FLAC format...overkill?

Wonder if DRM has any impact on record sales?

Can't wait to see ARM for vinyl ...
 
I did the same thing back in the day because of the expense of storage and because everyone on tech sites were saying that 128k was "CD quality". Though, I re-ripped everything to lossless when storage got cheaper.

To answer the OP's question. I would always archive to the computer in lossless because if they come out with some new terrific lossless format that is a quarter of the size you can always convert them without a loss.

For players and real world use. People on audiophile sites will typically tell you to go lossless for everything. Forums like Hydrogen Audio, where they strictly believe in ABX testing, will tell you:

"Non-lossy compression algorithms are assumed to be transparent: a non-lossy compression methodology should never introduce any artifact.

Transparency at the lowest possible bitrate also seems to be used as a measure of the quality or degree of sophistication and tuning of a lossy compression algorithm:

  • MP3-encoded files are generally considered artifact-free at bitrates at/above 192kbps.
  • Vorbis ogg files are supposedly artifact-free at bitrates at/above 160kbps.
  • AAC- and Opus-encoded files, depending on the particular encoder implementation, are claimed to be artifact-free at lower bitrates than both Vorbis ogg and MP3."
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Transparency

I am not endorsing either opinion. However, you should pick your poison and then stop over analyzing every sound and enjoy the music.

(I believe Foobar has an ABX testing process you can use if you trust ABX tests. However, be aware that a lot of audiophiles don't trust ABX testing.)



A lot of sense in yer second last statement, Tman. From what I've experienced, a lot get so into the quest of perfection, they tend to forget about what it's all about...the enjoyment of listening!:music:

Bottom line: much ends up being subjective as we all hear differently the sounds we experience. I know that after AK folk sharing the theories/stats/experience on this thread, it boils down to what we personally like and the way we get there... mind you taking into consideration how much storage it takes to satisfy these likes.

Q
 
Last edited:
Sure there is. There is the new lossy kid on the block, MQA, that 'Supposedly' will fix everything, even the US economy!


Read on that issue, for won't of better word...make that diatribe on that thread. Sure got heated up, it did.

Another chapter...down the road for me.:rolleyes: Lossless has to be grappled with right now and where to find the place to put it, eh? MQA is yet to be another "monkey wrench" in the mix.

Q
 
Enough of the acronyonism...write English! Please?

DRM = Digital Rights Management. It is meant as a method of protecting the product from piracy (for example, songs bought in the iTunes Store can only be played on devices that are approved to play them from that account (or something to that effect, or at least it was the case awhile ago).) Often this results in frustration and issues for the consumer. (i.e., I have a track I bought that I can no longer listen to because I do not have access to the email that the account was made with).

ARM = (I am guessing) Analog Rights Management, which is a term sKiZo made up or is otherwise using for a (to my knowledge) fictitious technology that would limit where a record could be played.
 
DRM = Digital Rights Management. It is meant as a method of protecting the product from piracy (for example, songs bought in the iTunes Store can only be played on devices that are approved to play them from that account (or something to that effect, or at least it was the case awhile ago).) Often this results in frustration and issues for the consumer. (i.e., I have a track I bought that I can no longer listen to because I do not have access to the email that the account was made with).

ARM = (I am guessing) Analog Rights Management, which is a term sKiZo made up or is otherwise using for a (to my knowledge) fictitious technology that would limit where a record could be played.


Thank you...am that much smarter...doesn't take much.:D

Q
 
... and not to forget, a proposed adjunct to ARM ... LEG (Legal Extortion Gambit).

I'm not against an artist getting their just due, but the hoops they try to make us jump through even if we purchase a legal copy.

One thing I DO suggest - if you rip your CDs and such to digital, DO keep the originals, s that's required proof of ownership should the RIAA gestapo come a'knockin' ... mine are all on 200 disc spindles, stashed in the closet. If nothing else, good backup insurance if your server (and your TWO backups?) go kaput.

Also, most any downloads contain copyright data somewhere or other. I get a lot of that sort of stuff from Amazon, and they include a special key ID. Best to leave that as is as well.
 
I was concerned when I originally started ripping a lot of my music onto a server for playback; there is so much talk about lossless vs. lossy, and the various bit rates. As far as I can see, FLAC is best used for archival storage if you don't want to keep the original file on your storage device. It is of course just a losslessly compressed version of the original and saves you about 50% space while retaining the full audio quality. If your player software supports it, all the better. That's a good compromise for the paranoid.

Incidentally, DRM hasn't been used by iTunes for many years, and they allow users who bought the older files to "upgrade" for free; I'm not aware of any popular current music source which restricts its playback to "licensed" devices.

As for lossy encoding, it behooves anyone who is interested in MP3 or AAC encoding to actually do a listening test to find out what your ears can detect. I sat down a couple of years ago and went through a handful of my best recordings and did a blind listening test comparison (ABX) of the original CD vs. MP3 encodings. The nice thing about doing it with software is that you have a completely unbiased source and can listen to samples repeatedly (for hours if desired) during the test. The computer randomizes the sources and tracks it for you on each test instance. The software also provides you with statistics showing how well (or how poorly) you did - in other words, a confidence level that you were actually hearing a difference and not guessing. It's also proof to anyone who questions your results - assuming you share the full details and are honest. :p

The bottom line: I was astonished that I had great difficulty distinguishing the original files from a 128K MP3. All the little details that I was sure would be missing from the MP3 file - weren't. I spent a couple of hours going through several recordings and had to concentrate much harder than I would have if I were just enjoying the music. In the end, I identified the files correctly 100% of the time, but it was extremely hard to do and I can't explain in words what differences I heard - it was very subtle. If I was listening casually (for enjoyment) rather than straining to hear a difference, I would have failed the test badly. I'm convinced that the next step up to 192K would be audibly transparent to me, so for overkill I use 256K AAC and don't worry about it. Some day when I'm bored I may attempt to find my threshold of audibility, but it will be a lot of work for little reward so it keeps getting put off.

