24 bit downloads: Why are HD tracks saying WAV files are not recommended?*

My new approach: "No ABX test report, no trust"...

 

And, who said I didn't do ABX testing? You know, all you had to say was that you'd prefer ABX results instead of saying "whatever".

 

Actually, a successful ABX test report (20 successes out of 20 attempts; 9+ out of 10 will be perfectly acceptable, of course) was referenced in my post above...

 

You can believe what you want, man.

 

I am also one of those people. Objectively it doesn't make sense that there could be an audible difference. But something's going on.
I wouldn't rip a CD to 24-bit. That doesn't make sense. But if a source file is native 24/44.1 I'd rather have that than the 16/44.1 CD version.

 

As others have mentioned, with WAV files there is no standard way of storing metadata. Thus, the method used to store the metadata with one program might not travel to a different program.

Some have used the file structure as a way to store the metadata* and some music management programs can extract the metadata stored by this method. That method might work as an archive method of storing the data.

* Such as c:/[Album Artist]/[Album] - [Year]/[Track Number] - [Song Name].wav

 

Good luck using that kind of file name structure for classical music.

But seriously, that kind of work-around seems very inconvinient. That's one of the reasons I never considered WAV, but went with FLAC right from the start. That and the file size of course.

 

The only advantage I can see to the workaround I mentioned is that it can travel between programs but it is far too little information. I agree about the file size being a definite advantage, all the sound quality of WAV with less than 60% of the WAV file size.

I agree that classical music is a bit of a nightmare when it comes to tagging since it tends to go counter to the other genres of music (the conductor and composer seeming to be more important rather than the artist). As an example, I have a continuing project of rewriting my classical music song titles to eliminate any abbreviations (I dislike periods in any tag, especially in the song title since it can create potential issues when you rename of the files based on the tags).

 

I don't even bother tagging my classical stuff. Somehow I managed to find what I wanted to listen to back in the tagless days of LPs. I just use common sense folder and file naming.

 

Some programs, like MediaMonkey, make tagging classical music easier. With MediaMonkey, not only does it separate the classical music from the other music (if you choose) but its classical music metadata screen is designed with classical music in mind (includes fields like "Conductor").

 

I got Vincent Belanger's "Pure Cello" in high-res through his Indiegogo campaign. It came as 24/192 WAV files with no tagging. I had to manually convert to FLAC, manually tag the files, and search the internet for a highish resolution cover image. A lot of extra work. If all high-res files came like that I'd give up on high-res because it would be just too much busywork to deal with. Fortunately the vast majority of high-res files I purchase are tagged. Hopefully the "Pure Cello" high-res files will get proper tags and be available in FLAC or ALAC once it's available for purchase through official high-res music sites. "Pure Cello" is a very good recording. Well worth the wait to finally get it through Indiegogo. And well worth the busywork I had to do to convert and tag it.

 

My Uconnect radio doesn't support FLAC files so I download .wav files from HDTRACKS to ensure they will play on everything I use (iTunes, Sony HAP, Auralic Lightning, Uconnect)

 

That's an excellent reason if you have the extra time and bandwidth. For some people, though, it would be faster to download the compressed FLAC files and then convert them to WAV after downloading if they need WAV.

 

I think there's a greater benefit to higher sampling rates than bit depth. I don't understand why HDTracks has so many that are 24 bit, but only 44.1 kHz.

 

Because the material is provided by the labels and that's the best they have?

 

Fine. I change my statement to, "I understand why HDTracks has many albums that are only in 24/44.1, but I wish the labels would provide higher sampling rates instead. I'd be more interested in 16/88.2, for example."

 

Probably because more people believe there is a greater benefit to 24-bit, like me.

 

This is the process the HDTracks downloader does for you when you order WAV files. They don't send the files as WAV.