[Vitaly2017]

roufly 2 days here with iem and high gain at 45, Wavs and DSD all the way

 

[aceedburn]

roufly 2 days here with iem and high gain at 45, Wavs and DSD all the way

2 days? You can’t be serious bro.

 

[Vitaly2017]

This is crazy there is major flooding in Japan that happend yesterday, I dont know how that will affect future sony products now. World nature is going wild

 

[Vitaly2017]

2 days? You can’t be serious bro.

Well I didnt count my hours lol it just holds approximately 2 days with my listening use

 

[mwhals]

I will have to be happy with FLAC. I do not want to spend days of my life again rescanning for WAV. I am spending days now rescanning my album art to get a high res PNG image and a 1000x1000 jpg image. In the future if I want a 1500x1500 jpg image, I just have to use an image converter and convert all my high res PNG to the new jpg size. It is similar to being able to make a copy of another music format from my existing FLAC files with a converter.

I do not think it gives me any sonic benefit converting my FLAC files to WAV. Correct? It would need to be scanned initially as WAV for the best audio. I may do it one day, but not today. I think burning does not take as long as the album art. It is time consuming scanning, fixes blemished, resizing to 2500x2500, saving as PNG, resizing to 1000x1000, saving as JPG and embedding JPG into the album files. Burning the audio in dbpoweramp and dragging the art to it would be much faster especially since I can burn two or three at the same time.'

I think I will rip one CD I know and love, Dire Straights Brothers in Arms, to WAV and do a comparison with my FLAC copy. If I hear nothing different, I will not worry about it. If I do, then I might as well rerip them since I am already doing albums.

 

[Gamerlingual]

I will have to be happy with FLAC. I do not want to spend days of my life again rescanning for WAV. I am spending days now rescanning my album art to get a high res PNG image and a 1000x1000 jpg image. In the future if I want a 1500x1500 jpg image, I just have to use an image converter and convert all my high res PNG to the new jpg size. It is similar to being able to make a copy of another music format from my existing FLAC files with a converter.

I do not think it gives me any sonic benefit converting my FLAC files to WAV. Correct? It would need to be scanned initially as WAV for the best audio. I may do it one day, but not today. I think burning does not take as long as the album art. It is time consuming scanning, fixes blemished, resizing to 2500x2500, saving as PNG, resizing to 1000x1000, saving as JPG and embedding JPG into the album files. Burning the audio in dbpoweramp and dragging the art to it would be much faster especially since I can burn two or three at the same time.'

I think I will rip one CD I know and love, Dire Straights Brothers in Arms, to WAV and do a comparison with my FLAC copy. If I hear nothing different, I will not worry about it. If I do, then I might as well rerip them since I am already doing albums.

I keep hearing great things about DB power amp. Just wish it’s price wasn’t $100

 

[Vitaly2017]

I will have to be happy with FLAC. I do not want to spend days of my life again rescanning for WAV. I am spending days now rescanning my album art to get a high res PNG image and a 1000x1000 jpg image. In the future if I want a 1500x1500 jpg image, I just have to use an image converter and convert all my high res PNG to the new jpg size. It is similar to being able to make a copy of another music format from my existing FLAC files with a converter.

I do not think it gives me any sonic benefit converting my FLAC files to WAV. Correct? It would need to be scanned initially as WAV for the best audio. I may do it one day, but not today. I think burning does not take as long as the album art. It is time consuming scanning, fixes blemished, resizing to 2500x2500, saving as PNG, resizing to 1000x1000, saving as JPG and embedding JPG into the album files. Burning the audio in dbpoweramp and dragging the art to it would be much faster especially since I can burn two or three at the same time.'

I think I will rip one CD I know and love, Dire Straights Brothers in Arms, to WAV and do a comparison with my FLAC copy. If I hear nothing different, I will not worry about it. If I do, then I might as well rerip them since I am already doing albums.

In my tests I did when comparing flac vs wav. I head the most biggest difference was in pc system. But when comparing on wm1z It was really really hard to spot any difference between flac and wav honestly. They sounded very similar.

I bought all my audio library already in native wav, so this is why I keep my trend and stay in wave realm.

