[zoom25]

From my perspective, the only thing that matters is whether SQ is degraded if CPU usage increases during the "unpacking" of FLAC.

To my ears, and in my system's BDP-1/BDA-1, the answer is no, for both 44/16 and 96/24.

So I use FLAC -- takes up less memory on my drives.

Yeah, that's what I used to think as well. Now I think the reality might be more complicated and that the results could differ based on the specs of the machine. I remember reading that the kind of noise FLAC created was more broadband, asymmetric and stable, whereas WAV had peaks or something like that. This can apparently create different patterns of jitter or noise. In Audirvana Plus, I can visually confirm that WAV decoding is near instantaneous. FLAC is just a little behind. Although, the I/O of WAV might be something to consider.

I have been doing more blind listening tests on the Mac (Audirvana Plus) and the BDP-1 and it's been eye-opening. I've also been observing how the CPU responds when seeking tracks quickly or changing tracks in both WAV and FLAC and how that impacts the next few seconds. This of course becomes important if you're jumping back and forth between FLAC and WAV in short intervals. For long uninterrupted playback, both formats seem to be stable in CPU load. This is on the BDP-1.

I have asked this type of question before from a personal standpoint. This time it was more from an academic standpoint. The blind listening tests have also been providing another important dimension in how the system sounds when playing uninterrupted. So just a typical Saturday.

EDIT: Also, I wonder if the DAC has any effect in this at all.

[CanadianMaestro]

^ The BDA-1 has, as far as practicality goes, nearly zero jitter. The human auditory threshold for detecting jitter is around 2000 ns or so (theoretically not real-world listening conds), not even close to the picoseconds as spec'ed in the BDA-1. So, I wouldn't worry.

Take a Valium and enjoy the music, my Friend....FLAC or WAV.   

[zoom25]

In the last 3 days of blind testing, I definitely improved. Yesterday I was close to 100% on Audirvana Plus. It's easier to do it there rather than running on BDP-1. Although, the results hold up there as well. I kinda figured out why I was off in the first day of blind testing. It was actually because in some tracks I preferred the FLAC over the WAV, but in others it was WAV.

The other thing I did was record which tracks I got wrong in blind testing. If the assumption was that the better sounding track was WAV each time, then you should get WAV each time. After a few trials, I noticed the ones that I got right were always the same ones, and the ones that I got wrong was also consistent. The bottom line of the first line was that I was actually not getting right and wrong all over the place. My preference for each track remained relatively same.

For myself, I have found the differences in how FLAC sounds against WAV. As of now, this change in sound actually holds up across all music. It took awhile to get there and blind testing forces you to learn new things.

WAV - The vocals and music sounds bigger and more 3D. The bass also has more bloom.

FLAC - Sounds more accurate and controlled from top to bottom.

They both sound great on my system, different, but still great. Haven't made up my mind on which version I like more or which is actually the more accurate. Perhaps a CD player.

[Phil]

Can't see the music folders after updating to S2.32 and MDP 0.19.2.  The "playlist" is visible as is a folder.  There is an additional folder that doesn't seem to open, just indicates "loading," but nothing happens. 

Went to "settings" icon and checked off "show hidden folders."  The music folders now appear in red but cannot be accessed.

I checked the manual but didn't find a solution.

Thanks for any suggestions. 

 

[James Tanner]

^ The BDA-1 has, as far as practicality goes, nearly zero jitter. The human auditory threshold for detecting jitter is around 2000 ns or so (theoretically not real-world listening conds), not even close to the picoseconds as spec'ed in the BDA-1. So, I wouldn't worry.

Take a Valium and enjoy the music, my Friend....FLAC or WAV.   

I believe its 200 NS

james

[CanadianMaestro]

I believe its 200 NS

james

I stand corrected. Even smaller. Still thousand-fold higher than the picoseconds jitter of BDA-x.   

[CanadianMaestro]

WAV - The vocals and music sounds bigger and more 3D. The bass also has more bloom.

FLAC - Sounds more accurate and controlled from top to bottom.

They both sound great on my system, different, but still great. Haven't made up my mind on which version I like more or which is actually the more accurate. Perhaps a CD player.

Interesting observations. Both are lossless, so you should be able to convert WAV into FLAC and keep both for your fav tracks. Mood dependent listening. Seems like FLAC is more neutral and transparent. Solid state.

WAV may appeal more to the tube fans.

Cheers

[zoom25]

Interesting observations. Both are lossless, so you should be able to convert WAV into FLAC and keep both for your fav tracks. Mood dependent listening. Seems like FLAC is more neutral and transparent. Solid state.

WAV may appeal more to the tube fans.

Cheers

Yeah, all my albums that I have collected and ripped are in FLAC. That's considered my archive/backup as it takes up less space and has metadata that works on all systems. WAV also holds all this info and appears identical as FLAC on Audirvana Plus for example. I also use FLAC for playback depending on which floor that particular drive ends up. The WAV thing was something that I had given a shot about a year back because of my experiences in the past. So I have copies of both. Batch conversion on a fast computer takes few minutes for a 100+ albums. A whole album in about 5-10 seconds top.

