLES has a point
Anybody arguing that the level is still very low and probably below audible threshold as a point.
Anybody arguing that the periodic jitter (the spikes) is there running or not and more damaging has a point.
How this maps to a PC with far more an more powerful components is another question.

 

[beeman458]

If you can't see the obvious advantages of FLAC so be it. I think people are wasting their time trying to educate you when it doesn't appear you're taking anything new on-board.
 
Then you haven't been reading what I've written in response.
 
One. There is a quote button and I see no reason not to use it.
 
And I see no reason to use it.  And?  Is everything a fight with you?
 
???

 

[Hero Kid]

Each to their own.
 
Also if you think I was attacking you directly, I apologize as that was not my intent. I was simply trying to highlight your folly.
 

 

[HeatFan12]

[size=10pt]Hello beeman...[/size]
[size=10pt]You are making friends quickly in only a couple of months...lol....

[/size]
 
 
[size=10pt]I was reading some of your other threads and you are all over the place.  That's good, you want to educate yourself, however when you get several responses, you don't want to hear them.  It's like you know the answer you are looking for, but will not be satisfied until you receive whatever it is you are looking for.  [/size]
 
[size=10pt]In the Music sub-forum you asked about ripped WAVs vs. original CD, soundwise.  You received many different answers but none were good enough.  That's fine, it's your thread.  Your question was answered in many different ways.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]In the Dedicated sub-forum, you are quarreling about how much is too much in reference to DACs etc. etc. etc.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]I don't know exactly what you want to read in reference to all this debate.[/size]
 
 
[size=10pt]Now, let's get to the present matter at hand for you.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]You want to know about the ripping and converting WAV, FLAC etc...Which is better..etc.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]I read in your other thread that you just buy a CD, throw it in your computer and rip to wav with WMP, with a blu-ray drive.  You find many differences in the ripped wav and the original cd, when that should not be the case, UNLESS your rip is not as accurate as it should be.  You received many suggestions in re-ripping a few of them with other rippers, but you choose not to give it a shot.  [/size]
 
[size=10pt]My suggestion- Download EAC (Exact Audio Copy)(free), set it up according to the guide. http://blowfish.be/eac/Install/install1.html Run the Drive Wizard, it will give you good info on your drive, and rip a couple of CDs.  It has error correction etc. etc..[/size]
[size=10pt]As you get to know the program you will see the many features it offers.  It might take a bit for you to sort out, but look at it as the journey not the destination. This is supposed to be fun and not really complicated and members are trying to help you.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]Good luck...[/size]
 
[size=10pt]To at least answer the OPs question- WAV or FLAC-  I use both (Rip to FLAC & WAV, keep the original WAV with cue for quick CD burning, and listen to FLAC in Foobar).  [/size]

 

[beeman458]

Also if you think I was attacking you directly,
 
---snip---
 
I was simply trying to highlight your folly.
 
And your above is not a direct attack?
 

 
???
 
FWIW, as I wrote, I got no need for FLAC, got no need to learn how to use FLAC and got no need to use the limiting nature of the quote function and as I also wrote, I get the point that some folks find need for the benefits, above compression, that FLAC provides.
 

 

 

[Hero Kid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
And your above is not a direct attack?

If me saying what you did/do is foolish is classified as a personal attack... so be it. I suppose I hang around with too many under eighteen year olds to note the difference.

 

[stang]

I prefer FLAC, as it supports album art, tagging etc. In foobar2000, you can see the name of the song etc if the file is .wav, but when you go to artist, genre etc, it will just be in unknown. I will stick to FLAC. 

 

[beeman458]

[size=10pt]HeatFan12:[/size]
 
[size=10pt]I don't know exactly what you want to read in reference to all this debate.[/size]
 
Thank-you for your thoughtfulness.  The answer to your above question is simple, completeness of form.  If somebody knows their $#it, then it won't frustrate them when called upon to articulate their wisdom on a matter.  If they don't, they'll frustrate out very easily and usually resort to name calling in short order as a cover story.   It's better that I leave my answer in the form that it is and for me to continue muddling my way through the various responses as what's important is the gleaned information.  This as opposed to trying to articulate my many findings which are in direct conflict with much that is written here.
 
