Thank you for sharing FC-U17 ChunYinZi.
Though at the risk of starting a lengthy debate I am still curious why you are, as you say, "a strong defender of WAV". What do you consider are the advantages of WAV over FLAC or other lossless format?
Before I answer your question, I must admit
I can't hear the difference between flac and wav, even though I have very good equipment.
Even when I have good equipment and someone shares an album in flac, I don't intentionally convert it to wav to listen to it.
As for why I like wav?
The reason is simple, because it is my religion.
As a matter of fact, not to mention library music, even pop music, any music platform or mainstream music site only has lossless music in wav format, (and even the higher Hi-Res format.)
I wonder why they don't offer music in flac format? Wouldn't smaller files be better?
Later, I asked a few friends in the music industry, and they all gave the same answer, saying that the music industry generally dislikes flac and prefers wav format because it is the first format converted after mastering.
My understanding is that music loses something with multiple transitions, even if the human ear doesn't hear the difference.
But I still like the wavs I get from the first conversion and won't convert them again to flac to listen to them
Likewise, the music I share will be in wav format, so you can download it and convert it to flac yourselves.
BTW, my favorite is the wav that you get from ripping a CD
They are better than the wavs downloaded from some library music proxy sites using permissions
I can hear the difference, and the spectrogram shows the difference too
Because the wavs from the library music agents don't seem to be the original masters, they're forced to upgrade some of the highs and lows, and some of the demos are flawed, such as having a distracting sound at the beginning, or having an incomplete beginning that's missing 1-2 seconds, and they're not as good as the ones from the library music agents.
This requires the CD data to compensate.