Try a test yourself, if you want to see where the "sweet spot" is for your music and hearing apparatus. Don't let other people tell you what you can or can't hear. Learning is a good thing, right? I did the same back in the 80s with cables and amplifiers, and that was an eye-opener.
 
Incidentally, DRM hasn't been used by iTunes for many years, and they allow users who bought the older files to "upgrade" for free; I'm not aware of any popular current music source which restricts its playback to "licensed" devices.

Ah, well, in fairness, that track was bought about 11 years ago. I could probably be not so cheap and simply buy it again.
 
About 5+ years ago ... when I ripped the bulk of my Car CDs (greatest hits, compilations, best of .. etc) to files ... I choose
128k AAC. Also use these files for my DAP. Figured eventually (after some time had passed) that I would re-rip to FLAC but never found it necessary for Car audio or DAPs.
Agree about car playback. My Ridgeline with Appleplay only supports MP3.

When spending huge amounts of time ripping, why compromise the effort at all? I simply transcoded FLAC content into 320k MP3 for the car.
 
I'm considering getting into FLAC, now that I can hear the limits of MP3. I store digital music in a Kindle Fire and am just starting to figure out if it can even handle FLAC at all.

AFAIK Amazon Fire tablets do not support FLAC. My Fire 7" doesn't. OTOH my DAP (AGPTEK Rocker 2) supports FLAC and DSD (DSF) along with a slew of lossy file types.

IME you can store 600+ CD's in FLAC form in ~250GB.
 
Last edited:
Another vote for FLAC here, with over 2TB of FLAC files on a 4TB external drive. While that's the format I listen to at home, my iPod won't play them. I converted a lot of files to ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) in order to play them in my vehicles and on headphones. ALAC files are slightly larger than FLAC files. I'm now in the process of copying my FLAC files to 320 MP3's for use in the pod, and find it can more than twice as many of those than it can ALAC files. Carrying around a few hundred albums to listen too whenever I want is pretty nice. I don't hear the difference in my vehicles or on the headphones at 320 or 256 kbps vs. the ALAC files. Lower than that, and I can almost always tell. I will have two copies of everything when I'm done - which may not be exactly kosher as far as copyright laws are concerned, and is kind of a pain in the rear end.
 
As usual, I'm always on the tail end of tech advancement:rolleyes:...but came across another conversion codec this week...Ogg. I was given a portable Batt/AC driven TT that has "Audacity" software that can DL records into various digital conversions, and Ogg is in it. "Audacity" only has a few offerings, and the manual says Ogg Vorbis is better than mp3 or AAC. WAV is also offered, but the requirement for space is huge! FLAC sadly is not in the conversion formats.

So, wondered if others have used this free format, OV to DL some their LP's and what were the results?


Q
 
here's my take. if you have large libraries of MPx, suitable players, and some need for your
current sound chain (apple gear, car gear, etc) then by all means keep it going.

since the minimum (yes, I know you can still buy and DL MP3s) is CD redbook at 16/44.1
then it doesn't make send to down-res it for these older players.

head-fi has almost weekly announcements of DAP with PCM up at the limits, and DSD in
the lower forms, very new DACs, analog and digital outputs, and occasionally dual SD cards
(which sometime soon is coming in 512GB sizes) and built-in configurable equalizers.
these can be found for about $150 and most often under $100 and they will still play your MP3s.

why not upgrade now (before you start looking at ebay for Gen1-7 old ipod players just to
keep going). best part is that these new DAPs can interface to your home system.

I look forward to digitizing my LPs, CDs, cassettes, to 24/96 FLAC - easiest of all formats
and putting it all on a single current/future DAP. and bypassing all the intermediate
cash solutions like NAS, media servers, multiple USB hdds, etc.

however you do it, enjoy the music.
 
I have yet to HEAR a difference between 320 kbps MP3's and FLAC files I've ripped from CD's I own. And I have three kick ass systems to play them back from. If I have to sit there and TRY to pick out some sort of minuscule difference, sign me up for the annual circle jerk awards.
 
Last edited:
all flac and never goin bac
If you rip to flac then you have everything. You can transcode them to mp3, AAC or Ogg if you need to for the car or a DAP. If you start with lossy there is no going back to lossless. Storage is cheap.
 
I bought some £20 secondhand speakers (TDL NFM1).

I connected them to a £10 secondhand Sony HT-BE1 home theatre amp, driven by an optical SPDIF from my TV, fed via HDMI, from a £32 Android media box running BubbleUPnP, streaming from my NAS.

I was a bit disappointed with the speakers, as the top end seemed muddy and confused.

Then I noticed that I was streaming from my portable media library, compressed to mp3 by LAME.

I switched to my FLAC library, and the muddiness vanished, and clarity returned.

Turns out they're great little speakers.

I have tinnitus...
 
Back
Top Bottom