Best FLAC converter software

[sandyk]

6 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

Also: it seems to me that when I first experimented with the converting FLAC into WAV ten years or so ago, the difference was more noticeable. Since then, linear power supply units were added at all critical points, better quality cables, and NAA have been added to the audio system. Now there is practically no difference. Probably, it could be concluded that in this case the efforts in the field of hardware proved to be more effective.

Isn't that exactly what I have been saying ? 😉

 

Even then I was able to get a further very worthwhile improvement recently by improving the PC's internal earthing as per the suggestions in this thread.

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/60381-hdd-to-case-bonding-uptick-in-sq/?tab=comments#comment-1084599

 

[AnotherSpin]

37 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Isn't that exactly what I have been saying ? 😉

 

 

 

I believe you were exactly saying that converting FLAC files to WAV makes sense, if I understood correctly.

[sandyk]

48 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

I believe you were exactly saying that converting FLAC files to WAV makes sense, if I understood correctly.

I always convert .flac to.wav for serious listening, even with corrected and posted .flac files in John Dyson's PM group about feral Dolby-A encoded files.

 So why is it so inconceivable that the 2 banned posters were able to hear differences between .flac files converted to .wav using different types of S/W ?

 Each type of S/W would have it's own individual electrical noise profile that may not have been noticed if they had made further improvements to the PSU, cabling and earthing areas as you also appear to have done.

 

P.S.
 I also noted from the photos I saw from the OP that he had gone to a lot of trouble in the PSU area, although he may have made the common mistake of using too many low value parallel capacitors ,which could have had the effect of the output impedance of the PSU being considerably lower at 100kHz and higher, thus further accentuating any HF noise.

 

[fas42]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 I also noted from the photos I saw from the OP that he had gone to a lot of trouble in the PSU area, although he may have made the common mistake of using too many low value parallel capacitors ,which could have had the effect of the output impedance of the PSU being considerably lower at 100kHz and higher, thus further accentuating any HF noise.

 

 

Sorry, Alex, that doesn't make sense - the lower the impedance at a particular frequency, the less noise passes through, is how it works. For example, if you deliberately design a dreadful PS, with high impedance at 60Hz, then the system will have terrible mains hum issues.

[sandyk]

30 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Sorry, Alex, that doesn't make sense - the lower the impedance at a particular frequency, the less noise passes through, is how it works. For example, if you deliberately design a dreadful PS, with high impedance at 60Hz, then the system will have terrible mains hum issues.

No. That isn't how it works with Digital .You heard differences where one file had a lot more HF detail. Too much in fact, where there was also the appearance of lack of LF warmth, as well as extra HF noise that you could see in the Video version. In that case it used a PSU for the USB memory with a WAY lower output Z at >100KHZ

Alex Crespi also agrees that the PSU area should have as low and FLAT an output possible from almost D.C. to 1MHz.

If you also  check in the Music Server area you will find that many use the LT3045 voltage regulators to obtain increased HF detail. They have a MUCH lower output Z at >100kHz and even the manufacturer doesn't recommend them for  HiFi  use despite their VERY low noise. (Additional much higher value electros in parallel can help restore the overall tonal balance though 😉

)

If you want a demo of this I can send you a couple of YouTube Video examples with Tyros 3 - The Power of Love (Instrumental)

[fas42]

54 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Alex Crespi also agrees that the PSU area should have as low and FLAT an output possible from almost D.C. to 1MHz.

If you also  check in the Music Server area you will find that many use the LT3045 voltage regulators to obtain increased HF detail. They have a MUCH lower output Z at >100kHz and even the manufacturer doesn't recommend them for  HiFi  use despite their VERY low noise. (Additional much higher value electros in parallel can help restore the overall tonal balance though 😉

)

If you want a demo of this I can send you a couple of YouTube Video examples with Tyros 3 - The Power of Love (Instrumental)

 

Bit confusing here, Alex - for a PSU to not drop its voltage at 1Mhz, it must have a very low impedance at that frequency - otherwise, any current drawn at that frequency will drop voltage across the output stage.

 

The sound of a track is something that depends on a whole lot of things - IME, if one uses very high frequency devices, a lot more care is needed in the implementation  - one can't be as sloppy as one can get away with using less capable parts. So, the greater the potential, the more effort is needed to get it exactly right ...

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Bit confusing here, Alex - for a PSU to not drop its voltage at 1Mhz, it must have a very low impedance at that frequency - otherwise, any current drawn at that frequency will drop voltage across the output stage.

