I had an eloquent post ready until my computer froze near the end. So I'll quickly re-sum up what I had written:
- I think all my flash drives are utterly on the cheap end. I never cared for flash drives as a music tool until recently. At this point, I don't need constant ABing to hear difference in flash drives vs. hard drives having put high mileage on both. It's obvious all the time, although both are very much enjoyable.
- It's a waste of time describing the full difference I hear in sound between the two, but the main are as following: cleaner transients and what appear to be more detail on the flash drives. Everything is tighter sounding. However, the hard drive is more relaxed and without the edge/glare. Now I haven't been able to nail down if what I'm perceiving as non-glare on the HD is simply loss of detail. This is where having the incoming Jitterbug is going to be helpful in revealing any noise/jitter issues. Additionally, having a top drive the Corsair would have further helped.
- Regarding storage mediums, I found a lot more useful info on ComputerAudiophile. A lot of people seem to absolutely love their SD cards. Apparently the best in shootout for a few.
- FLAC vs. WAV vs. AIFF ---> I found far more info and experience that mirrored mine on the BDP-1 on the Naim forums using their own dedicated players. Lots of good info there about noise ripples and patterns, clock destabilization, jitter, closed system intermodulation, inherent architecture preference for little endian and WAV in particular. I don't know how much of it applies to the BDP's, but it definitely mirrors my experience. A lot more crazy folks there, who apparently know what they are talking about.
I think FLAC vs. WAV is something easier for people to swallow, however, WAV vs. AIFF/AIFF-C is something even too crazy among the crazies for a discussion given that they are both uncompressed and only vary in order of data. Surprisingly, I did come across people working on this at Naim forums and others that apparently think there might be a difference in the noise and ripple pattern even between WAV and AIFF.
This is where I'm personally at from my testing at this moment in time:
FLAC vs. WAV - I think when people that haven't put a lot of time testing these both, go and do A/B comparisons (especially in shorter time intervals) they might actually prefer FLAC because its more intimate and appears more detailed and crisp on the vocals, whereas WAV is more open sounding and dynamic. WAV is more 3D sounding. It becomes apparent after some time. It's a non-issue for me as I have my library replicated in both FLAC and WAV (with tagging).
AIFF vs. WAV - Doing testing between these two actually kind of helped me figure out why I liked WAV over FLAC/ALAC. Because for all intents and purposes, I genuinely found WAV and AIFF to have the exact level of detail and soundstage and dynamics....BUT....it was only after reading a comment from someone else on a Naim forum that tested these two extensively that one particular word clicked in all of a sudden that helped explain what I was FEELING RATHER THAN HEARING over the last year and a half. That WORD IS FLUID.
This is why I think when people discuss doing A/B sessions they should first consider if they have actually put mileage testing both formats for a week period getting used to the sound of each format. Next, when it comes to doing the actual A/B tests, the time interval is actually super important. The more nuanced the detail, the more time you'll need to both feel it and hear it.
For example, if there is a massive change in soundstage, you might only need 5-10 seconds to tell that the soundstage has shrunk or grown. It's very much a hearing thing. But for something like very subtle noise patterns that might have equal bearing on the overall feeling and hearing as it relates to the music being FLUID, it takes a lot of time to fully figure it out. I still don't know what measurable parameters exactly influence this fluidity component. The difference was explained in the difference in the pattern of noise created. Who knows.
I'm still not certain myself on WAV vs. AIFF at this time, but adding fluidity as a component really helps in figuring out which file format I prefer in the long term. This actually mirrors what I had been saying all along. WAV wins each time when you play an album front to back without stopping because it FEELS LIKE MUSIC. There is a swing and uninterrupted quality about it that FLAC doesn't have, along with compressed soundstage and more top end detail...but perhaps a tiny bit more fluidity over AIFF as well. Again, the jury is still out on AIFF vs. WAV for me. If there is actually a difference, I hypothesize it's going to be near impossible in hearing it, before one can first feel it. Listen with your body.
