Is WAV worth it?
Dec 18, 2008 at 12:52 AM Post #17 of 31
i have all my cds ripped into FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) using the EAC (Exact Audio Copy) freeware, then it is a very quick convert into LAME V0 255 cbr using Foobar2000 freeware.

It takes about 20 seconds from flac to pull all the songs from a cd into foobar, and hit the convert button. You can convert about 20 cds at a time, and it takes about 40 minutes depending on your computers processor speed... you just walk away after starting the convert pn all 20 (takes about 6 minutes to start them all) and come back a 40 minutes later and they're all converted.
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 1:13 AM Post #18 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by dura /img/forum/go_quote.gif
No FLAC on Sony DAP's.


Well obviously they didn't do their research before buying. Older iPods can be Rockboxed, Cowon has FLAC/WAV support across the board, some of the other smaller brands also have FLAC support through firmware updates. Just gotta check the spec.
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 1:16 AM Post #19 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by davidw89 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Well obviously they didn't do their research before buying. Older iPods can be Rockboxed, Cowon has FLAC/WAV support across the board, some of the other smaller brands also have FLAC support through firmware updates. Just gotta check the spec.


Well he didn't ask for FLAC or complain about lack of FLAC support, so obviously he holds FLAC lower in his feature list than you.
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 1:18 AM Post #20 of 31
Convert Flac --> Wav (or vice versa), loseless to loseless should be fine. Problem solved.
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 1:59 AM Post #21 of 31
How did people start talking about FLAC in here? My DAP does not support FLAC.
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 2:10 AM Post #22 of 31
^Nature of the internet.

In any case, as has been stated before, it really depends on the music you're listening to and your own subjective hearing. For portable listening, I use high bitrate mp3 or ALAC (for the new iPods). At home I use FLAC, for two reasons:

1. Wav is a huge space hog for very little gain over a lossless format.
2. Wav does not support tagging

You just have to take into consideration your own wants and needs in regards to your audio preferences.

Cheers!
beerchug.gif
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 12:33 PM Post #23 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by davidw89 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
No use FLAC. Also FLAC is open source, built for audiophile, and smaller file size too.


Well, that it pointless.
Since the OP's Sony S639F unit don't support FLAC. Rendering all his files useless...
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 12:34 PM Post #24 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by i_don't_know /img/forum/go_quote.gif
How did people start talking about FLAC in here? My DAP does not support FLAC.


They comment without reading and understanding the point of the thread...
 
Dec 18, 2008 at 1:18 PM Post #25 of 31
I second V0 or 320k mp3. You want to enjoy your music, not analyze the finest details while listening.
 
Dec 19, 2008 at 1:09 AM Post #26 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I second V0 or 320k mp3. You want to enjoy your music, not analyze the finest details while listening.


I agree, as well. Plus, WAV is going to kill you with the disk space requirements on your 16GB player. As for tagging - does the Sony allow for direct folder access? If not, WAV will be completely unusable, as you won't be able to search by Artist / Song / Album etc. Your player will become a big iPod Shuffle.

EDIT: Actually, I would also seriously consider AAC, if you are doing this from scratch. Only because the codec is superior to MP3, assuming similar file sizes. AAC also gives you some cross compatibility (Zune and iPods, for example), although not as much as MP3 will.
 
Dec 19, 2008 at 1:52 AM Post #27 of 31
I'm going to come down on the side of V0 MP3 as well. I've been completely unable to reproduce the test I ran where I could reliably tell a difference between that and wav, so I guess it was just a fluke. At this point I'd say if there is an audible difference between the two on this player, it's pretty much insignificant.
 
Dec 19, 2008 at 11:55 AM Post #28 of 31
Have you tried Nero encoded AAC? I can ABX between quicktime aac and wav, but can't between Nero AAC (at the highest quality setting) and wav. But that's just me of course. But might be worth experimenting with.
 
Dec 19, 2008 at 12:24 PM Post #29 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by i_don't_know /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm either filling my Sony S639F with WAV files or MP3 files encoded with LAME in 320kbps insane setting. What audible differences are there between these two formats? It's likely I'll be doing an A/B comparison test, but I'd like to get a general consensus before I download all the programs, bunch all my CDs together, and hook up my DAP.


From what I understand, 16gb would hold (on average) about 330 50mb music files, right? So how much of the 320kbps LAME MP3 music would I be able to fit?


My suggestion is always rip your CDs in the highest level, i.e. to WAV or FLAC, and then TRANSCODE this to whatever format your DAP supports. That way you'll only rip your CDs once, and not re-rip when you upgrade to better gear etc in the future. I use Winamp to do the transcoding for me, and then the setting can be the usual trade-off between quality Vs quantity.
 
Dec 19, 2008 at 5:10 PM Post #30 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif
They comment without reading and understanding the point of the thread...



I think carrot cake with cream cheese icing is best.



No seriously, stick with the high bitrate VBR MP3 format. Most universal to accommodate a variety of DAPs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top