Frank

 We aren't talking here about low output impedances. We are talking about ULTRA low output impedances as compared with typical Analogue audio.

Say you had a little mains related hum from a PC's Linear PSU, not an SMPS PSU, and you were using a DAC via Coax SPDIF which was well implemented in the PC using an isolating SPDIF transformer, how is normal 100/120HZ hum going to get through this to be directly heard in the DAC as low level hum? 

 I will UL a couple of examples in the next few minutes for you via a PM.

 

Alex 

[manueljenkin]

Something I want to point out is that what we measure as output impedance is mostly relating to an abstract model of the transformer/equipment (a basic two port model). It acts as a good rule of thumb!

 

The reality could be a litte more complex and the two port model may not cover everything. The 60hz could be a resonance, the bump in oi at 60hz could just be another effect of the circuit causing this resonance, and not really the cause of this resonance.

[fas42]

Something I just came across, which may be of interest to some - "A comparative overview of power supply regulator designs with listening tests": https://linearaudio.nl/sites/linearaudio.net/files/v4 jdw.pdf

[sandyk]

41 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Something I just came across, which may be of interest to some - "A comparative overview of power supply regulator designs with listening tests": https://linearaudio.nl/sites/linearaudio.net/files/v4 jdw.pdf

I am using a Jung Regulator in my DIY DAC which was tweaked a little with several components in conjunction with Walt Jung and an E.E. friend of mine last year, who also supplied PCBs to Walt Jung for the tests.

We both provided feedback to Walt .

 

[fas42]

5 hours ago, sandyk said:

Frank

 We aren't talking here about low output impedances. We are talking about ULTRA low output impedances as compared with typical Analogue audio.

Say you had a little mains related hum from a PC's Linear PSU, not an SMPS PSU, and you were using a DAC via Coax SPDIF which was well implemented in the PC using an isolating SPDIF transformer, how is normal 100/120HZ hum going to get through this to be directly heard in the DAC as low level hum? 

 I will UL a couple of examples in the next few minutes for you via a PM.

 

Alex 

 

Well, Alex has done it again - those two files, mp4s, were loaded into Audacity, and output just using that software's playback function. One was clearly superior to the other, in terms of tonal qualities - it was unmistakable ... but when I tried comparing them, by inverting one and adding the other, I got a perfect null. Then used the command line utility "FC /B" to do an MS-DOS file comparison, byte by byte - and they matched ...

 

What's going on ... I'm certainly scratching my head ... 🙃

[AnotherSpin]

9 hours ago, sandyk said:

I always convert .flac to.wav for serious listening, even with corrected and posted .flac files in John Dyson's PM group about feral Dolby-A encoded files.

 So why is it so inconceivable that the 2 banned posters were able to hear differences between .flac files converted to .wav using different types of S/W ?

 

No doubt many people with ears can hear the difference between different types of files - that's exactly what I wrote already. The two posters were not banned for being able to hear the difference between files, as I believe. I only can guess what do you think they were banned for?

 

In my system and for my ears, there is a difference between a FLAC and a WAV, but it's not so crucial to go through converting routine each time. However, there are software solutions that have a greater impact on sound. For example, in my case it is the use of a virtual RAM disc.

[sandyk]

16 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

I only can guess what do you think they were banned for?

 

 They were banned due to provocation by a couple of members resulting in them considering this a hostile instead of welcoming forum, and reacted very badly . Yes, their reactions were OTT and completely unacceptable and left Chris with no other option.

 

 I must admit that I went very close to doing the same on several occasions, mainly due to provocation by Ralf11.

 

 If you are indeed able to hear differences between .flac and .wav then it should be very easy for you to hear the same differences that Frank reported about in his previous post ? 

[AnotherSpin]

14 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 They were banned due to provocation by a couple of members resulting in them considering this a hostile instead of welcoming forum, and reacted very badly . Yes, their reactions were OTT and completely unacceptable and left Chris with no other option.

 

 I must admit that I went very close to doing the same on several occasions, mainly due to provocation by Ralf11.

 

 If you are indeed able to hear differences between .flac and .wav then it should be very easy for you to hear the same differences that Frank reported about in his previous post ? 

 

You may want to re-read first couple of posts of OP before you start accusing someone of provocations. 

[AnotherSpin]

30 minutes ago, sandyk said:

They were banned due to provocation by a couple of members resulting in them considering this a hostile instead of welcoming forum

 

"In other words, nobody cares about superior WAV and everybody continues to listen to their inferior FLACs?

