[mikemalter]

Quote:

Congrats Peter! We're talking about the WA22 and not the LCD-2, yes?
 
 
 
Mike, are you using M-Pod? What control device are you using with the BDP-1?
 
Also is there added functionality when using it with the Bryston DAC compared to the W4S?
 
I would definitely stay away from WAV, as the tag files you are generating for the BDP-1 may not be what you want if you migrate to a different playback device. Genuine tagging would be better for avoiding potential problems in the future when converting to different formats/devices/applications.

With the BDP-1 I'm using the mPod, the built-in web page on the BDP-1 and Gnome.
 
There is no additional functionality when using the BDP-1 with the BDA-1.  One thing though that is being brought forward as a benefit is that both units are impedence matched.  I am not sure what that means, or what it brings to the party, but that is what is being said.
 
On the topic of the DAC, the Bryston DAC is very smooth and I have less hours on it than the W4S.  I have 100 hours on the W4S and it is sounding very harsh right now.  The Bryston is sounding very smooth and the bass has finally fleshed out (it was very thin before).  I am surprised actually by the Bryston as previously I did not think much of them - not because of any technical knowledge, just never was in their marketing profile and nobody on any board I ever hung out on ever said anything about them.  So far its the Bryston DAC by a neck, but we are only up to 100 hours and no decision will be final until after the 200 hour mark.
 
Regarding FLAC, if I understand you correctly, a FLAC media library is more flexible than a WAV media library because it can store tags in the file?  I am looking for the most practical way to do this and am not married to anything.  So far in my listening tests, FLAC and WAV sound similiar, so now it is a matter of logistics. 
 
I am very interested if anybody has any "case-in-point" stories to tell.
 
Thanks.
 
 

 

[mikemalter]

Quote:

My WA22 arrived today....very impressed with it so far with my LCD-2s. I immediately popped in my NOS Tung-Sol 7236s (but I'm using the stock driver and rectifier tubes....for now anyway

). I am really digging the combination about 30 minutes in. Dave (davo50) mentioned that he pretty much burned it in over the past 3 months.

I plan on writing a comparative review (quick one though as between work and my 2 young kids, finding time is not easy). I plan to compare my LCD-2s, HD800s and T1s (in that order) using both the WA22 (tubes mentioned above) and my (or should I say Sophonax's WA2) with Tung-Sol 5998s, Mullard CV2492s and Mullard EZ80s.

One thing I can definitely say at this range, the law of diminished returns is certainly kicking in.....but there still are some improvements (mostly subtle).

Have fun, you are going to love it!

 
 

 

[bergnerm]

I'll definitely look forward to this review...
 
Quote:

My WA22 arrived today....very impressed with it so far with my LCD-2s. I immediately popped in my NOS Tung-Sol 7236s (but I'm using the stock driver and rectifier tubes....for now anyway

). I am really digging the combination about 30 minutes in. Dave (davo50) mentioned that he pretty much burned it in over the past 3 months.

I plan on writing a comparative review (quick one though as between work and my 2 young kids, finding time is not easy). I plan to compare my LCD-2s, HD800s and T1s (in that order) using both the WA22 (tubes mentioned above) and my (or should I say Sophonax's WA2) with Tung-Sol 5998s, Mullard CV2492s and Mullard EZ80s.

One thing I can definitely say at this range, the law of diminished returns is certainly kicking in.....but there still are some improvements (mostly subtle).

 

 

[BrucYSN]

It's not fair to use the stock tubes.... They make the biggest difference and you u need the balanced input on WA22 otherwise it's a waste 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

With the BDP-1 I'm using the mPod, the built-in web page on the BDP-1 and Gnome.
 
snip
 
Regarding FLAC, if I understand you correctly, a FLAC media library is more flexible than a WAV media library because it can store tags in the file?  I am looking for the most practical way to do this and am not married to anything.  So far in my listening tests, FLAC and WAV sound similiar, so now it is a matter of logistics.

 
If there was ever a reason to buy an iPad I would think that your BDP-1 would be it:
 

 
What a killer wireless remote.
 
I would consider AIFF as well as FLAC for archiving if I was you, but that's just me.