When converting flac into wav I think it preserves the wav original data and simply unpacks it as a zip fil...
I would say stay with flac if space is crucial, but go wav for maximum benefits. To me flacs can be slightly more aggressive and harshy in comparison to wav in the long run listening sessions.
24/44.1 flacs are much much better in sound then 16/44.1 and sounds much closer to a wav feeling. Then converting cd into a 24bit... It might simply smooth down the frequencies curve and sound slightly less edgier but still being limited to the 16/44 quality...

 

[nc8000]

I will have to be happy with FLAC. I do not want to spend days of my life again rescanning for WAV. I am spending days now rescanning my album art to get a high res PNG image and a 1000x1000 jpg image. In the future if I want a 1500x1500 jpg image, I just have to use an image converter and convert all my high res PNG to the new jpg size. It is similar to being able to make a copy of another music format from my existing FLAC files with a converter.

I do not think it gives me any sonic benefit converting my FLAC files to WAV. Correct? It would need to be scanned initially as WAV for the best audio. I may do it one day, but not today. I think burning does not take as long as the album art. It is time consuming scanning, fixes blemished, resizing to 2500x2500, saving as PNG, resizing to 1000x1000, saving as JPG and embedding JPG into the album files. Burning the audio in dbpoweramp and dragging the art to it would be much faster especially since I can burn two or three at the same time.'

I think I will rip one CD I know and love, Dire Straights Brothers in Arms, to WAV and do a comparison with my FLAC copy. If I hear nothing different, I will not worry about it. If I do, then I might as well rerip them since I am already doing albums.

Both flac and wav are lossless so you can always transcode between them without any loss. With wav you loose tags. Some people seem to be able to hear a difference between the formats, I can’t so go for flac for convenience and space saving. All my album art is 300x300 wich is fine for me

 

[nc8000]

Thanks to everyone for sharing your thoughts... It's clear that the 30 to 40 hours could only reached with perfect conditions (direct mode, all sound options are off). But good to know that my player is still in average.

And low bit rate mp3.

I never turn my player off and get about 20 hours play plus a weeks stand by on a 90% charge with no dsp and flac 16/44.

 

[mungster]

And low bit rate mp3.

I never turn my player off and get about 20 hours play plus a weeks stand by on a 90% charge with no dsp and flac 16/44.

I think wav is the next best thing to dsd. I would go dsd all the way but not much titles in dsd.

 

[Vitaly2017]

I think wav is the next best thing to dsd. I would go dsd all the way but not much titles in dsd.

Sony play dsd really beautifully it is on a different level! here is an image what happens and why we should all use dsd only but its not very practical as it eats huge space amounts!
Dsd from my findings, sounds the best as it has the best sound of a vinyl and the best dynamics of a high resolution recordings.

 

[mungster]

Sony play dsd really beautifully it is on a different level! here is an image what happens and why we should all use dsd only but its not very practical as it eats huge space amounts!
Dsd from my findings, sounds the best as it has the best sound of a vinyl and the best dynamics of a high resolution recordings.

I just store all my dsd music on my 10tb hard drive and transfer only the song i want on my 1tb wm1z or lpgt. You can always make copues of flac and wav from dsd, dsd is best quality.

 

[nanaholic]

Both flac and wav are lossless so you can always transcode between them without any loss. With wav you loose tags. Some people seem to be able to hear a difference between the formats, I can’t so go for flac for convenience and space saving. All my album art is 300x300 wich is fine for me

Small correction - wav is uncompressed PCM while flac is lossless compressed PCM, this is supposedly where people hear the difference.
While it's true you cannot embed art work for wav files, Wav tag is now supported by the Walkmans but it's kind of hit and miss especially regarding double-byte characters.

 

[minzink]

I think wav is the next best thing to dsd. I would go dsd all the way but not much titles in dsd.

Well, forget to mention that I used a random playlist, approx 60% FLAC 44.1/16 files, very few high res and the rest is 320 kbits MP3, maybe a few with lower bitrate. Sound settings an file quality seems to be more important to battery as I I supposed before. Once again thank you to all for the helpful input.

 

[Ravenous]

Desktop listening session in progress. Bliss!

I keep hearing great things about DB power amp. Just wish it’s price wasn’t $100

Or you could simply use a program like Foobar and download the free encoder pack to convert to WAV. All free.