Why no interest in reel to reel if you're looking for the ultimate sound?

At last, an authority! Two in a row! 🤗 Someone even thinks this is a religious argument. What next, controlled double blind testing? 😩

WAV is no higher resolution than FLAC, Apple Lossless, or any other truly lossless format.

BTW, I use WAV which is the highest resolution and no longer available for HD down-loads.

You can speak with authority on your setup for recording and ADC, and on your DAC and how that sounds. If you recorded a tape of a tape, there would be detectable differences as well.

Since I down-load my reel to hardrive for playback, I think I can speak to the difference between the two with authority.

My golden ears told me that WAV is better than FLAC when I compared the two HD down-loads; now I no longer use HD down-loads because they only offer FLAC.

How brilliant of you to note that I can only speak with authority on my rig; you got anymore mind blowing observations left?

That's my lock-down sense of humor coming out.

Can you please tell it to go back in?

@geoffkait


You can measure all you want but there is one central truth:

Music (sound) is analog and by changing that signal to digital something is lost. Something is lost once again when you change it back to analog so your ears can understand it. This is part and parcel of Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is known as Entropy. It is immutable.

Additionally, when you sample a analog signal, by definition, there is some period of time when you are NOT sampling. This information is lost forever. Yes, if the sampling rate is high enough - and in Redbook CDs it is not even close -  you don't tend to notice these losses as obvious. The loss seems to be realized as a loss of "presence" or depth of soundstage or perhaps a certain "air", This is why vinyl has seen such a resurgence; it stays in the analog domain. Bench measurements have been shown over and over to be a distraction in audio. All that matters is your ears.