netchord wrote: 
> on my system, AIF sounds better.

Better than wav?

I must confess that tagged wav or aiff files sound much worse than
tagged flac or Apple lossless files. There is what sounds to me like a
typewriter in the background. Please note that it is very faint and only
someone with highly trained golden ears can hear it but nonetheless it
is there and once one hears it the music becomes completely
unlistenable.

Here are my golden eared audiophile rankings for the various digital
audio file and tagging combos:

1) Untagged wav or aiff - simply the best!

2) Untagged flac or Apple lossless - substantially worse than untagged
wav/aiff but almost listenable.

3) Tagged flac or Apple lossless - boarding on painful and only passable
as background music

4) Untagged 320 mp3 - why bother?

5) Tagged 320 mp3 - for kids only

6) Tagged wav or aiff - completely useless

As unbelievable as it may appear, even high bit rate mp3 sounds way, way
better than taqgged wav or aiff. :) ;)



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104227

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to