Disclaimer: For the people reading along, all my conversion includes check, so all copies are identical. There are some people that believe files get worse after conversion or repeated conversion. I believe in no such thing. I have done null tests and they always match. All lossless formats are identical in what they store.

It's only in playback where I have found differences. To eliminate this problem, I use memory playback systems, but for some reason it's still there. I have done blind tests to eliminate chances of placebo or any biases. It genuinely becomes noticeable after a few hours/days of testing. A learning curve, just as with anything.

Going back to listening preferences, to others that may want to try this, I would suggest consuming entire albums in just one format for an extended period of time. When you switch over to the FLAC versions, you might feel a difference in the presence. I think in blind ABX comparisons, most people might actually end up picking FLAC as it comes off crisper and thus detailed. Although, WAV might come out on top in long listening sessions. There's something about the sound that makes it sound like WAV is completely unrestricted and not holding back. FLAC sounds like it's more polite and reserved while polished.

Perhaps: FLAC for micro, WAV for macro.

CM, Going by your habits, I think WAV will do you some good 

[zoom25]

Yeah, all my albums that I have collected and ripped are in FLAC. That's considered my archive/backup as it takes up less space and has metadata that works on all systems. WAV also holds all this info and appears identical as FLAC on Audirvana Plus for example. I also use FLAC for playback depending on which floor that particular drive ends up. The WAV thing was something that I had given a shot about a year back because of my experiences in the past. So I have copies of both. Batch conversion on a fast computer takes few minutes for a 100+ albums. A whole album in about 5-10 seconds top.

Disclaimer: For the people reading along, all my conversion includes check, so all copies are identical. There are some people that believe files get worse after conversion or repeated conversion. I believe in no such thing. I have done null tests and they always match. All lossless formats are identical in what they store.

It's only in playback where I have found differences. To eliminate this problem, I use memory playback systems, but for some reason it's still there. I have done blind tests to eliminate chances of placebo or any biases. It genuinely becomes noticeable after a few hours/days of testing. A learning curve, just as with anything.

Going back to listening preferences, to others that may want to try this, I would suggest consuming entire albums in just one format for an extended period of time. When you switch over to the FLAC versions, you might feel a difference in the presence. I think in blind ABX comparisons, most people might actually end up picking FLAC as it comes off crisper and thus detailed. Although, WAV might come out on top in long listening sessions. There's something about the sound that makes it sound like WAV is completely unrestricted and not holding back. FLAC sounds like it's more polite and reserved while polished.

Perhaps: FLAC for micro, WAV for macro.

CM, Going by your habits, I think WAV will do you some good. A solid week or two of WAV. 

[CanadianMaestro]

I'm a detail, micro freak. So FLAC.   

[dznutz]

NVM, got it working

simple format issue

[unincognito]

Can't see the music folders after updating to S2.32 and MDP 0.19.2.  The "playlist" is visible as is a folder.  There is an additional folder that doesn't seem to open, just indicates "loading," but nothing happens. 

Went to "settings" icon and checked off "show hidden folders."  The music folders now appear in red but cannot be accessed.

I checked the manual but didn't find a solution.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Have you tried updating the database yet?

[Phil]

Have you tried updating the database yet?

Thanks, Chris.  Eventually, yes, and the updating worked (I had assumed that rebooting the device would start an update and did that a few times). 

The update did take a very long time (seemed to not be working at first).

Thanks for continuing to fit the code into the BDP-1.  Where is the best place to get information on the new features? 

[unincognito]

The readme file that appears before installing firmware updates

[mikemalter]

Thanks, Chris.  Eventually, yes, and the updating worked (I had assumed that rebooting the device would start an update and did that a few times). 

The update did take a very long time (seemed to not be working at first).

Thanks for continuing to fit the code into the BDP-1.  Where is the best place to get information on the new features?

Chris,

Yes, thank you very much for continuing to fit updates into the BDP-1.

Mike

[Hoiman]

I have a BDP-1 till the new BDP-3 is here (yes good service from the importer), but I have a lot of music and I just reordered the HDD. Now the player doesn't work anymore and the text UPDATE is blue. Do I have to wait with playing till this text isn't blue anymore? I can play but after a few minutes the whle player doesn't do anything anymore. I just reboot the machine but still doesn't load all the directories of the HDD.

[James Tanner]

I have a BDP-1 till the new BDP-3 is here (yes good service from the importer), but I have a lot of music and I just reordered the HDD. Now the player doesn't work anymore and the text UPDATE is blue. Do I have to wait with playing till this text isn't blue anymore? I can play but after a few minutes the whle player doesn't do anything anymore. I just reboot the machine but still doesn't load all the directories of the HDD.

Hi

Yes wait till it fully updates and the light goes off.

james

[Hoiman]

Yes wait till it fully updates and the light goes off.

You mean the text "UPDATE" has to be white again? It's also normal that this takes more then 30 minutes for 1TB of data on a 2TB HDD?

[James Tanner]

You mean the text "UPDATE" has to be white again? It's also normal that this takes more then 30 minutes for 1TB of data on a 2TB HDD?

The BDP-1 is very slow.

james

[Hoiman]

Thanks for your quick reply.