WAV versus FLAC

From what I have read and experienced, there are definite differences in file types on high resolution systems. you really ought to try for yourself. Make wav copies off of some select files and put them into a playlist.

I am sure some are going to argue about this, but in my system (mac) I could readily tell the difference from ALAC, AIFF and .wav. Do not fall for the bits is bits diatribe. They shouldn't sound different, but they do for (yet) unknown reasons in system. It is not placebo or expectation bias either. I wish it weren't so, and I have not changed over as it will be a hassle.

The real test, in my opinion, isn't WAV vs. FLAC but rather WAV vs. WAV converted from FLAC. Would WAV converted from FLAC retain brightness? Would it gain warmth?

There is no difference in the data between a FLAC and WAV file. The FLAC is a lossless compression format similar to Zip files, but designed for music.

If one is hearing a difference between the two formats, there are two possible issues.

The first is that any difference is due to the extra load placed on the processor in decoding the FLAC file.

The other possibility is the difference arises from subjective perception.

The more vocal adherents of each school of thought will try to pressure you into their camp - "anyone could hear the difference" or "your system isn't good enough" or "no one can measure a difference" and so on.

The key is to not worry what others think. Experiment for yourself - it is pretty simple in this case to stream FLAC and WAV files of the same song back-to-back. Once you've decided what works best for you, run with it and ignore the naysayers.