I saw your comment, and I think you read the post correctly. It wasn’t saying “differences are impossible,” just that any difference would mean the system isn’t operating cleanly. A renderer with limited processing capacity can absolutely show strain when unpacking FLAC — extra CPU load, timing variance, or noise that leaks into the DAC. That’s a system behaviour, not a sonic advantage of WAV.
A setup that’s not quite dialed in — or just running a little short on processing headroom — can behave differently when it’s dealing with FLAC. That’s usually what people end up hearing, not anything in the file itself. Both formats decode to the same PCM, so if there’s a difference, it’s really just the system reacting to the extra work FLAC needs, not WAV having anything special going on.
Yes indeed my Melco’s are full already with both 10TB of space, so working with connected drives which is not ideal. At some time I might switch to a Musicserver with 30+TB of capacity to deal with it. I store everything in Flac and transfer on the fly before it arrives at my ND555….
Very interesting to read that if FLAC and WAV sound different the cause is the playback chain rather than file itself.
Very well I’ll put this to the test as I will be home demoing the SW1X VDT IV. I’ll rip both FLAC and WAV onto the internal storage drive and see if there is a difference.
If this device shows an audible difference then I’ll forever be convinced that there is a difference in the file as the VDTs by SW1X are a game changer in digital audio.
This is part of the problem. People can’t or don’t want to get their head around why there are differences so then insist that they are going to believe it therefore has to be a difference in the data.
The only way I can try and show this visually is to take your quote above and run it through a quick script that changes a random bit in a random character in every 10 to a ‘1’. If we are to believe that ripping/sending digital data is prone to lots of errors thereby justifying better equipment, then this isn’t a completely ridiculous thing to do… your quote becomes…
If tiis device {hows an audib?e difverence then I’ll ?orever be convincgd that there ms a difference in t?e file as the VDTs b} SW1X are a ga?e changer in digital(audion
It doesn’t produce a slightly fuzzy version of your quote that can be sharpened by a filter to bring it back to perfection, it contains completely different characters. You might contend that is part of the beauty of digital. Errors don’t just make the bass slightly muddy, or hide a delicate cymbal, it provides pretty obvious glitches like a Max Headroom video.
For ‘subtle’, coherent changes in sound to occur it has to be influencing the analogue bit, namely the DAC stage through unwanted interference/noise which impairs that critical process. As others have said, nearly all the digital fiddling that takes place is aimed at reducing digital noise by either isolation at the network, or between key stages such as the renderer and the DAC.
This is not saying any difference you hear is not real, it’s simply saying the difference is something other than the data. Different processing paths generate different digital noise, so even though the data spat out of the two files towards the DAC is the same, the processing effort and path used to produce that data stream most definitely is not.
(E.g. It would be interesting if they guarantee absolutely to be unaffected by any noise superimposed on the digital datastream, nor to pass noise to anything downstream, and, if those devices do the unpacking of any digital files, if they guarantee not to produce noise or suffer timing degradation whilst so doing, whatever the file size…)
I realise my reply was rather vague. I’ve been using computer audio as a source for many years. I have tried some streamers but they sounded lifeless compared to my audio server setup. This was until of course I tried the VDT 2 by SW1X last year. I’ve kept my mouth shut about it because I wanted to get a level 4/5 unit at home before I express my impressions of the device/s.
VDT (Valve Digital Transport) by SW1X is the most unique digital source I can think of in its pursuit of the purest signal. Unique in the sense that they employ valves in the stages of a digital transport device. The further up the ladder you go the more tubes you get and a more hearty power supply.
The device has internal storage with a very simple layout optimised for local playback above all else.
Therefore, I think if this device shows a difference between FLAC and WAV with as little influence from any other components, I’ll draw the conclusion that the files indeed do sound different. Evidently caused by the unpacking of the FLAC file but if there are countless examples of this effect then that’s a definitive conclusion IMO.
As of now I can concede that my 2013 and 2016 MacBooks don’t have the processing power or are generating noise in the unpackaging of the FLAC file.
I’ll leave you guys with a photo. I picked it up yesterday. So excited.
I mean one would think so right but in an attempt to keep a reasoned debate going, I’ll concede to that. I mean something is causing the FLAC to sound different it’s possible its the CPU, RAM along with the noisy environment of a device that’s not created for hifi.
-my chain of playback. MacBook 2013 and 2015, I have a 2025 Pro too which I cannot use as I don’t have a USB C to B cable. Audirvāna playback software, Furutech GT2 USB cable to Abbas DDC and then onto my SW1X DAC III Balanced Special.
Please bear in mind the Abbas DDC is an extraordinary device which has a tube master clock. When I compared this with my previous reference DDC, the Berkeley Audio Alpha USB it bettered that device on all fronts and by a margin.
There’s no need to think so. FLAC was designed to be easy to uncompress as it was known that you would not have a full computer in the playback device, and when it was designed processing power was many orders of magnitude less than now. Even a 2013 MacBook with an Intel processor can easily decode and display full HD video. This takes a lot more processing power than audio. The 2025 model will barely register any CPU usage decoding FLAC. I have an M2 Macbook and the speed it edits photos with and encodes video is just bonkers.
I would hope, given that your DAC is separate, that you would not notice any difference in file formats for the same source as all those valves should be giving you a lovely clean supply in the transport. Look forward to hearing your results.
Don’t say that. I’ve just spent 4k on my 2025 MacBook Pro. It did very well on a benchmark test beating my brother in laws desktop computer
… I just did a search of the device you’ve recommended. Sorry I thought you were recommending a performance laptop. I think you may have missed my previous message. I’m very much invested in the idea of the tube source component. SW1X VDT IV. I have one on home demo.
I believe it’s a transport but you can stream via Plug and play. Don’t quote me on that as I don’t know everything about that device yet. I haven’t had the time to even listen to it yet, let alone explore its features.
Different processing paths generate different digital noise, so even though the data spat out of the two files towards the DAC is the same, the processing effort and path used to produce that data stream most definitely is not.