 

If that is indeed the case, then, it appears, that I'm in the wrong place with my questions. I erroneously thought that this was the forum where addicted-to-best audiophiles share, help and learn from each other..." 

 

Nothing in this post sounds to me as a request for discussion from someone who has written his first post on a long existing forum. Sorry. You may disagree, of course.

[sandyk]

 

If anybody is genuinely interested in checking out the files that Frank mentioned in his recent post, please send me a PM for the DL links

[manueljenkin]

On 11/5/2020 at 10:30 AM, cappo said:

If you take an album in FLAC (or APE) and convert it to WAV using 5 different converters you will find that all 5 newly created WAV-versions of your album sound different. What the heck is going on here? Why do they sound different!? There are many dozens of converters out there that can do the job. I don't have the time to go through them all to find the best for the job. So, the point of this thread is to cross-fertilize, collect member feedback and come up with a list of top-three converters out there.

So my question goes to all those addicted to best: what is your favorite FLAC-to-WAV converter?

This was the first post I guess (atleast what I'm seeing currently). Nothing about it seems hostile.

 

On the other hand the first few responses were sarcastic/hostile and not helpful to the discussion.

[manueljenkin]

On 11/7/2020 at 2:16 PM, AnotherSpin said:

I guess quite soon we will be offered to buy another converter from FLAC to WAV that will radically revolutionize our listening experience😀

What's this? In the middle of people offering useful contributions to the post.

[AnotherSpin]

Just now, manueljenkin said:

What's this? In the middle of people offering useful contributions to the post.

 

You may refer to the OP post which I quoted above. My post was after that.

[manueljenkin]

On 11/11/2020 at 12:18 AM, AnotherSpin said:

 

Bingo!

And what's this? He was literally asking for options other than what he had found, thinking people here might have explored further.

[AnotherSpin]

3 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

And what's this? He was literally asking for options other than what he had found, thinking people here might have explored further.

 

Ok. Couple of quotes from Chris. It should help you:

 

“Not to be a cynic, but the OP from Ukraine starts talking about converting FLAC to WAV in his first post on the site. Shortly thereafter another poster from Ukraine joins the site to offer a solution that converts FLAC to WAV, in his first post on the site.”

 

“Nice to see you know each other. I can only use my experience operating this website since 2007, to gauge people and posts. The sequence of events here is identical to thousands of posts I've seen where people are trying to promote software with a hidden agenda. You must admit that this thread and its sequence of posts could've been predicted by anyone who knows how online spammers operate. I've blocked thousands of these types of posts from appearing on this site.”

[manueljenkin]

1 minute ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

Ok. Couple of quotes from Chris. It should help you:

 

“Not to be a cynic, but the OP from Ukraine starts talking about converting FLAC to WAV in his first post on the site. Shortly thereafter another poster from Ukraine joins the site to offer a solution that converts FLAC to WAV, in his first post on the site.”

 

“Nice to see you know each other. I can only use my experience operating this website since 2007, to gauge people and posts. The sequence of events here is identical to thousands of posts I've seen where people are trying to promote software with a hidden agenda. You must admit that this thread and its sequence of posts could've been predicted by anyone who knows how online spammers operate. I've blocked thousands of these types of posts from appearing on this site.”

That was Chris's guess. Do we have any proof that the two people were in any way affiliated to the softwares in discussion?

 

All I've seen them do are

 

1. Share their experiences

2. Ask for suggestions to explore further.

 

Someone who's into promoting their stuff is unlikely to ask you to share a competing product. Things got crazy and they seem to have lost their cool as a result.

[AnotherSpin]

Just now, manueljenkin said:

That was Chris's guess. Do we have any proof that the two people were in any way affiliated to the softwares in discussion?

 

We are entitled to have our guesses. Objections?

[AnotherSpin]

9 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

That was Chris's guess. Do we have any proof that the two people were in any way affiliated to the softwares in discussion?

 

All I've seen them do are

 

1. Share their experiences

2. Ask for suggestions to explore further.

 

Someone who's into promoting their stuff is unlikely to ask you to share a competing product. Things got crazy and they seem to have lost their cool as a result.

 

[...] Example: download Audio Transcoder and, using it, convert just 1 of your favorite albums into WAV and listen. Then tell us what you think. All of this will take you half an hour max and you will learn something useful. No need to pay either since they offer a free trial period... [...]

[manueljenkin]

6 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

We are entitled to have our guesses. Objections?

You can be. I don't have to persuade otherwise since I donot have any idea about the two people. But the posts atleast were harmless (and actually useful) until they were poked.