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

 
 
If there was ever a reason to buy an iPad I would think that your BDP-1 would be it:
 

 
What a killer wireless remote.
 
I would consider AIFF as well as FLAC for archiving if I was you, but that's just me.

That screen shot looks so good, I was tempted to "click & scroll"... think I'll try it anyway!
 

My library from 2008-2010 was dominated by ALAC, with AIFF, FLAC & WAV coming in about 10% each. From 2010-2011 my library is balanced mostly between AIFF & ALAC (we're in transition). But FLAC & WAV still have their roles to play.
 

 

[mikemalter]

Quote:

That screen shot looks so good, I was tempted to "click & scroll"... think I'll try it anyway!
 

My library from 2008-2010 was dominated by ALAC, with AIFF, FLAC & WAV coming in about 10% each. From 2010-2011 my library is balanced mostly between AIFF & ALAC (we're in transition). But FLAC & WAV still have their roles to play.
 

Your're AIFF and ALAC because you're on a Mac, right?
 
 

 

[mikemalter]

 
Quote:

 
 
If there was ever a reason to buy an iPad I would think that your BDP-1 would be it:
 

 
What a killer wireless remote.
 
I would consider AIFF as well as FLAC for archiving if I was you, but that's just me.

You are a BAD man, Grokit

.  Actually, an iPad is in my future, but really way down the road.  It does look purdy though.
 
Right now it's between FLAC & WAV.  I'm learning about what tags are and what their value brings and how each format stores tags and how other applications relate to the formats' storage.  Basically, I'm looking for a good reason to get talked out of WAV which is my default because it has more information and that's just me.  However, as I learn more, tagging seems to be important down the road, and since sonically FLAC = WAV, the more flexible format seems the way to go.
 
 

 

[BrucYSN]

uh.... I give up on ripping long ago....

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

Your're AIFF and ALAC because you're on a Mac, right?
 
 

Aren't all CD's AIFF format?
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

Your're AIFF and ALAC because you're on a Mac, right?

 
I am using ALAC because I am on a Mac, but it works fine in Windows as well. The only thing that trips me up is the different HDD formats for the two platforms. I was going to go with AIFF for ultimate re-archiving on a Windows platform but that project got pushed to the back burner.
 

Quote:

You are a BAD man, Grokit 

.  Actually, an iPad is in my future, but really way down the road.  It does look purdy though.
 
Right now it's between FLAC & WAV.  I'm learning about what tags are and what their value brings and how each format stores tags and how other applications relate to the formats' storage.  Basically, I'm looking for a good reason to get talked out of WAV which is my default because it has more information and that's just me.  However, as I learn more, tagging seems to be important down the road, and since sonically FLAC = WAV, the more flexible format seems the way to go.

 
Heh, you are right but I've been called worse. I would say that sonically AIFF = WAV, and FLAC = ALAC. The differences are minute depending on other factors but they are there.

 

[mikemalter]

Quote:

Aren't all CD's AIFF format?
 

I don't know.  What are you thinking?
 
 

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

Your're AIFF and ALAC because you're on a Mac, right?
 
 

Initially with iTunes (the iPods; iTouch & iPhone) on Windows. However, since smelling the tea leaves & drinking the kool-aid inside Apple's Walled-Garden, I rarely take the Windows rig down the street anymore...  

 

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

Aren't all CD's AIFF format?
 

 

No. All CD's are 16-bit PCM files. Correction: What is CD-A?
CD-A (Compact Disc Audio) is the format to which domestic and commercial CD players adhere. When you create a music CD on a computer it is burnt in the CD-A format. All music purchased from a music store on CD is in the CD-A format.

This is the standard Audio CD format and is used by all manufacturers of hi-fi, CD, Discman etc. Almost all CD burning software supports this format enabling anyone with a modern computer to create Audio CD's.

By default Audio CD's can hold 74 minutes of audio regardless of sound quality. All music on an audio CD is created as CD quality 44.1KHz, 16-Bit, Stereo. File size of CD-A compares to that of other uncompressed formats such as WAV and AIFF.
 

 

[Eee Pee]

Yes, PCM.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_pulse_code_modulation
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-code_modulation
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_disc