I find that many people here make statements that are pretty much wrong in content.  I find this out when I do follow-up research on what's written; meta-analysis.  I'm not here to argue.  If somebody wants to write something and that something is in conflict with what's written that I find in meta-analysis, what do I care?  What I do is use their bad information as a compass and do research in that direction; buzz words.  It's okay for one to think of me as dumb, unable to learn or dumb.  Why?  It's not about what someone thinks of me, it's about that what can be gleaned from what has been written.  And I'm not here to take on all the bad information being projected as true and accurate.  Nor, without being exceedingly verbose, can questions be fully articulated.  Some folks here need to eat more bran muffins in the morning, or at least before they start clacking away on their keyboard.  In the end, it doesn't matter how much bad information is being floated about as true and accurate when it's not.  And in truth, it's not necessary to argue any of the errors going round as we all have the ability to follow-up on anything that's posted as fact when it's not.  If folks don't want to keep my posts in the context they were meant, I can't keep going backwards and correcting them as that in of itself would become a full time position.  In short, as an example, someone posts a reply to another's question.  I take that reply, do a study on the accuracy of the comment; gleaned information, and move forward.  If I find out the response is inaccurate, I don't comeback and correct the poster.  Why?  It's not necessary.
 
Some folks here just like to argue and they'll argue and call folks they don't know names because it makes them feel good for their shortcomings.  Good for them.  What can one say when one tells you that you're wrong?  Someone wants to tell me I'm wrong, when I'm not, what do I care?  If you think I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.  It's okay.  Why?  It's not about ego as it's about moving forward.  I find the use of the ignore feature cleans up much of this type of name calling abuse and when more of it leaks onto these pages, the individual who thinks this behavior is acceptable, when it isn't, just gets added to the list.  Doing so keeps the background noise down and I'm sure the mods appreciate this point also.  Attack me once, shame on you.  Attack me twice, shame on me.
 
The point, yes, there's a boatload of frustration on my part due to all the bad or poorly thought out tidbits of information being communicated on others parts and I'm doing my part to not personalize it or make an argument out of it.  Hope the above, although woefully incomplete, helps give you insight to my side of the coin.

 

[beeman458]

Hero Kid wrote:
 
If me saying what you did/do is foolish is classified as a personal attack,
 
Aaaaah, you didn't write foolish.
 

 

[Hero Kid]

     Quote:

Aaaaah, you didn't write foolish.
 

 
By me saying folly I meant - to quote the free dictionary - an act or instance of foolishness.
I have nothing more to say on the matter and apologize again for harm I may have caused.

 

[beeman458]

Hero Kid wrote:
 
By me saying folly I meant - to quote the free dictionary - an act or instance of foolishness.
I have nothing more to say on the matter and apologize again for harm I may have caused.
 
No harm caused.  I just found it ironic that you'd attack me with your comment and then make claim you weren't attacking me and then follow up with a complaint (another attack) on my lack of doing things your way; use of the quote feature.  A feature which I don't like I might add.
 
Now, how do you expect me to receive your above?  And how many attacks does one have to endure before saying; "Hey!  Enough!"  Or would you rather I quietly muddle my way through and ignore?  If one wishes to clutter their system and thinking up with all the different possible programs, I'm not going try to stop them and on the flip side of the coin, if someone else doesn't find need to do the same, encourage them and wish them well.  I made my comment and boy, did things get exciting.
 
If you read what I write and maintain the context of what I write, you'll find my comments make a whole lot of sense.  The thread title is FLAC vs. WAV.  I say; save your brain a ton of effort and confusion and stick with WAV, keep it simple and lose all the rest.  That's my opinion and my response to the OP title.  And if someone doesn't like the comment, let me go militant and write, too bad.
 

 
 

 

[HeatFan12]

All points well taken beeman...There are many different ways to accomplish a task.  We find our favorite and stick with it but all work nevertheless.  After a while curiosity creeps in and we try something different and what do you know, it works better or not, but you investigated the various options- again, it's the journey that counts and makes it fun.  If you want to stick with WAV, that's great if it works for you....
But I'll tell you this- Once you FLAC, you'll never go back....LOL.....

 
 
BTW here's a nice little feature:

---

 
 
 
Sorry I could not resist                  

 

[khaos974]

Well, my point is in response to the OP that Flac is not more complex than Wav while having much more advantages.
If someone find those advantages irrelevant to them (such as beeman458), sticking to wav is a perfectly valid option.

 

[K3cT]

It's the same thing. Zilch, nada. Why are we wasting time discussing FLAC vs WAV again?